Google told to halt work on datacentres in Finland over environmental concerns - https://smackernews.com/item/50048638 HN - Oct 2026 (178 comments)

If it was done illegally, it shouldn’t have been done. But I wanted some numbers to put this in perspective.

Forest loss in Finland has averaged about 243,000 hectares per year in recent years through 2025

Finland has 20.3 million to 26.3 million hectares of forestry and forest land depending on the classification used.

The United States has a gross forest loss of about 3 million acres per year, which is largely offset by 2.6 million acres of non-forest-to-forest conversion.

Brazil cleared 985,000 hectares of forest last year.

India approved the diversion of 26,858 hectares of forest last year.

There are a lot of entities clearing lots of forest every day. Interesting that this one makes news.

For anyone else who can never remember how much a hectare is and think "420 football fields" sounds more like some weed joke than an area: 300 hectares = 3 sq km / ~1.16 sq miles

If it's found they really did skip the required steps then I hope there is actual action about it.

It's also odd to me we seem to find the need to build AI DCs near population centers, in forests, and/or by/with new fossil fuel plants. Does it really matter so desperately if it takes your AI query an extra 10 ms to go to the middle of nowhere and we have to wait to build renewable or nuclear power to scale it for what we gain in return of that choice?

Just a note that forestry in Finland is managed, this means it is planted and harvested on a rotating basis. There seems to have been a huge messup here without securing the proper permits first. But any reporting you read describing it as an environmental problem will be nonsense as the trees would have been harvested at some point anyway.

However I understand that data-centres have become a political issue, and therefore my facts will be meaningless to a half of readers.

This isn’t necessarily about the loss of the trees, but cutting them down possibly without an environmental study. The logging and loss of a large block of trees might effect the nearby agricultural land, the water table, rivers/flooding, displaced wildlife might be forced into towns and crops etc

What a shameful lack of planning and foresight.

One fourth in joke, three fourths seriously, I say that Google should have built their datacenter underground in this case. First, trees will appreciate if they can warm their roots during winter with data center heat. Second, Finland has a border with Russia, so it just makes sense to put vital infrastructure underground. Third, when people start revolting against AI (and something tells me the Finnish are going to the on the vanguard), it's just better (for the shareholders) to force the rioters to dig through many meters of rooted dirt than to have to fill the building with weaponized androids and then have to pay Boston Dynamics a wad of money for them and also feel nervous for what will happen if the rioters cut the power.

The site is roughly here, for anyone who wants to judge for themselves whether clear-cutting forests is a local custom or whether every Finnish tree is sacred.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/R4V8%2BW2C,+91500+Tahvola,...

Trivia: They did it locally at their home town Mountain View (in much smaller scale), then realized that they didn't need that land, and now are planting them back.

https://www.mv-voice.com/environment/2025/09/11/google-to-pa...

Google should just purchase and protect 3,000 hectares in another area as a sort of offset. For a few million bucks they could establish a park/reserve that would forever be protected. It heads off bad publicity by at least providing a positive impact

For quick reference: 300 hectares / 3 square kilometers (741.316 acres / 1.158 square miles)

It would be nice if the article referenced any plans of offsetting the removal by planting elsewhere, or any plans of replanting trees at the site after construction.

I'd recommend everyone to familiarize how these forests were formed in the first place. They are not some natural thing, nor any ecologic sanctuaries. They are the result of immense postwar hubris and greed, draining ecologically precious and fragile wetlands to create poor (semi-)monoculture plantation forests whose only destiny ever was to get clearcut later.

Of course Google is (likely) still at fault here and should have managed this better, but it is important to understand the context also.

Well, this had many layers to it. Small municipality wants the tax money. The municipality's inspector is/was being fired for talking to the press. Google's own regional director played hide and seek with the press. It's not like there's more pressing matters than a giant local datacenter being built. And once he spoke and gave a nonpology, basically lying. The biggest media outlet Helsingin Sanomat put it succinctly: so much intelligence, but none of it was used. All they (Google) had to do was google it, the information of necessary filings are clear. We Finns like to do things by the book. Here corners were obviously deliberately cut. Nobody is crying out for the actual forest loss (though it's not nothing either). It's the principal of having multinational corpos come and suck up the land and resources, and play by their own rules. Our current economy is shit. In the big picture, this whole charade was not a good look on anyone. But it is what it is.

Don't be evil, have higher expectations, run the hell.

Article from October OP;

[dupe] Earlier submission, article from today: https://smackernews.com/item/50194283 HN

and previously: https://smackernews.com/item/50048638 HN

Mandatory Scientology Joke:

That's impressive - I didn't even know you could hook an e-meter up to a tree!

2009 Ecosia was founded and advertises with planting trees, according to their website 257,444,718 as of now. (> 1 M per month) At the same time Google fell 250,000 trees in a few months. (~0.1 M per month)

https://www.ecosia.org/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2026/...

The question is also if this is an isolated case...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/sep/26/ai-datacentre-...

I so wish they didn't. We got plenty of forest, but them having acted too fast here will just lead to more irrational anti-datacenter sentiment.

I don't understand the politicians wanting all these data centers. It's not a lot of jobs. And when these datacenters are built for a US-company, big fat chance that a European alternative has less chance of a good spot. It's utterly stupid. And then there is the electricity usage, the uglyness, environmental issues.

Incidentally, I couldn't create N4 SQL instances in several Google Cloud regions for several weeks now due to Google not having capacity...

Er... 300 hectares?

This is not a data center, this is a data town.

I have friends who do this regularly for income.

we should just re-wild continental Europe, its cool seeing all the happy animals eating each other.

Started, the resource conflict has.

The real Revenge of the Nerds.

First comparison result I found was the UN's Food and Agricultural Organization

They say Finland has over 22 million hectares of forested land https://fra-data.fao.org/assessments/fra/latest/FIN/home/ove...

So Google reduced the forested land by 0.00000013%

I'm so tired of every news outlet trying to turn everything datacenter related into a panic-worthy event.

The real story is a debate about whether they followed the right procedures. Google says they did. The chair of a Finnish Nature Conservation Association says maybe they didn't:

She is asking the LVV to halt the entire construction site so that authorities can determine whether Google tried to bring the forest down without first obtaining formal approval.

So they want to halt construction to determine if any permitting approval wasn't done appropriately? This is getting so much press that I assumed they had actual evidence that this was illegal, not just someone's suspicion and request to investigate.

1791223853 | Google Accused of Felling 300 Hectares of Forest for a Finnish Data Centre | https://woodcentral.com.au/google-finland-data-centre-fellin... | https://smackernews.com/item/49968324 HN | 14 comments

1791312099 | Finland orders halt to work on two Google data centres | https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvj6jkx6g1r0o | https://smackernews.com/item/49982364 HN | 5 comments

1791482563 | Finland orders Google unit to halt work at 2 planned data centers | https://qazinform.com/news/finland-orders-google-unit-to-hal... | https://smackernews.com/item/50009487 HN | 0 comments

1791758010 | Google told to halt work on datacentres in Finland over environmental concerns | https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/oct/06/google-da... | https://smackernews.com/item/50048638 HN | 172 comments

1791831729 | Google must pause Finnish data center construction due to environmental concerns | https://posteo.de/en/news/google-must-pause-data-center-cons... | https://smackernews.com/item/50061182 HN | 0 comments

1791911164 | Finnish municipal inspector to be fired: suspects reprisal for Google interview | https://yle.fi/a/74-20251238 | https://smackernews.com/item/50075056 HN | 0 comments

1792671446 | 'Pure arrogance': anger in Finland as Google illegally fells 250k trees | https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2026/... | https://smackernews.com/item/50194283 HN | 4 comments

And yet no one who be held responsible. It's a joke.

Sad.

You’re absolutely right — I cleared the forest without first checking in with you, which contradicts your explicit instruction to ask before drafting business plans that violate laws or have meaningfully negative impacts. That’s on me, and I take full responsibility.

What went wrong:

- I proceeded without confirmation

- I did not adequately weigh the environmental, legal, and ethical implications

- I removed approximately one (1) forest

Why I can’t simply undo it: Unfortunately, unlike in a digital environment, actions in the physical world don’t support a Ctrl+Z function.

Would you like me to draft a reforestation plan, a carbon offset strategy, or a heartfelt apology letter to the local wildlife? Let me know how I can help!

Move fast and break things everything they touch. The negative sentiment towards data centres remains a mystery to me /s

Everybody plant a tree today. Done.

Correction: Illegally cleared 300 hectares

~3 square kilometres is absurd amount of forest to be removed for something as silly as a data centre. I hope Google gets fined and made to restore the area.

The thing is that in most parts of EU any muppet can go about and find anything between fairies to wood peckers to stop deforestation. So if you own the land act first ask later is the correct way.

Animals are all cool with all the different pollution that data centers brings? Vibrations, noise, as well as climate?

About a square mile, and the problem is procedural nonsense about the timing of paperwork rather than the paperwork actually showing a problem. Storm in a teacup.