How does noise and light pollution from data centres affect nearby residents and wildlife?

Numbers match the citations in the article. A working link isn't proof that a page supports a claim; check the quoted passage and date.

1. 1

   Environmental Noise Pollution in the United States: Developing an Effective Public Health Response

   Environmental Health Perspectives (Hammer et al.)Published Dec 5, 2013Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “We aimed to describe some of the most serious health effects associated with noise, summarize exposures from several highly prevalent noise sources based on published estimates as well as extrapolations made using these estimates, and lay out proven mechanisms and strategies to reduce noise by incorporating scientific insight and technological innovations into existing public health infrastructure. DISCUSSION: We estimated that 104 million individuals had annual LEQ(24) levels > 70 dBA (equivalent to a continuous average exposure level of >70 dBA over 24 hr) in 2013 and were at risk of noise-induced hearing loss. Tens of millions more may be at risk of heart disease, and other noise-related health effects. Direct regulation, altering the informational environment, and altering the built environment are the least costly, most logistically feasible, and most effective noise reduction interventions. Significant public health benefit can be achieved by integrating interventions that reduce environmental noise levels and exposures into the federal public health agenda.”

2. 2

   Artificial light at night disrupts immune rhythms in wild rodents under semi-natural conditions.

   Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) (Vardi-Naim et al.)Published Feb 5, 2026Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “Together, these findings underscore the need for ecoimmunological approaches to assess how expanding light pollution threatens wildlife health and resilience. Significance Statement. Artificial light at night (ALAN) is a growing anthropogenic disturbance with wide-ranging ecological and physiological impacts. While its disruptive effect on circadian rhythms is well documented, its effects on immune function remain underexplored. Our findings show that ALAN alters immune rhythmicity and weakens time-dependent antibody responses in wild rodents under semi-natural conditions, potentially increasing susceptibility to infection. Studying the effects of light pollution on wild species under natural conditions is essential not only for understanding its impact on ecosystem health, but also for assessing how altered immune function may influence the emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases. These insights underscore the need to investigate immunity in ecologically relevant contexts beyond traditional laboratory models and conditions.”

3. 3

   Light and noise pollution impacts specialist wildlife species disproportionately

   bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (Ditmer et al.)Published Feb 19, 2021Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “This knowledge is needed to improve the design and implementation of policies that mitigate or reduce sensory pollutants. We present results from an expert knowledge survey that quantified the relative influence of several ecological, anatomical, and physiological traits on the vulnerability of terrestrial vertebrates to elevated levels of anthropogenic lighting and noise. Our findings, based on 280 responses, highlight the increasing recognition among experts that sensory pollutants are important to consider in management and conservation decisions. Participant responses show mounting threats to species with narrow niches; especially habitat specialists, nocturnal species, and those with the greatest ability to differentiate environmental visual and auditory cues. Our results call attention to the threat specialist species face and provide a generalizable understanding of which species require additional considerations when developing conservation policies and mitigation strategies in a world altered by expanding sensory pollutant footprints. We provide a step-by-step example for translating these results to on-the-ground conservation planning using two species as case studies.”

4. 4

   The Ecological Economics of Light Pollution: Impacts on Ecosystem Service Value

   Remote Sensing (Anderson et al.)Published Jul 15, 2024Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “Light pollution has detrimental impacts on wildlife, human health, and ecosystem functions and services. This paper explores the impact of light pollution on the value of ecosystem services. We use the Simplified All-Sky Light Pollution Ratio (sALR) as a proxy for the negative impact of light pollution and the Copernicus PROBA-V Global Landcover Database as our proxy of ecosystem service value based on previously published ecosystem service values associated with a variety of landcovers. We use the sALR value to ‘degrade’ the value of ecosystem services. This results in a 40% reduction in ecosystem service value in those areas of the world with maximum levels of light pollution. Using this methodology, the estimate of the annual loss of ecosystem service value due to light pollution is USD 3.4 trillion. This represents roughly 3% of the total global value of ecosystem services and 3% of the global GDP, estimated at roughly USD 100 trillion in 2022. A summary of how these losses are distributed amongst the world’s countries and landcovers is also presented.”

5. 5

   Urban Ecology: Impact of Noise and Light Pollution on Local Wildlife

   INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CREATIVE RESEARCH THOUGHTS (Kumari)Published Jan 1, 2026Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “The chronic effect of noise pollution is the activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which increases the levels of glucocorticoids and inhibits the pulsatility of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and stimulates lipid peroxidation. Symbiotic environmental pollutants, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) amplify these biochemical insults by stimulating the cytochrome P450 enzymes and producing the actions of secondary oxidative intermediates. An overview of published biochemical and Eco physiological evidence in avian, amphibian, and mammalian taxa has shown convergent evidence of hormonal perturbation and genotoxic stress. The results of this study demonstrate that incorporating environmental chemistry within urban wildlife management is critical, and such biomarkers as urinary 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) in a 2-hydroxydeoxyuridine (H2O) form, plasma malondialdehyde (MDA), and faecal corticosterone metabolites are logical as routine surveillance tools of urban wildlife health.”

6. 6

   Grasping darkness: the dark ecological network as a social-ecological framework to limit the impacts of light pollution on biodiversity

   Ecology and Society (Challéat et al.)Published Jan 1, 2021Checked Oct 7, 2026

   “Challéat, S., K. Barré, A. Laforge, D. Lapostolle, M. Franchomme, C. Sirami, I. Le Viol, J. Milian, and C. Kerbiriou. 2021. Grasping darkness: the dark ecological network as a social-ecological framework to limit the impacts of light pollution on biodiversity. Ecology and Society 26(1):15. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12156-260115”