332

Finland's Supervisory Agency (LVV) has told the company behind Google's planned data centres in Muhos and Kajaani to suspend work that would "significantly alter the environment" by 23 October, after more than 300 hectares of forest were cleared, at one site without the mandatory environmental impact assessment. The developer has until 14 October to explain itself, or face enforcement proceedings.

The sites are part of the €13bn investment Google announced less than a month ago, its largest single investment in Europe, and Google says it "fell short" of its own standards and will follow the agency's guidance. Interesting test of how far Nordic countries will bend environmental rules to win the AI data-centre race.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

If they're literally forced to replant those trees and care for them until they're back at the same size (so, for around 30 years), that would totally upend such calculations.

Personally I'm eagerly awaiting to see if Finnish Justice is a joke and just gives then the expected "cost of doing business" fine or if it actually forces them to undo the damage (i.e. replant the trees and care for them) thus reversing any and all gains they might have had from their unlawful actions.

[-] paranoia@feddit.dk 0 points 6 days ago

I would wager the Finnish planning department doesn't have the appropriate tools to control this kind of project.

The only other entity historically building anything on this scale is the Finnish government itself.

The reality is this landscape is probably not of significant environmental value considering it was rezoned for industrial use, so replanting the same forest that blankets the entirety of northern Finland is not going to really be worthwhile.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

It's not about the forest, it's about breaking Law in Finland not being treated as the cost of doing business.

Either it has to be so costly that it's not worth it (replanting the trees, losing those licenses or something similar with entirely undoes the benefit of the unlawful actions), the corporate veil that protects them has to be pulled back and the people who ordered this have to spend time in jail or, ideally, both.

If there's no deterrence from a Law, then it's functionally the same as that Law not existing, and a nation like that isn't really one with Rule Of Law.

[-] paranoia@feddit.dk 0 points 6 days ago

You would never be jailed in Finland for removing farmed forest. I think you're going to be very disappointed with the penalty. The EIA will be written explaining the land is a farmed forest and the expected works. In the eyes of the bureaucracy this is going to be a procedural error and the project will likely continue, as there is no grounds to reject it.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago

If the individuals making the choices come out on the other side better than if they did not chose that way, then they will do the same choices again and again and again as will others who see them get away with it.

At one point in my career I worked in Investment Banking in Britain and it was painfully obvious that the business treated breaking regulations and the fines if caught as just another item in their cost-risk analysis spreadsheets (and it was totally logical for them to do so - apparently Britain is were most of the shenanigans in the time leading to, during and after the 2008 Crash in the World, and nobody ended up in jail and all the big banks got saved and kept paying massive bonuses even during the Austerity period).

So, yeah, if all that Finland does is some fines on the businesses, keeping the individuals making the choices insulated from the consequences and letting the businesses keep the upsides of their crimes, this shit will not just keep on happen but actually happen more and more.

[-] paranoia@feddit.dk 2 points 5 days ago

I'd say it's pretty cut and dry (logging joke) here. If any harsher penalties come in, they will be for everyone after.

this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2026
332 points (100.0% liked)

World News

58461 readers
1530 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS