Data centers in the Netherlands consumed approximately 5,100 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity in 2024, accounting for 4.6% of the country's total electricity consumption. This energy usage is comparable to the annual needs of nearly 2 million households. The increase in consumption reflects a growth trend, with a reported rise of 37% since 2021 when consumption was recorded at around 3,700 GWh and represented 3.3% of total electricity use.

The majority of this electricity is consumed by large data centers—approximately 45 facilities that each consume over 10 GWh—collectively responsible for about 90% of total energy usage by data centers in the country. While the number of these larger facilities has remained stable, their overall energy consumption has increased significantly over recent years.

In total, there are roughly 200 data centers located throughout the Netherlands, many situated near Amsterdam. These include operations run by major cloud providers and technology firms as well as smaller institutions such as universities and hospitals that manage their own data storage capabilities; however, smaller facilities are not included in these statistics.

The rate of increase in power consumption by data centers appears to be stabilizing compared to previous years when growth rates were higher. Between 2018 and 2021, for instance, there was a notable surge in consumption by approximately 58%.

Original Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (netherlands) (google) (microsoft) (entitlement)

The article discusses the rising electricity consumption of data centers in the Netherlands, providing some statistics and context about this trend. However, it lacks actionable information that a normal person could use. There are no clear steps, choices, or tools presented for readers to apply in their own lives. The statistics provided are interesting but do not translate into practical advice or resources that individuals can utilize.

In terms of educational depth, while the article presents some relevant data about energy consumption trends over time and mentions major players like Google and Microsoft, it does not delve into the underlying causes or systems driving these changes. It fails to explain why this increase in energy usage matters beyond surface-level facts. The absence of detailed analysis leaves readers without a deeper understanding of the implications of such trends.

Regarding personal relevance, while the topic may affect broader societal issues like energy sustainability and costs, it does not directly impact an individual's safety, finances, health decisions, or responsibilities in a meaningful way. The information is more relevant to policymakers or industry stakeholders than to average readers.

The article does not serve a public service function effectively; it recounts facts without offering warnings or guidance that would help individuals act responsibly regarding energy consumption or environmental impact. It reads more like an informative piece rather than one aimed at empowering readers with useful insights.

There is no practical advice offered; thus ordinary readers cannot realistically follow any guidance presented in the article. It focuses solely on reporting data without suggesting how people might respond to these trends.

In terms of long-term impact, the information shared is limited to current events surrounding electricity use by data centers and does not provide lasting benefits for planning ahead or improving habits related to energy consumption.

Emotionally and psychologically, while the article might raise awareness about energy issues indirectly through its statistics, it does not provide clarity or constructive thinking on how individuals can engage with these challenges positively. Instead of fostering a sense of agency among readers regarding their own energy use or environmental responsibility, it may leave them feeling disconnected from actionable outcomes.

Finally, there are no signs of clickbait language; however, there is a lack of substance that would keep reader engagement beyond mere curiosity about data center operations.

To add value where the article falls short: individuals can take steps toward reducing their own electricity consumption by being mindful of their usage patterns at home—such as turning off lights when leaving rooms and using energy-efficient appliances. They can also consider renewable energy options if available in their area as part of broader efforts toward sustainability. Engaging with local community initiatives focused on reducing carbon footprints can also be beneficial for those looking to make impactful changes collectively rather than relying solely on large corporations' actions. By staying informed about local policies regarding energy use and advocating for sustainable practices within their communities—like supporting legislation aimed at increasing renewable sources—they can contribute meaningfully towards addressing larger systemic issues highlighted by trends such as those discussed in this article.

The text states, "electricity consumption by data centers has almost doubled over the past five years." This wording emphasizes a rapid increase in energy use, which may evoke concern about environmental impact. By framing it as "almost doubled," it suggests urgency and severity without providing context on overall energy trends or comparisons to other sectors. This can lead readers to feel alarmed about data centers specifically, while potentially downplaying other significant sources of electricity consumption.

The phrase "power needs of approximately 2 million homes" is used to illustrate the scale of electricity consumption. This comparison creates a vivid image that may provoke emotional reactions from readers who relate to home energy use. However, it does not clarify how this figure compares to total household energy consumption or the broader context of national energy needs, which could mislead readers into thinking data centers are disproportionately consuming resources.

The text mentions "facilities where data storage is the primary function," highlighting large technology firms like Google and Microsoft. By naming these companies, it implies that they are primarily responsible for increased electricity usage without discussing how their operations might also drive technological advancements or efficiencies elsewhere. This can create a negative perception of these companies as solely harmful entities rather than recognizing their multifaceted roles in society.

When discussing smaller data centers that have maintained consistent energy use, the text contrasts them with major ones whose consumption has surged. The choice of words here subtly elevates larger data centers while minimizing the significance of smaller ones. It suggests that larger facilities are more impactful in terms of growth and resource usage without exploring why this disparity exists or its implications for future development.

The statement regarding CBS's analysis not accounting for organizations like hospitals and universities implies an incomplete picture of electricity consumption related to data storage. By saying “the actual power usage may be even higher,” it creates uncertainty around current figures without providing evidence for this claim. This speculation can lead readers to assume that the problem is worse than presented, fostering unnecessary alarm about overall power usage by all types of organizations involved in data management.

Lastly, when stating that “their collective energy consumption has surged from about 1,300 gigawatt hours a decade ago,” there is an implication that this growth trend is inherently negative without discussing potential benefits such as improved services or economic growth linked to increased technology use. The word "surged" carries strong connotations suggesting uncontrolled growth rather than measured progress, which could skew public perception against technological advancement in favor of environmental concerns alone.

The text conveys several meaningful emotions that shape the reader's understanding of the situation regarding electricity consumption by data centers in the Netherlands. One prominent emotion is concern, which arises from the alarming statistics presented about energy usage. Phrases like "significant increase in electricity consumption" and "nearly 5,100 gigawatt hours last year" highlight a growing problem that could evoke worry among readers about energy sustainability and environmental impact. This concern is strong because it emphasizes how this level of consumption is comparable to the needs of "approximately 2 million homes," making it relatable and underscoring its seriousness.

Another emotion present is urgency, particularly when discussing how data center electricity use has "almost doubled over the past five years." This doubling suggests a rapid escalation that can provoke anxiety about future energy demands and resource depletion. The phrase “now accounts for nearly 5 percent of the total electricity used in the country” further intensifies this sense of urgency by framing data centers as significant contributors to national energy consumption, prompting readers to consider potential consequences if this trend continues.

Pride can also be inferred from mentioning major technology firms like Google and Microsoft operating within these data centers. While pride typically evokes positive feelings, here it serves a dual purpose: it highlights technological advancement but also contrasts sharply with the negative implications of their high energy use. This juxtaposition may lead readers to feel conflicted; they may admire technological progress while simultaneously feeling disheartened by its environmental cost.

The writer employs emotional language strategically throughout the text to guide reactions effectively. By using phrases such as “surged from about 1,300 gigawatt hours” instead of simply stating an increase, there is an implication of alarm associated with rapid growth. Such wording amplifies emotional impact and steers attention toward potential crises rather than merely presenting facts in a neutral manner.

Additionally, comparisons are made between current usage levels and those from a decade ago, emphasizing how dramatically things have changed over time. This technique not only illustrates growth but also creates a sense of loss regarding previous stability in energy consumption patterns. The mention that smaller data centers have maintained consistent usage serves as a contrast that highlights just how extreme changes have been among larger facilities.

Overall, these emotional elements work together to create sympathy for potential future challenges related to energy sustainability while simultaneously building trust through factual reporting on statistics provided by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The combination encourages readers to reflect on their own views regarding technology’s role in society and inspires action towards more sustainable practices or policies concerning energy use in data centers.