DAKAR: Health officials battling the Ebola outbreak in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo are using anonymised mobile-phone data to map population movements and identify areas where the virus could spread next, according to the World Health Organization and researchers working with it.
The approach, which has not been used before in an Ebola response, comes as authorities struggle to contain what the WHO has described as the fastest-growing Ebola outbreak on record. Cases have been confirmed in six provinces, with more than 6,250 people infected and 3,039 killed since the outbreak was declared on May 15, according to the latest government data.
The outbreak, Congo’s 17th, is caused by the Bundibugyo species of Ebola, for which there are no approved vaccines or treatments.
As the virus spreads, health officials are looking for ways to anticipate where cases could emerge next and direct limited surveillance and response resources.
“Population movements have always been a factor in outbreaks, but they are particularly important in the current epidemic,” said Olivier Le Polain, head of epidemiology and analytics for response at the WHO Health Emergencies Programme.
Traditional risk assessments focus on outbreak hotspots and assume the virus is most likely to spread to surrounding areas.Analizing mobility data allows responders to identify risks in places that may be geographically distant but closely connectedthrough travel patterns.
“It gives us a more nuanced understanding of risk,” Le Polainsaid, citing the example of Ituri province, in the northeast, where the virus is believed to have started circulating.
“There are very significant population movements in Ituri linked to mining activities and trade. Understanding those movements is crucial to understanding how the outbreak spreads.”
The analysis is produced by Swedish non-profit Flowminder, using anonymised records generated when mobile phone users connect to telecommunications networks. As people move around the country, their phones connect to different antennas on the network, generating records that show where those connections took place. Researchers use those records to estimate how people travel between different areas.
The data is provided free of charge by Vodacom, Congo’s largest operator. Vodacom did not respond to a request for comment.
Flowminder says it receives aggregated and anonymised records and does not have access to information identifying individual subscribers.
“We seek to provide estimates of how people move, which in turn is a predictor of how infectious people move,” Flowminderfounder Linus Bengtsson said.
Flowminder’s first analysis, published in early June, focused on the three areas where the outbreak is believed to have started: Bunia, Mongbwalu and Rwampara. Researchers tracked where people who had spent time in those areas between April 3 and April 23 later traveled.
The largest flows were to nearby areas in Ituri province and North Kivu province. By the end of June, all 10 of the destinations receiving the largest flows of travelers from the original outbreak areas had reported confirmed Ebola cases.
SINGAPORE: Commodity vessel transits through the Strait of Hormuz fell to a single digit per day at the weekend, preliminary shiptracking data showed on Monday, well below a 10-day average of 14.
Over the weekend, four vessels exited the Gulf through the strait, including a Handysize vessel sailing in ballast, a Handy vessel carrying LPG, a Supramax carrying fertilizer and a Suezmax laden with crude or condensate.
Ten vessels entered the Gulf, including a mini-bulker carrying minor bulk commodities, a Handymax carrying grain, a Panamax carrying metals and a Supramax carrying dry bulk cargo, the data showed.
The figures exclude any vessels that might have crossed the strait with their Automatic Identification System transponders turned off to avoid detection.
A vessel was struck by an unknown projectile while transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations said early on Sunday.
It said the crew’s status, damage assessment and environmental impact were unknown.
Meanwhile, the vital East-West oil pipeline in Saudi Arabia, which has helped relieve the logjam in the Strait of Hormuz, was temporarily shut down by a drone attack coming from Iraq, Saudi officials said.
Before the Iran war started on February 28, the strait typically handled about 125 large, commercial vessels per day, including tankers, gas carriers, bulkers and container vessels, accounting for some 20% of the world’s daily crude oil and liquefied natural gas supply.
A US blockade of Iran-related shipping has halted Iranian crude oil exports since it was reimposed in mid-July. In the Bab el-Mandeb strait, 24 and 27 commodity vessels travelled through respectively on Saturday and Sunday, tracking data showed, compared with an average of around 27 ships over the last 10 days.
The Trump administration is proposing a dramatic overhaul of the once-a-decade U.S. Census head count that could leave out millions of immigrants based on status and key racial and ethnic data, jeopardizing the allocation of resources and the country’s voting map.
The potential changes, announced Wednesday, would exclude undocumented immigrants, asylum seekers and anyone without permanent status. Certain demographic questions from the traditional questionnaire would also be eliminated.
It echoes Trump’s previous idea to add a citizenship question to the 2030 census.
The U.S. Census Bureau, in a post on the Federal Register website, argued “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, as they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politic, or persons with a ‘usual residence’ in the United States due to their lack of a sufficient tie and allegiance to the United States.”
The census also “should be colorblind and should not be distorted in any way by questions about immaterial personal characteristics, such as race,” the agency said. It also is considering nixing questions related to people who identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community.
These changes would harm the quality of the data, said Beth Jarosz, a data researcher and vice president of the Association of Public Data Users. She called the proposals “unprecedented.”
“Not counting all of the people who reside here is actually where the real threat is,” Jarosz said. “If you think about all of the ways that census data are used.”
Census figures are traditionally used for an “apportionment count” to determine how many seats each state will have in the U.S. House of Representatives. That count also determines the number of votes in the Electoral College.
“You can imagine if we have undercounts or if we have people counted in the wrong place,” Jarosz said. “Then their political power or their political representation gets diluted.”
Historically, the decennial census has not sought to conduct a full count of people by citizenship status, she added. It may come up in the Census’ periodic American Community Survey.
Getting an accurate count of immigrants of various statuses is useful when assigning resources for public health emergencies or natural or human-made disasters.
“If you don’t have a count of everyone who’s there, you’re not going to have the resources you need,” Jarosz said. “And that puts everybody at risk.”
Race-related questions have been on the once-a-decade census since 1790. Starting in 2000, the U.S. census began allowing people to identify by more than one race. A 2015 Pew Research Center study found that multiracial people in the U.S. were growing at a rate three times faster than the general population. By 2020, 33.8 million people in the U.S. identified as being more than one race, according to the census.
Race and ethnicity data is essential for researchers who gauge discrimination, crime rates and wealth gaps in communities of color.
Manjusha Kulkarni is co-founder of Stop AAPI Hate and executive director of AAPI Equity Alliance, two advocacy groups that rely on census counts of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. The proposed changes would have tremendous impact on the populations they serve, she said.
“It also seeks to exclude important demographic data from millions that enables lawmakers, health care providers, public safety officials and community advocates — really anyone who cares about the health, safety and well-being of all Americans — from having the necessary data to keep us safe and healthy,” Kulkarni said via text message.
Dropping race and ethnicity data as well as some immigrants sends a message that these communities don’t matter, she added.
Collecting data for the 2030 Census with all these missing elements would be detrimental, Jarosz said.
“These changes are like trying to land an airplane when you are in thick fog and someone has thrown paint across the front window and your instruments are also not working,” she said.
Tang writes for the Associated Press.
The Trump administration is proposing a dramatic overhaul of the once-a-decade US Census head count that could leave out millions of immigrants based on status and key racial and ethnic data, jeopardizing the allocation of resources and the country’s voting map.
The potential changes, announced Wednesday, would exclude undocumented immigrants, asylum seekers and anyone without permanent status. Certain demographic questions from the traditional questionnaire would also be eliminated.
It echoes Trump’s previous idea to add a citizenship question to the 2030 census.
The US Census Bureau, in a post on the Federal Register website, argued “illegal aliens (among others) should not be included in the apportionment count, as they are not true inhabitants, members of the body politic, or persons with a ‘usual residence’ in the United States due to their lack of a sufficient tie and allegiance to the United States.”
The census also “should be colorblind and should not be distorted in any way by questions about immaterial personal characteristics, such as race,” the agency said. It also is considering nixing questions related to people who identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community.
These changes would harm the quality of the data, said Beth Jarosz, a data researcher and vice president of the Association of Public Data Users. She called the proposals “unprecedented.”
“Not counting all of the people who reside here is actually where the real threat is,” Jarosz said. “If you think about all of the ways that census data are used.”
Census figures are traditionally used for an “apportionment count” to determine how many seats each state will have in the US House of Representatives. That count also determines the number of votes in the Electoral College.
“You can imagine if we have undercounts or if we have people counted in the wrong place,” Jarosz said. “Then their political power or their political representation gets diluted.”
Immigrants of every status have historically been counted
Historically, the decennial census has not sought to conduct a full count of people by citizenship status, she added. It may come up in the Census’ periodic American Community Survey.
Getting an accurate count of immigrants of various statuses is useful when assigning resources for public health emergencies or natural or man-made disasters.
“If you don’t have a count of everyone who’s there, you’re not going to have the resources you need,” Jarosz said. “And that puts everybody at risk.”
Why race and ethnicity census data matters
Race-related questions have been on the once-a-decade census since 1790. Starting in 2000, the US census began allowing people to identify by more than one race. A 2015 Pew Research Center study found that multiracial people in the US were growing at a rate three times faster than the general population. By 2020, 33.8 million people in the US identified as being more than one race, according to the census.
Race and ethnicity data is essential for researchers who gauge discrimination, crime rates and wealth gaps in communities of color.
Collecting data for the 2030 Census with all these missing elements would be detrimental, Jarosz said.
“These changes are like trying to land an airplane when you are in thick fog and someone has thrown paint across the front window and your instruments are also not working,” she said.
Published on
Helsinki has landed the biggest cheque Google has written anywhere in Europe
The company announced on Wednesday that a €13 billion investment will fund data centres and supporting infrastructure across four municipalities, along with clean energy projects and funds dedicated to local biodiversity, education, research and workforce development.
The facilities in Hamina, Kajaani, Muhos and Vaala will power a range of Google services, among them its Gemini chatbot. The company described the decision as “a testament to Finland’s leadership in responsibly building AI infrastructure.”
Construction is expected across 2027 and 2028, and the firm estimates the investment will add €3.6 billion a year to Finland’s GDP while supporting more than 37,000 jobs, roughly 16,000 of them in construction.
Once the building stops, Google projects the sites will sustain around 7,000 jobs annually, spanning technical and facility roles, equipment suppliers, as well as the shops, restaurants and services used by those workers and their families.
Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo welcomed the announcement in Google’s statement.
“Google’s decision is a clear testament to our strengths. The value of the data economy extends far beyond direct investment into spurring innovation, research and development,” Orpo said, adding that closer collaboration would “deliver lasting benefits for both parties.”
The appeal to invest in Finland is rooted in its cold climate.
Data centres generate enormous heat and consume vast quantities of electricity, and Finland offers a cold climate that reduces cooling costs alongside relatively cheap and stable power from nuclear plants, wind and hydro.
That combination has produced a boom, with dozens of data centres already under construction across the country.
Google’s own presence dates back to 2009, when it bought a disused paper mill in the coastal city of Hamina and converted it, expanding steadily since.
For Orpo’s right-wing government, attracting this kind of investment has also been a priority, especially since Finnish elections will take place in April of next year.
Finland is contending with record unemployment and weak growth, and the data economy has become one of the few sectors offering the prospect of substantial investment and job creation.
Additional sources • AFP
HANFORD, Calif. — Darian Orduno bounced her baby boy on her chest, looking down at his thick black hair and bright eyes. What might pollution from a data center do, she wondered, to his growing lungs?
That question had brought Orduno, 25, to a community meeting opposing a possible data center here, and her fears, she said, likely would influence her vote in the midterm election too.
“I just had him, and now it’s concerning if he’s going to be able to grow up here,” Orduno said, or “if I’m going to have to relocate.”
As about 100 residents filed into a church for the meeting in late August, under a Central Valley sky hazy with air pollution, many shared the same worries — that a facility pitched for the local fairgrounds could further worsen the area’s air quality and strain its water supply.
Barbara Castle listens to speakers during a town hall meeting on a possible small-scale data center in Hanford.
Nationwide, such concerns are fueling a backlash to data centers from both the left and the right as tech companies flood the country with thousands of proposals for the facilities in nearly every state from California to Maine.
Data centers have become an unusually bipartisan flash point in the midterm elections, as candidates race to delineate policy platforms and respond to public opinion. The issue stands to influence swing voters and motivate turnout at the polls.
Here in the 22nd District, home to the state’s most competitive congressional race, how significantly the issue will affect voters’ decisions remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: Anxiety about data centers is mounting.
“It’s a national concern, it’s now a state concern, and now it’s bled into the local concern,” Hanford Mayor Mark Kairis said. “It’s a very emotionally charged issue right now.”
Residents in Hanford who oppose data centers say they are worried about the region’s air and water quality, concerns echoed by rural communities across the country.
Demand for data centers, which house the computer systems powering artificial intelligence and the internet, has surged as AI use has ballooned. As of April, more than 1,500 new data centers were in development across the United States, according to a Pew Research Center analysis, largely in rural areas.
The centers require intense cooling, which often demands high water and power use and creates the potential to affect the environment and to pass on utility costs to consumers. But they power technology that is becoming increasingly integrated into American business. They also create jobs, though with limitations.
Democrats see the data center uproar as fitting into their affordability messaging, and candidates generally agree data centers should be regulated, though their positions vary on how aggressively. For Republicans, whose party has backed AI innovation, responding to worsening public opinion has been trickier — particularly given President Trump’s championing of AI and data centers.
Vice President JD Vance on Thursday acknowledged negative polling on data centers but framed the issue as a question of American industrial dominance, saying the country can’t shy away from development. Earlier in the week, Trump asserted that the only reason communities should reject data centers is if they want to be “backwards and poor.”
The public may see data centers as a physical manifestation of AI advancement in general, said Camille Crittenden, executive director of the Center for Information Technology Research in the Interest of Society, a University of California research center. Opposing data centers offers people a way to vent their broader concerns about the technology’s increasing dominance.
Priest Luke Martinez expresses concerns during the community meeting .
“This is a very specific focal point for a general anxiety about AI,” she said. “People see these data centers, and they’re thinking, ‘AI’s going to take my job.’”
The backlash from residents in the Central Valley to the possibility of even a small-scale data center demonstrates how acutely the issue has put many Americans on edge.
“It really is terrifying,” said Lucy Gomez, 57, of Hanford, a retired teacher. “I feel like we’re being guinea pigs when we don’t want to be.”
Community anger about the facilities has prompted close attention from California lawmakers, who passed legislation in Sacramento on Monday to regulate energy use by the data center industry and impose other requirements.
California is home to the third-most data centers of any state, though it has experienced a relatively smaller new boom because of its high electrical prices and other factors. Still, 54 new facilities were in the works for the state as of April, according to Pew.
Hanford Councilwoman Kimber Regan speaks with Mayor Mark Kairis during the meeting. Hanford’s zoning ordinances do not allow data centers, but the city does not have jurisdiction over the county fairgrounds site where Global Stack is evaluating its proposal.
In Georgia and Pennsylvania, New York and Texas, Nevada and Virginia, the issue has become hot-button in elections at all levels. Ads about data centers run on the airwaves in states with key congressional races. Gubernatorial candidates jockey over it; both New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, put temporary moratoriums on new data centers.
A memo from the Republican senatorial campaign arm underscored how critical the question was becoming last month, when it warned AI companies that data centers could be the deciding issue in the close race between Ohio GOP Sen. Jon Husted and former Sen. Sherrod Brown, his Democratic challenger.
Data centers “are the anchor hanging around Husted’s neck,” said the memo, which was first obtained by Axios. “If he loses and data centers get the blame, politicians across the country will take notice — and they will not go near the next one.”
Sixty-one percent of Americans would oppose a data center being built where they live, a late August poll by the Economist and YouGov found.
Though Democrats and independents were more likely to oppose the centers, 47% of Republicans also said they would oppose it, and 52% of people who voted for Trump in 2024 said they believed construction of a new data center would increase their electrical bills.
Data centers encapsulate existing concerns among red and blue voters across the nation and in California about their quality of life and the influence of major tech companies, said Sonoma State University political science professor David McCuan.
“California has a lot of communities that have been struggling and trying to find a way forward, and the data center debate captures those voters’ frustrations,” McCuan said.
The historic Bastille, which served as Kings County’s jail and sheriff’s office from 1897 until 1964, stands tall next to the courthouse in Hanford’s Civic Center Park.
The idea for a center on the Kings County fairgrounds is part of a broader pitch by developer Global Stack USA to boost the state’s emergency infrastructure by installing small-scale data centers, helipads and parking garages at fairgrounds around the state.
Global Stack Chief Executive Dan Kang said the goal was strengthening the state’s emergency response capabilities while helping fairgrounds financially. The company’s early materials envisioned operating 70 sites by 2030.
The company has not made any formal proposals, but in Kings and Tulare counties, the issue caught attention after fair officials agreed to allow Global Stack to evaluate their sites. The idea also prompted some residents to voice opposition in Ventura County last month.
The facilities would include what’s known as an edge computing data center, which typically is much smaller than traditional data centers and which Global Stack says would require lower utility use and no municipal water connection.
Concerns about water and energy use by data centers are legitimate, said Shaolei Ren, a UC Riverside engineering professor who studies AI. Centers like the one proposed by Global Stack do not guzzle water the way larger ones do, but they still can use extra power or generate air and noise pollution, Ren said.
In Kings County, the project potentially could benefit the fairgrounds as a long-term revenue source, said Dena Rizzardo, chief executive of the fair board, a state entity that would have final say over any proposal. Because fairgrounds are state property, local and county officials don’t have jurisdiction.
Kang said he is committed to working with local communities to ensure “any path forward reflects local needs and California’s broader resilience priorities.”
In the district’s congressional race, which could help decide control of the House in November, Democratic nominee Randy Villegas said he has been getting questions about data centers from voters. Last month, he released a set of policy points and called for a data center moratorium of at least a year to give Congress time to pass regulations.
Democratic congressional candidate Randy Villegas urged meeting attendees to lobby federal lawmakers to pass legislation regulating data centers.
“The advancement of technology … should not be an excuse to throw our communities under the bus,” Villegas said at the Hanford meeting, where he addressed the friendly crowd without identifying himself as a congressional candidate. A College of the Sequoias professor, he is attempting to unseat Republican Rep. David Valadao.
Valadao, in a statement to The Times, said data center construction requires a “responsible approach” that includes local input and ratepayer protections.
“Data centers play an important role in our economy and national security, but Central Valley families are already facing high electric bills and concerns about our water supply,” Valadao said. He did not answer questions about the proposal in Hanford.
Several attendees at the Hanford meeting, who ranged from Gen Z to elderly, said the issue would affect their midterm votes, though most said they already were leaning to the left.
Gomez, the retired teacher, was not happy with either party but planned to vote for Democrats because she viewed them as taking more action to protect public health than Republicans.
Ember Gomez listens to speakers while her father, Filiberto, looks on during the meeting. Filiberto Gomez said he was concerned a data center would affect children’s health.
Courtney Hawkins, 40, said the data center issue “absolutely” would carry weight in his votes.
“I believe that AI is good for propelling technology in general,” Hawkins said, “but I don’t believe we should be pursuing it without regulations and at the cost of the environment.”
The United States and Iran continue to make competing claims about who has greater control of the critical Strait of Hormuz in the Gulf.
Washington claims the strait is open and that dozens of ships, carrying millions of barrels of oil, are passing through each day. US President Donald Trump claimed last month that the US was in “total control” of the waterway, through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas is shipped during peacetime, but which has been closed since the US-Israel war on Iran began six months ago.
list of 3 itemsend of list
Iran, however, says the strait remains under its control and is closed except to pre-approved vessels using its designated channels. It has warned that other ships attempting to transit risk being targeted.
So what is really going on in the strait – and what explains the divergent accounts?
The US says shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has significantly increased in recent weeks.
Two US officials told CNN that 40 commercial ships carrying some 18 million barrels of oil passed through the strait under US military escort on Tuesday, in what would be a new wartime record.
Trump gave a similar figure on Monday, saying the US Navy was helping some 30 ships pass through Hormuz every night. He later said the waterway was “under USA control”.
In terms of oil, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said that “at least 10 million barrels” were getting through the strait each day, with between 15 million and 17 million on Tuesday.
The assessment comes after US CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper claimed last week that the US military had cleared Hormuz’s transit lanes of sea mines.
Before the war began, an average of around 100 ships and 20 million barrels of oil are estimated to have passed through the waterway each day.
According to figures from PortWatch, this has fallen to an overall average of seven vessels since March.
Iran has acknowledged that some vessels are getting through the strait, but insists it remains in control of the waterway.
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf on Tuesday said “the enemy managed to get some ships” through Hormuz, but stressed that Iranian forces remain “in complete control of the strait and will not allow it to be opened”.
Ghalibaf accused the US of giving ships “false guarantees” about their ability to cross a southern route in Hormuz, warning that ships that try to do so would be targeted.
The following day, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed two oil tankers had hit mines and were disabled while trying to cross an “illegal route” in the strait. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, claimed an Iranian attack hit a Saudi oil tanker, killing two Filipino sailors.
The latest ship-tracking data paints a different picture than the US claims, with far fewer vessels recorded as transiting the strait.
According to marine analytics firm Kpler, just six vessels crossed the strait on Wednesday, 11 on Tuesday and five on Monday. It put the 10-day average at 13 vessels per day.
Other ship-trafficking services show a similar pattern. Maritime data firm Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded an average of around 12 transits per day from August 26 to September 1, though the latest data may be incomplete “due to a lag in identifying dark transits”, said the firm’s maritime intelligence and research director, Bridget Diakun. This means that some ships are switching off their tracking beacons.
From August 17-23, Lloyd’s List Intelligence recorded “about 14 non-Iranian-linked ships each day”, Diakun told Al Jazeera.
All these figures are far lower than the US claim that 40 ships transited the strait on Tuesday.
The Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC), which monitors threats to shipping in the region, said in a September 1 advisory that commercial traffic through Hormuz was “far below baseline”, despite a “modest uptick from recent lows”.
The advisory put the risk level for Hormuz at “severe”, citing a “continued risk of drifting or uncharted mines”, despite US claims to have cleared the strait of mines.
Diakun told Al Jazeera that it is difficult to explain the gap between US-claimed transit figures and those recorded by ship trackers without insight into how the US tallies its own figures.
She said it’s possible the US includes smaller or non-cargo-carrying ships in its total, unlike Lloyd’s, which only counts “cargo-carrying vessels over 10,000 dwt [deadweight tonnage]”.
Eirik Hooper, a senior associate covering the ports and terminals sector for maritime research consultancy Drewry, also pointed to possible differences in how the US counts vessel transits.
“A US operational count plausibly includes everything that moved under or near naval protection: naval auxiliaries, offshore support and tugs, coastal and small craft [and] dhows,” said Hooper, noting that ship-tracking firm Kpler filters out such vessels “on size or cargo grounds”.
Hooper also said the US has access to “satellite, airborne and other sensor coverage plus its own convoy manifests”, which enables it to see vessels not immediately picked up by the normal automatic identification system (AIS) tracking system.
“By late August, the majority of Hormuz crossings were classified ‘dark’ or unknown by route, and AIS data counts often need to be revised to include vessels that switch off their transponders, with confirmed movements backdated,” said Hooper.
More generally, both the US and Iran have an incentive to play up their influence in the strait, the status of which has become a major sticking point in their six-month conflict.
Former US Ambassador Henry Ensher recently told Al Jazeera that he believes the latest cycle of US-Iran confrontation was likely triggered by CENTCOM’s claims to have de-mined that strait, and said “both sides would be well served to stop talking quite so much”.
SACRAMENTO — After weeks of intense negotiation, state lawmakers on Friday reached a compromise on legislation to regulate energy use by California’s growing data center industry, action triggered by community anger over the facilities and fears of high utility bills in some communities.
The goal, according to legislators and advocates, is to protect consumers from growing electricity costs driven upward by the sprawling facilities and to track the centers’ immense energy and water consumption.
Business groups representing tech companies argued that some of the proposed restrictions and requirements, along with California’s high energy costs and lack of available land, would make it difficult for data centers to open in the state.
Municipalities risk missing out on tax revenues and jobs from the centers if the industry goes elsewhere, they said.
Two bills to regulate the controversial industry consumed the state Legislature in the final weeks of the 2026 session, drawing in Gov. Gavin Newsom and industry organizations and lobbyists representing some of the world’s most influential companies, including Google, Meta, Amazon and artificial intelligence firms such as Anthropic and OpenAI.
Proposed legislation by Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista) and Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles), finalized Friday, would establish special rules for data centers’ electrical use. The legislation requires the California Public Utilities Commission to create special rates and updated rules for data centers’ use of electricity, including the costs for new power for infrastructure upgrades.
The debate in Sacramento around the data centers centered on how much they should pay for power and infrastructure, and whether that should be mandated by the state Legislature or the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates investor-owned utilities and is controlled by a board appointed by the governor.
Unlike some other states, California hasn’t seen an overwhelming wave of new large-scale data centers, nor have state leaders sought moratoriums such as the ones enacted by governors in Texas and New York.
An aerial view of a 49.5-megawatt data center under construction in Vernon last month.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
Nevertheless, advocates focused on reforming the state’s utilities sought this year to seize the moment to enact tough regulations, including forcing data centers to pay for transmission upgrades and wildfire mitigation efforts.
Utility reform advocates and environmental leaders offered mixed reaction on Saturday.
Matthew Freedman, a senior staff attorney for The Utility Reform Network (TURN), praised the final language in the two bills, saying the legislation would prevent data center costs from “being foisted on other customers” while helping California meet its clean energy goals.
Monica Embrey, the founder of Affordable Energy Campaign, called the last-minute amendments “concerning.”
In particular, she pointed to a lack of clean energy requirements for data centers who use their own energy, and a provision that allows a utility to enter into its own agreement with a data center for energy in the interim period before the state finalizes its regulations.
A representative for the Data Center Coalition, whose members include Google and Microsoft, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Data centers have existed for decades but are rapidly expanding because of the rise of artificial intelligence, or AI. The centers help power everything from streaming services to videoconferencing calls.
Data centers in California are typically smaller than the mammoth, 500+-megawatt AI facilities making headlines in other parts of the country. Electricity costs and state regulations on gas-powered generators limit the vast majority of them to under 100 megawatts.
But as proposals increase in number, opposition has been fierce and growing.
A Public Policy Institute of California poll from July showed that 73% of residents oppose the construction of data centers in their communities.
Opposition centers on water use, air and noise pollution, and the potential for data centers to raise utility bills as they add strain to the grid requiring costly upgrades and new electricity supply.
The California Energy Commission expects data center electricity use, currently 2% of the state’s demand, to double in the next 10 years.
Monterey Park became the first city in the country in June to permanently ban data centers by a popular vote, and at least four other San Gabriel Valley cities have enacted moratoriums.
Southeast of L.A., Imperial County, Desert Hot Springs, and Palm Springs also voted on moratoriums, while Coachella permanently banned the facilities. In the Central Valley, Tulare County adopted a moratorium this month as residents voiced opposition to proposals to develop tiny data centers on local fairgrounds in the region.
And in San José, the state’s hot spot of data center development, residents flooded a recent public hearing to call for a moratorium while the city updates its data center standards.
Newsom last year vetoed legislation by Assemblymember Diane Papan (D-San Mateo) that would have required data centers to disclose and certify their water consumption. The governor said he was reluctant to impose “rigid” reporting requirements on the development of “this critically important digital infrastructure.”
Separate bills that would require the centers to disclose their energy and water use were recently approved by state lawmakers.
Like other state legislators, Papan said she wants to work with the centers, not ban them.
“I constantly say, ‘Help us help you.’ We will all get this right if we can just be transparent and methodical,” said Papan, whose district includes Silicon Valley.
Padilla’s district includes Imperial Valley, where a developer’s plans for a data center on 75 acres is sparking fierce backlash.
Advocates and lawmakers fought over two approaches on the issue of regulating data centers’ energy use.
A wider coalition of environmental groups supported the bill from Padilla, SB 886, sponsored by TURN, that would have required data centers to pay up front for broader power grid updates required to meet their demand. That approach made it into the final package.
TURN pointed to a recent transmission plan from California’s grid operator projecting that increased power demands from data centers in PG&E‘s service territory, where the majority of current and proposed data centers are concentrated, would create up to $1.8 billion in upgrade costs for the power grid, including transmission lines.
PG&E favored a less stringent approach. In an email earlier this week, a PG&E spokesperson argued SB 886 would “risk higher costs for customers and delay critical infrastructure needed to serve the state’s growing energy demand.”
The Data Center Coalition had opposed both bills for “singling out” one type of power user.
The high cost of land and power, as well as lack of available land, are just some of the reasons that California hasn’t seen a flood of data centers, said Khara Boender, a director of government affairs at the Data Center Coalition. She said dozens of states offer some type of exemption for data centers, but California does not.
Additional regulation in the Golden State, she said earlier this week, “would be another signal that the state is a more challenging place for data center development.”
The firm said it only became aware of the hack on Tuesday and quickly prevented the hackers gaining any more access, and notified affected customers.
“We immediately contained the risk and have been working with specialist advisors and taking appropriate steps to protect our customers and systems,” MAG said.
“We have informed and are working with the relevant authorities.”
The airport group said the e-mail addresses obtained by the hackers came from passengers signing up to the airports’ on-site wifi.
More detailed data, including vehicle registrations, came from people booking car-park spaces, arranging access to lounges, and booking fast-track.
Customers are urged to remain vigilant about suspicious emails, text messages or phone calls and avoid opening attachments from unknown contacts.
The identity of the hackers was known, MAG said, and the relevant authorities had been informed.
Earnings Call Insights: Semtech (SMTC) Q2 FY2027
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
If not renewed, CISA 2015 protections end in the US on September 30.
This article appears in the September issue of Global Finance Magazine.
Companies that share cybersecurity information with their peers have until Sept. 30, 2026, before the limited liability granted by the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 runs out, exposing them to potential regulatory scrutiny and penalties.
Under the Act, non-federal entities may share anonymized cyberattack and response information with other non-federal entities and the federal government via the Automated Indicator Sharing (AIS) program operated by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
In July, 23 industry associations that represented the financial services, energy, technology, transportation, healthcare, and retail sectors wrote to Speaker of the House Michael Johnson (R-LA) requesting an extension to the Act since it is “a foundational component of the nation’s cybersecurity.”
However, some view AIS as a relic of an earlier era of cyberdefense that provides machine-readable cyber threat indicators and defensive measures against malicious IP addresses, file hashes associated with malware distribution, and known malicious web links.
“It was a failure from the get-go, and it accomplishes nothing,” Milton Mueller, a professor of cybersecurity policy at Georgia Institute of Technology’s Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy, told Global Finance. “No one will notice when it’s gone.”
A web post by Mueller earlier this year cited a DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) report stating that non-federal participants using AIS fell to fewer than 90 in 2024 from a high of 304 in late 2022. The report also noted that alert volume on the platform dropped 93% between 2020 and 2022. Though there was a surge in alerts, to 10 million from 1 million, the OIG found that 89% of the data came from a single private-sector participant.
“The non-Federal participants we interviewed stated that they find AIS useful and an effective tool for protecting their systems from cyber threats,” wrote the report’s authors. “However, the number of non-Federal participants remained lower in 2023 and 2024 than in previous years. AIS now has 87 non-Federal participants compared to 252 in 2020.”
Nonetheless, the House of Representatives included an extension to the Act in part of the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, which is waiting for Senate approval.
In July, the Trump administration sidestepped legislative concerns and created “Gold Eagle,” a clearinghouse to share cybersecurity vulnerability information and coordinate responses among private industry and federal agencies, including the U.S. Treasury Department, CISA, and the U.S. War Department, formerly the Defense Department. The new system will be powered by frontier artificial intelligence, which emulates and may surpass human-level intelligence.
Although CISA 2015’s renewal is up in the air and details regarding Gold Eagle are sparse, private industry has had formalized cybersecurity data-sharing programs since 1999.
“There is plenty of threat intelligence sharing going on,” said GeorgiaTech’s Mueller. “There are commercial services, sectoral nonprofit Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs), and industry consortia like the Cyber Threat Alliance.”
The newly rebranded Alliance for Critical Infrastructure (formerly the Tri-Sector Executive Working Group) seeks to bring together critical infrastructure operators to strengthen national resilience and reduce systemic risk, while sustaining economic continuity.
The 501c(6) non-profit industry coalition started with nine founding members: American International Group Inc., AT&T Inc., Berkshire Hathaway Energy Co., Consolidated Edison Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Lumen Technologies Inc., Mastercard Inc., The Southern Co., and Xcel Energy Inc.
Since its formation, the organization has been on a membership drive, with JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon reportedly having private conversations with numerous companies across industry sectors to join the alliance.
Despite the benefits of sharing cybersecurity data, such as faster and broader threat detection and coordinated responses, sharing that data is not risk-free for a corporation.
“When information is shared, one should assume that information could be obtained by others, including regulators, litigants, and insurers, and that can inform the nature, contour, and context of the sharing,” said Mary Alexander Myers, lead of law firm Jones Day’s Cybersecurity, Privacy & Data Protection practice.
For chief financial officers, uncertainty around CISA’s liability shield adds another costly risk to the existing risk landscape. As cyber governance moves from the realm of IT to a board-level issue, CFOs and other C-level executives will have to determine if a reauthorized CISA 2015 or Gold Eagle provides them with enough confidence to continue to share cybersecurity information without the fear of regulatory penalties.
Rob Daly covers fintech and the economy. Contact him at rdaly@gfmag.com.
Earnings Call Insights: Wolfspeed (WOLF) Q4 FY2026
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer: This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
An image made with a drone shows an Amazon Web Services data center in Ashburn, Va., on Sept. 23, 2025. File Photo by Jim Scalzo/EPA
Aug. 17 (UPI) — Nvidia announced on Monday that it will finance an OpenAI data center in Ohio for up to $105 billion.
The credit from Nvidia will fund the data center’s first 4.25 gigawatts in computing capacity with an option to bring 3.75 gigawatts more online. The center is slated to begin operating in Pike City, Ohio, in 2028.
The data center will be located at the PORTS-Pike Technology Campus in Pike City. It will be constructed and managed by SB Energy, a subsidiary of SoftBank Group.
Nvidia is also providing the compute power to the data center.
“This is the essential economic point: the [Load Power Supply] commitment secures a long-lived AI factory site, while the NVIDIA compute inside can be upgraded repeatedly,” NVIDIA said in a press release. “Each new generation can deliver greater production, more intelligence and better economics.”
SB Energy and SoftBank agree to build enough power supply for 10 gigawatts of energy and invest at least $4.2 billion into the regional power grid infrastructure. Nvidia has also agreed to invest $1.5 billion into SB Energy.
OpenAI said the data center will support 35,000 construction jobs through 2032. It will also support 2,500 long-term jobs.
OpenAI will pay the least on the data center as its tenant, Nvidia said.
Published on
Two pieces of data collided in Tokyo within hours of each other.
Bond investors pushed the 10-year Japanese government bond yield to a three-decade high before the government reported that growth had come in at barely half the pace economists had forecast, a pairing that says a great deal about what is really driving Japan’s markets right now.
The economy expanded at an annualised rate of 1.1% in the second quarter, Cabinet Office data showed, well below the 2.0% forecast and down from a downwardly revised 1.9% pace in the first quarter.
Quarter on quarter, GDP rose just 0.3% against a forecast of 0.5%, marking a third consecutive expansion. Private consumption was flat, and capital expenditure fell 1.2%, while net exports, helped by the weak yen, added 0.5 percentage points to growth.
The 10-year JGB yield touched 2.93% earlier in the day, its highest level since September 1996, before easing slightly once the GDP figures landed.
The gap between weak growth and rising bond yields helps explain what is moving Japanese bonds now: not growth, but inflation and the currency.
The GDP deflator rose 2.6% year on year, and traders are increasingly betting that the Bank of Japan will raise its policy rate, currently at 1% and already a three-decade high, as soon as September to contain inflation and support the yen.
The yen slid to 163.73 per US dollar in late July, its weakest level in roughly four decades, prompting Japan and the US to carry out their first joint currency intervention since 2011.
Japan deployed an estimated $85 billion (€73.3bn) in the first two days alone, while the US intervention was much smaller, according to Goldman Sachs.
The operation pushed the yen back to around 159 per US dollar.
There is currently a wide gap between Japanese and US interest rates, with the Federal Reserve’s benchmark rate still at 3.50% to 3.75%. The Bank of Japan’s September meeting is being watched as the next test of whether the currency’s recovery can hold.
Japan’s bond market matters well beyond Tokyo because of the yen carry trade, in which investors borrow cheaply in yen to fund purchases of higher-yielding assets abroad, from US Treasuries to emerging-market debt.
Rising Japanese yields erode that trade’s profitability and can force rapid unwinding, as it happened in August 2024, when a Bank of Japan rate rise combined with weak US jobs data sent the Nikkei down more than 12% in a single session and knocked roughly 3% off the S&P 500.
With JGB yields at three-decade highs and further tightening still expected, analysts say the conditions for a similar shock have not disappeared.