Korea’s AI ambitions confront Nimby realities as public opposition to data centers grows

For months, the sidewalk outside the Geumcheon District Office in Doksan-dong, southern Seoul, has been a protest site — against the construction of a new AI data center in the area.

About 30 residents were there again on Sept. 8, holding anti-data center signs as loudspeakers played a song about defending their neighborhood and a banner called for the project’s permit to be revoked. The words “Our neighborhood, our land — we will protect it” rang out from the speakers in song.

“The protest entered its 191st day today,” said one of the protesting residents.

The rally began after construction broke ground last October on an eight-story data center near Geumcheon-gu Office Station.

If completed, the center will occupy a 1,356-square-meter site (14,600 square feet).

AI data centers (AIDC) sit at the heart of the government’s AI ambitions — one of its three major national projects alongside semiconductors and physical AI.

“We must secure the key elements of AI faster than any other country,” President Lee Jae Myung said during a government briefing in June. “One important task is to build AIDCs across the country.”

There is broad consensus across the information technology (IT) industry that more AIDCs are now a necessity. Large-scale computing infrastructure is essential for training and running generative AI models and powering cloud services — but that doesn’t mean people want them in their neighborhoods.

Once sought after, now fiercely opposed

There was a time when local governments actively sought to court data centers. In 2019, Naver received proposals for 136 sites from 118 local governments and other entities nationwide after inviting bids for its second data center. Competition to lure data centers was common among municipalities at the time.

Now, communities are fighting to keep data centers out. Opposition protests have surfaced in Mullae-dong in western Seoul; Gurae-dong in Gimpo, Gyeonggi; Dohwa-dong in Incheon; and Daeheung-dong in Daegu.

The resistance has had real consequences. A Gimpo project took nearly four years to advance from approval to construction, while an SK-led data center project in Daegu has effectively been derailed.

Public support for AIDCs appears to weaken considerably when the facilities move closer to home.

A total of 67.3 percent of 1,007 respondents backed the construction and expansion of AIDCs as a national policy in a poll conducted by Munhwa Ilbo and Opensurvey last month. But 64.1 percent opposed or expressed reservations about a data center being built within a one- to two-kilometer (0.62 to 1.24 miles) radius of where they live.

The tension could intensify as Korea pursues its goal of expanding AIDC capacity to 18.4 gigawatts by 2035 — compared with roughly 2 gigawatts of data center capacity currently in operation nationwide.

Local concerns span everything from cooling-tower noise and electromagnetic fields from high-voltage lines to battery fires and damage to the residential environment. A 2022 fire at SK C&C’s Pangyo data center in Gyeonggi further fueled public anxiety.

Some measurements have challenged residents’ concerns. In Goyang, electromagnetic field readings in front of a data center were no higher than in surrounding residential neighborhoods, but opposition remained strong.

The rapid shift in public sentiment over just the past year or two caught authorities unprepared. “There is no legal requirement to seek input from nearby residents during the building permit process,” said Kim Hyeon-jin, head of the dedicated team at the Geumcheon District office for data centers.

“The district did have a separate advance notification system, but data centers were not explicitly covered at the time, so the project did not go through that process. Four data centers had previously been approved and were operating in Geumcheon District without drawing significant complaints, so we did not anticipate organized opposition this time either.”

Residents warn that the neighborhood’s narrow streets could cost firefighters precious time if a blaze breaks out. The district said the project had already cleared a review by fire authorities during the permitting process. After opposition mounted, officials asked for another look but were told there were no grounds for an additional review.

Residents demand a seat at the table

Residents are now pressing for a formal role in scrutinizing data center projects.

Kim Ik-hyun, administrative head of the emergency steering committee representing Geumcheon District residents, has urged the district to add residents and external experts to its data center team and incorporate input from resident-nominated experts into its existing checklist.

The push aims to make the vetting process more impartial and trustworthy. The issue has also brought political leaders and district officials to the same table.

Ruling Democratic Party Rep. Choi Ki-sang, the Geumcheon District chief and city and district council members discussed the issue on Aug. 13 at the first party-government meeting since officials elected in the June 3 local elections took office. The talks, however, produced no clear way forward.

At another meeting with residents on Sept. 3, calls to revoke the building permit resurfaced. The district rejected the demand. “If a project meets the legal requirements, the authorities are generally required to issue the building permit,” Kim said. “We cannot revoke it.”

Seoul’s districts, meanwhile, are moving to tighten the rules themselves. Last month, the heads of 22 of the city’s 25 districts unanimously backed tighter rules on where data centers can be built.

Under the proposal, data centers would face mandatory architectural reviews by both the city and district governments, while restrictions currently limited to Type 1 general residential zones would expand to Type 2 and Type 3 zones. Taken together, the measures would effectively bar the construction of new data centers in residential areas.

Data centers face local resistance worldwide

The pushback is hardly unique to Korea. Data centers have already become a contentious issue in the United States.

More than 300 data center-related bills had been introduced in state legislatures as of mid-February this year, according to Data Center Watch, a research group that tracks opposition to such projects. Some lawmakers in 14 states had proposed moratoriums on new construction.

Local resistance has already taken a heavy toll. During the first three months of this year, 75 data center projects valued at $130 billion faced delays, cancellations or other setbacks, including 20 that were scrapped. Last year, opposition affected $156 billion worth of projects, 25 of which were canceled.

“The real cause of the outrage is simpler. Americans are skeptical of AI, distrust the firms that build it and fear it will lead to job losses,” The Economist reported earlier this month in a story titled, “How data centers became one of America’s hottest political issues.”

The debate has recently broadened to include pressure on power and water supplies, environmental impacts, community involvement and ways to ensure that host communities share in the benefits.

In Frederick County, Maryland, a developer this month proposed an agreement offering $110 million in community support and measures to reduce the environmental footprint of an already approved data center project. The plan calls for shrinking the development area by about 20 percent, cutting drinking water use by 80 percent and creating a conservation area, while investing in schools, community facilities, job training, solar power and firefighting equipment.

New Jersey recently introduced a separate rate structure to prevent the cost of grid upgrades needed for data centers from being passed on to ordinary electricity customers. The state also requires data centers to regularly disclose their water and power consumption.

Can Korea find a workable compromise?

The Korean government is also drafting enforcement rules for a special AIDC law set to take effect next March. The law gives central and local governments a legal basis to gather residents’ views and pursue projects that benefit host communities.

The Ministry of Science and ICT plans to use the law to establish standards and principles for gathering community input and issue them to local governments. But until the legislation takes effect, data center developers have no separate obligation to seek residents’ views. For now, measures such as local ordinances are being left to the discretion of individual municipalities.

But the central dilemma remains: The industry favors the greater Seoul area, but concentrating more data centers there also raises the potential for conflict.

“Bringing data centers closer reduces network travel time, which in turn can lower power and water demand and make them more efficient,” an industry source said. “Data centers in the Seoul metropolitan area are unavoidable given its population concentration.”

The government is reluctant to push them there. “The government is not actively encouraging further data center development in the Seoul metropolitan area,” said Jang Ki-cheol, director of the AI Data Promotion Division at the AI Infrastructure Policy Bureau at the ministry. “Needs and attitudes differ sharply by region, so for now, our current policy is to give municipalities flexibility in how they respond.”

“Data centers are becoming indispensable as the AI industry expands, but residents cannot be asked to bear the costs of having such facilities in their communities without anything in return,” said a source at a developer working on a data center project in the greater Seoul area. “We should consider ways to offset the environmental burden and return tangible benefits to local communities, much as residents affected by airport noise receive compensation.”

Another expert called for a broader look at how the benefits of data center development could be shared with local communities and the wider public.

“Before anything else, we need to determine exactly what a data center brings to a community — how much it adds to tax revenue, whether it creates jobs and how it benefits related industries,” said a public administration professor specializing in public conflict.

“Then we can weigh those gains against the burden shouldered by the host community and work out how some of the broader benefits can be returned locally.”

The professor warned that a system in which residents push back only after projects are approved is not sustainable.

“If consultation begins only after approval has been granted and residents push back, the same disputes are bound to recur,” the professor said. “The conversation should start early, with residents, developers and municipal officials sharing information as potential sites are assessed. If the dispute cannot be settled at the district level, the central government, National Assembly and metropolitan authorities need to get involved.”

BY NOH YOU-SUN [[email protected]]