This is going to be popular with the NDP base, but it’s a catastrophic idea. You can’t run on big social spending while also destroying economic activity.
[deleted] on
[removed]
Baconus on
Great idea. AI data centres are environmentally and economically destructive. They do not result in any real permanent employment either. We should be investing in actual public goods.
And before people come at me saying that’s not how economics works. That’s not how neoliberal economics works but I promise you there are credible alternatives.
Vova_Poutine on
Uh-huh and then when we fall behind in technological investment by private capital and become even more reliant on American tech firms, we will suddenly scramble to build our own AI infrastructure with public money while having having missed out on years of tax revenue and keep complaing about not having public funding for other things.
Cystonectae on
Eh I understand what he is going for but I just cannot see this as a strategy that works long-term. Unless the rest of the world gets on board, AI is not going to be going away, even with a million and one regulations in Canada on it. I guess this would work as a short term solution to prevent immediate massive layoffs but the layoffs are coming one way or another. Capitalism thrives off of reducing costs and replacing people with AI is going to be better than the dang industrial revolution at doing just that. I’d rather efforts go towards setting up better nets to actually catch the wave of unemployment that is on the horizon.
currentfuture on
This is a mistake. Compute for all industries is needed locally and not having data centres for that compute creates dependency on foreign compute data centres.
Data centres are not destructive, the current design and setup of some data centres are, but that is not a required scenario where water is consumed, non-renewables are used, and valuable land is diverted. There are many scenarios where cold climates with significant renewable power negate the downsides of the non-renewable large footprint designs.
Large scale compute is as necessary as highways and fiber for advanced societies.
TheRealStorey on
AI is humanity at our worst, sold as a promise that we won’t have to work and resulting in us having to work more for less.
Hour_Season8625 on
The flaw I see in all the arguments presented by folks with this type of persuasion is the question of sovereignty:
– if we don’t invest in sovereign data centres, what happens when, for instance, the US takes control of Canadian data which is currently all run through US tech firms?
– if we don’t invest in the armed forces, why would an NDP leader do should the US set up shop in the Northwest trade corridor?
callmecrude on
I work at one of the big names in AI. Most people can’t even begin to fathom how much larger the industry is going to get over the next decade.
The best picture I can paint is to go back 20 years and try explaining to people that smartphones were going to be owned by virtually everyone on earth, they’d be within an arms-length at all times, and used by everyone for ~6 hours per day…. It was inconceivable at the time yet in 2006 we were literally right on the cusp of it.
AI is going to be the same, and I’d argue it’ll likely see even more rapid adoption. We’re still in the “keypad phone era” of AI, but the big acceleration is coming. Every bank, doctors office, engineering/accounting/lawyer firm, manufacturing facility, retailer, restaurant, etc is interested in AI. It’s going to run the global economy. Canada is a world leader in energy generation and we should be doing everything we can to leverage that and build out our own datacenters. Otherwise we’ll be paying huge premiums to buy AI workflows from the US in a few years.
I see far too many people thinking AI is something we should be purging or ignoring… but companies are going to use it. Layoffs are going to happen. It’d be akin to thinking we could ignore automated switching systems and keep using phone operators to connect calls for the sake of keeping jobs. Those people are getting laid off, but we can either be the country that develops our own infrastructure to support the transition, or we can be the country that’s at the mercy of the US to provide us the infrastructure we need to stay competitive.
[deleted] on
[removed]
Imaginary-Smile2708 on
Good! AI data centers are terrible energy sucks that Hydro ratepayers should NOT be subsidizing. Especially when our water reservoirs are dwindling due to increasing drought from climate change. We can’t afford to keep wasting precious water on industries that do not serve people.
The fact is, the reason the AI bubble even exists in the first place is because corporations are betting big on being able to slash everyone’s jobs.
Building AI data centers are bad for the planet and they are terrible for workers.
The only people who will benefit are corporate shareholders and even that’s a big maybe if this bubble pops, which it’s likely to in the next year.
This could be akin to banning railroads in the 1800s or banning electricity in the early 20th century, or banning broadband infrastructure in the 90s. There’s a ton I hate about AI. But it’s not going away. Data centres are 21st century infrastructure. We have to have the infrastructure to take part in this technological revolution. It’s not an option not to. And there is a sovereignty interest in having domestic capability in this.
It’s mostly good ideas. Take a pause on the rapid building of AI datacenters and actually think about the impact and how to mitigate it.
I don’t exactly want my utility bills to go up because no one thought about how much electricity they use and what impact that has on prices. I don’t want the public service to be replaced with chat bots that rarely work, or the government to stop hiring Canadian artists for graphics and photos.
TheLoveBoat on
Two questions to the AI skeptics:
**1. Would you be convinced that generative AI is a technology worth developing and investing in if AI helped make these happens**
– Solve a Millenium Prize problem (one of 7 most important unsolved math questions)
– Novel drug discovery for a disease like cancer, alzheimer’s etc.
– Design a resilient and sustainable building material
– Discover new physics
(I used the words “helps” because AI will first play a supportive role before it’s able to work autonomously – AI research assistants are already a thing, google “AI for science”)
It strikes me that people are focused on consumer-facing chatbots instead of healthcare, biotech, life sciences, and more. Large pharma companies like Eli Lilly are spending billions on data centres already.
**2. Even if you think AI is currently a bubble, it’s clearly here to stay. At the very least, we will 100% need AI for national security, science, corporate R&D, etc.**
In Canada, we tend to export resource-based, “upstream” goods like energy, minerals, raw agricultural products, and import “downstream” manufactured goods like packaged foods, consumer goods, vehicles, etc. Energy is a classic example, since we export our raw crude to the US and import refined gasoline. This makes us heavily dependent on the US.
Why would we repeat the same mistake and commit to being a net importer of AI? This will make us even more dependent on the US. If private companies want to build AI data centres in Canada, we reap the benefits of security, national sovereignty, and resilience. So why not let them?
Kooriki on
I have mixed feelings. Canada will need to compete in the AI/compute space. Maybe concessions for Canadian owned and led projects and a wide berth for scientific endeavors. Energy subsidies for people prompting dogs singing Taylors Swift songs? Not so much.
There’s no path to sustainable profitability and positive cash flow for most “AI” companies without massive reduction in the cost of inference, unsustainably low cost of electricity and water (wholesale electricity tariffs are going up 800% in the US for 2027-28 uptake due mainly to datacentres btw), and accounting voodoo like depreciating hardware over unreasonably long useful lives.
It is quite simply insane to me that capital commitments in the trillions of dollars are being made over technology that’s this unproven and severely lacks practical use cases (perhaps beyond mass surveillance of the population to make sure nobody is making fun of Trump’s tiny hands). There’s not even a fraction of power and water capacity available to fire up the data centres *already being developed* in the US.
To me it seems like AI is being shoved down everyone’s throat as a magic cure for productivity, but most people I meet hate it, and don’t want it crammed into every product they buy. This is without a doubt a bubble that has an even chance of cratering the US economy when it bursts. I really, really don’t want Canada to go the same way.
Medea_From_Colchis on
>CBC News pressed the Lewis campaign on what levers the federal government should use to pause data centre construction, since such project approvals generally fall within the purview of provincial and municipal governments.
>A campaign spokesperson said the federal government should use “every lever at its disposal — legislative, regulatory or financial,” including the withdrawal of millions of federal dollars funding data centre projects.
It is going to be amusing watching the Lewis campaign have to deflect from this question non-stop. Legislative and regulatory action in areas of provincial jurisdiction is part of the problem, which the campaign team doesn’t seem to realize. The provinces can still give funds and the companies can build the centers themselves, too.
Tall_Guava_8025 on
I’ve been very impressed with Lewis up till now but this is idiotic.
Being against technology modernization almost always puts you on the wrong side of history.
If AI actually causes mass stagnant unemployment, then it’s time to tax these companies more and use that money to implement a Guaranteed Liveable Income.
Trying to reduce productivity means that we are going to be left behind.
CorneredSponge on
We know compute is a necessity for the future and Canada is well-positioned from an energy and water standpoint to meet growing demand.
These data centres will pop up no matter what; isn’t it better to have them in a nation with a relatively comprehensive regulatory regime surrounding the environment, abundant water (thereby reducing water related distortions in the rest of the world), ability to produce abundant electricity, etc.
The economic benefits in the immediate term may not be as obvious as they are for a factory, for example. The enduring employment effects are minimal. However, FDI and tax revenue is an obvious win, as are the opportunities for adjacent employment (ex. meeting rising energy demand, mid-level engineering education infrastructure). In the longer run, this gives Canada greater leverage over a growing space in the economy, it gives us the opportunity for data sovereignty, and so forth.
Which brings us to the chief concerns regarding data centres; environment and electricity prices. The environmental issue is entirely bunk IMO, considering the aforementioned point about data centres existing regardless of whether they’re in Canada or not. And most water- at increasing levels- is recycled. Electricity prices are more tricky, but there are solutions to this, whether that be rate auctions similar to the PJM solution, forward rate lock-in contracts, etc. In the long-term, this only incents govt and industry to build out a more comprehensive grid and energy production infrastructure.
I’m open to hearing dissenting opinions, but thusfar, I see no reason why Canada should so easily cede such an integral and easy win.
19 Comments
This is going to be popular with the NDP base, but it’s a catastrophic idea. You can’t run on big social spending while also destroying economic activity.
[removed]
Great idea. AI data centres are environmentally and economically destructive. They do not result in any real permanent employment either. We should be investing in actual public goods.
And before people come at me saying that’s not how economics works. That’s not how neoliberal economics works but I promise you there are credible alternatives.
Uh-huh and then when we fall behind in technological investment by private capital and become even more reliant on American tech firms, we will suddenly scramble to build our own AI infrastructure with public money while having having missed out on years of tax revenue and keep complaing about not having public funding for other things.
Eh I understand what he is going for but I just cannot see this as a strategy that works long-term. Unless the rest of the world gets on board, AI is not going to be going away, even with a million and one regulations in Canada on it. I guess this would work as a short term solution to prevent immediate massive layoffs but the layoffs are coming one way or another. Capitalism thrives off of reducing costs and replacing people with AI is going to be better than the dang industrial revolution at doing just that. I’d rather efforts go towards setting up better nets to actually catch the wave of unemployment that is on the horizon.
This is a mistake. Compute for all industries is needed locally and not having data centres for that compute creates dependency on foreign compute data centres.
Data centres are not destructive, the current design and setup of some data centres are, but that is not a required scenario where water is consumed, non-renewables are used, and valuable land is diverted. There are many scenarios where cold climates with significant renewable power negate the downsides of the non-renewable large footprint designs.
Large scale compute is as necessary as highways and fiber for advanced societies.
AI is humanity at our worst, sold as a promise that we won’t have to work and resulting in us having to work more for less.
The flaw I see in all the arguments presented by folks with this type of persuasion is the question of sovereignty:
– if we don’t invest in sovereign data centres, what happens when, for instance, the US takes control of Canadian data which is currently all run through US tech firms?
– if we don’t invest in the armed forces, why would an NDP leader do should the US set up shop in the Northwest trade corridor?
I work at one of the big names in AI. Most people can’t even begin to fathom how much larger the industry is going to get over the next decade.
The best picture I can paint is to go back 20 years and try explaining to people that smartphones were going to be owned by virtually everyone on earth, they’d be within an arms-length at all times, and used by everyone for ~6 hours per day…. It was inconceivable at the time yet in 2006 we were literally right on the cusp of it.
AI is going to be the same, and I’d argue it’ll likely see even more rapid adoption. We’re still in the “keypad phone era” of AI, but the big acceleration is coming. Every bank, doctors office, engineering/accounting/lawyer firm, manufacturing facility, retailer, restaurant, etc is interested in AI. It’s going to run the global economy. Canada is a world leader in energy generation and we should be doing everything we can to leverage that and build out our own datacenters. Otherwise we’ll be paying huge premiums to buy AI workflows from the US in a few years.
I see far too many people thinking AI is something we should be purging or ignoring… but companies are going to use it. Layoffs are going to happen. It’d be akin to thinking we could ignore automated switching systems and keep using phone operators to connect calls for the sake of keeping jobs. Those people are getting laid off, but we can either be the country that develops our own infrastructure to support the transition, or we can be the country that’s at the mercy of the US to provide us the infrastructure we need to stay competitive.
[removed]
Good! AI data centers are terrible energy sucks that Hydro ratepayers should NOT be subsidizing. Especially when our water reservoirs are dwindling due to increasing drought from climate change. We can’t afford to keep wasting precious water on industries that do not serve people.
The fact is, the reason the AI bubble even exists in the first place is because corporations are betting big on being able to slash everyone’s jobs.
Building AI data centers are bad for the planet and they are terrible for workers.
The only people who will benefit are corporate shareholders and even that’s a big maybe if this bubble pops, which it’s likely to in the next year.
If you don’t believe me about the jobs, listen to the bay Street bankers he interviewed who admitted it: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DToKGzCki7Y/?igsh=MWx3NzJlNGsxcWdpMQ==
This could be akin to banning railroads in the 1800s or banning electricity in the early 20th century, or banning broadband infrastructure in the 90s. There’s a ton I hate about AI. But it’s not going away. Data centres are 21st century infrastructure. We have to have the infrastructure to take part in this technological revolution. It’s not an option not to. And there is a sovereignty interest in having domestic capability in this.
Read the plan – https://lewisforleader.ca/ideas/dignified-work-full-plan
It’s mostly good ideas. Take a pause on the rapid building of AI datacenters and actually think about the impact and how to mitigate it.
I don’t exactly want my utility bills to go up because no one thought about how much electricity they use and what impact that has on prices. I don’t want the public service to be replaced with chat bots that rarely work, or the government to stop hiring Canadian artists for graphics and photos.
Two questions to the AI skeptics:
**1. Would you be convinced that generative AI is a technology worth developing and investing in if AI helped make these happens**
– Solve a Millenium Prize problem (one of 7 most important unsolved math questions)
– Novel drug discovery for a disease like cancer, alzheimer’s etc.
– Design a resilient and sustainable building material
– Discover new physics
(I used the words “helps” because AI will first play a supportive role before it’s able to work autonomously – AI research assistants are already a thing, google “AI for science”)
It strikes me that people are focused on consumer-facing chatbots instead of healthcare, biotech, life sciences, and more. Large pharma companies like Eli Lilly are spending billions on data centres already.
**2. Even if you think AI is currently a bubble, it’s clearly here to stay. At the very least, we will 100% need AI for national security, science, corporate R&D, etc.**
In Canada, we tend to export resource-based, “upstream” goods like energy, minerals, raw agricultural products, and import “downstream” manufactured goods like packaged foods, consumer goods, vehicles, etc. Energy is a classic example, since we export our raw crude to the US and import refined gasoline. This makes us heavily dependent on the US.
Why would we repeat the same mistake and commit to being a net importer of AI? This will make us even more dependent on the US. If private companies want to build AI data centres in Canada, we reap the benefits of security, national sovereignty, and resilience. So why not let them?
I have mixed feelings. Canada will need to compete in the AI/compute space. Maybe concessions for Canadian owned and led projects and a wide berth for scientific endeavors. Energy subsidies for people prompting dogs singing Taylors Swift songs? Not so much.
[MIT report: 95% of generative AI pilots at companies are failing](https://fortune.com/2025/08/18/mit-report-95-percent-generative-ai-pilots-at-companies-failing-cfo/)
[BCG says only 5% of companies are deriving value from AI.](https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/bcg-says-only-5-companies-171501700.html)
There’s no path to sustainable profitability and positive cash flow for most “AI” companies without massive reduction in the cost of inference, unsustainably low cost of electricity and water (wholesale electricity tariffs are going up 800% in the US for 2027-28 uptake due mainly to datacentres btw), and accounting voodoo like depreciating hardware over unreasonably long useful lives.
It is quite simply insane to me that capital commitments in the trillions of dollars are being made over technology that’s this unproven and severely lacks practical use cases (perhaps beyond mass surveillance of the population to make sure nobody is making fun of Trump’s tiny hands). There’s not even a fraction of power and water capacity available to fire up the data centres *already being developed* in the US.
To me it seems like AI is being shoved down everyone’s throat as a magic cure for productivity, but most people I meet hate it, and don’t want it crammed into every product they buy. This is without a doubt a bubble that has an even chance of cratering the US economy when it bursts. I really, really don’t want Canada to go the same way.
>CBC News pressed the Lewis campaign on what levers the federal government should use to pause data centre construction, since such project approvals generally fall within the purview of provincial and municipal governments.
>A campaign spokesperson said the federal government should use “every lever at its disposal — legislative, regulatory or financial,” including the withdrawal of millions of federal dollars funding data centre projects.
It is going to be amusing watching the Lewis campaign have to deflect from this question non-stop. Legislative and regulatory action in areas of provincial jurisdiction is part of the problem, which the campaign team doesn’t seem to realize. The provinces can still give funds and the companies can build the centers themselves, too.
I’ve been very impressed with Lewis up till now but this is idiotic.
Being against technology modernization almost always puts you on the wrong side of history.
If AI actually causes mass stagnant unemployment, then it’s time to tax these companies more and use that money to implement a Guaranteed Liveable Income.
Trying to reduce productivity means that we are going to be left behind.
We know compute is a necessity for the future and Canada is well-positioned from an energy and water standpoint to meet growing demand.
These data centres will pop up no matter what; isn’t it better to have them in a nation with a relatively comprehensive regulatory regime surrounding the environment, abundant water (thereby reducing water related distortions in the rest of the world), ability to produce abundant electricity, etc.
The economic benefits in the immediate term may not be as obvious as they are for a factory, for example. The enduring employment effects are minimal. However, FDI and tax revenue is an obvious win, as are the opportunities for adjacent employment (ex. meeting rising energy demand, mid-level engineering education infrastructure). In the longer run, this gives Canada greater leverage over a growing space in the economy, it gives us the opportunity for data sovereignty, and so forth.
Which brings us to the chief concerns regarding data centres; environment and electricity prices. The environmental issue is entirely bunk IMO, considering the aforementioned point about data centres existing regardless of whether they’re in Canada or not. And most water- at increasing levels- is recycled. Electricity prices are more tricky, but there are solutions to this, whether that be rate auctions similar to the PJM solution, forward rate lock-in contracts, etc. In the long-term, this only incents govt and industry to build out a more comprehensive grid and energy production infrastructure.
I’m open to hearing dissenting opinions, but thusfar, I see no reason why Canada should so easily cede such an integral and easy win.