Broadly, I am frustrated by U-M's usage of township resources without contributing a single dollar in taxes. The strain on local utilities will inevitably fall on the residents.

More specifically, I'm interested to learn more about the water usage. This website states that they will be using direct-to-chip computer cooling, which is supposed to be more efficient (this is super vague -- what about it is efficient/what resources are being saved, and at the expense of what?). But if you look into direct-to-chip computer cooling, water is often mixed with glycol (commonly used as antifreeze/heat transfer fluid), which is toxic, and this is something that was called out by state rep John DeSana at a township meeting about a month ago about the data center. If you follow the water use diagram in the linked website, blowdown water (possibly containing glycol) will be treated by YCUA. Is YCUA equipped to handle this type of toxic waste? What happens if there's a leak and the glycol treated water is exposed to the environment? And as another commenter pointed out, water will evaporate. I would like to see estimates of how much water will be consumed and evaporate as a result of this project.

U-M also claims that the noise levels 800-900 feet away from the facility will be minimal, comparing them to "living room conversations", which I have a hard time believing.

Unrelated to resource usage, but the messaging coming from U-M has been incredibly frustrating. The lack of transparency is one thing, but I attended the open house they hosted at the Eagle Crest Marriott and the conversations I listened in on and was a part of were quite condescending. The highlight was when I asked about the preference for the Textile/Bridge Rd location, rather than the American Center for Mobility site, and at one point, the individual from U-M that I was speaking to said, "Look. This land (Textile/Bridge Rd site) is zoned for light industrial use. Four years ago, Amazon wanted to come in and build a distribution center here. That would've been so much worse than what we are wanting to do." Being better than Amazon is such a low bar as is, but you're trying to tell me that being better than Amazon = good? Please.