Americans don’t agree on much, but that’s not the case when it comes to data centers.
Seven in 10 Americans oppose building data centers for artificial intelligence in or near their communities. Despite this, the federal government is moving to make it easier for them to be built. And in some places, residents won’t even get the chance to raise concerns publicly or even know if a data center is coming to their neighborhoods.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency plans to scrap a federal requirement that states tell the public — and allow public comment — before approving air-pollution permits for industrial facilities. That includes the data centers rising across the country, as well as the power plants built to feed their enormous appetite for electricity.
At the same time, the EPA last month also proposed another change that would let developers start building data centers before their permits are approved.
The rural South, which is home to a disproportionate amount of Black communities, has seen the largest growth of these large data centers. The proposals and lack of transparency may worsen health risks, increase utility bills, and contribute to community displacement, residents told Capital B.
The change at the federal level would mean that, in some places, residents could lose one of their few formal chances to ask questions, raise alarms, or learn that a data center is headed their way before the permits are signed and construction begins.
Paul Black, an environmental activist organizing against a data center complex the size of 1,200 football fields in rural South Carolina, said these moves “run counter to the way American democracy is sold to us.”
“It is a betrayal of everything that this country should stand for, purports to stand for. It runs counter to the will of the people,” he added.
The data center project currently being debated in his 40% Black community was only proposed there after developers tried — and failed — to build a similar campus in a predominantly white county in Georgia.
The change at the federal level would mean that, in some places, residents could lose one of their few formal chances to ask questions, raise alarms, or learn that a data center is headed their way before the permits are signed and construction begins.
In a statement, the EPA said the proposal would “provide the state and local agencies most familiar with local issues the discretion to determine whether, when, and for how long to provide opportunities for public participation.”
But many Americans are increasingly losing faith in their local governments to work in their best interests.
In part of a growing web of secrecy, local governments have routinely signed nondisclosure agreements with tech companies to hide these projects and overruled legal orders in order to bury information about them.
“What I am saying is that if we, as the community, the people who are responsible, can’t understand this, can’t have questions answered, can’t have information, then how can I look somebody in the eye and tell them this is good for you, trust me?” Davante Lewis, a Louisiana public service commissioner tasked with regulating industry, told Capital B last month.
Lewis was the only member to vote in favor of releasing electricity use information tied to the current construction of the country’s largest data center in rural Louisiana.
Nearly 200 advocacy groups and more than a dozen states, led by both Democrats and Republicans, have voiced opposition to the federal changes.
Where the biggest threats lie
“In the more rural parts of the nation, we are under attack by data centers,” Black said. “They are seeking to get in as fast as possible, as quietly as possible, and do what they will to the places [where] we live, that we find precious, the places that we’ve preserved, and they want to come in in the dark of the night to build a data center.”
Last month, South Carolina passed its own ruling that says power plants for data centers can be constructed without review or approval from the state’s regulatory commission.
The burden of data center growth is already falling heavily on Black communities. Data centers can drive demand for gas-fired power plants and turbines, which emit smog-forming nitrogen oxides, fine particulate matter and, in some cases, hazardous air pollutants such as formaldehyde connected to a slew of cancers.
“It’s beyond cruel for Trump’s EPA to silence front-line communities who bear the brunt of unhealthy air,” said Brandon Jones-Cobb, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.
At the same time, the costs of building new utility infrastructure is often passed onto ratepayers. Black households, who on average face a higher energy burden than other groups, have been plagued by rising bills and subsequently power shutoffs related to data center growth.
Industrial growth can also remake housing markets faster than rural communities can absorb. In communities surrounding where Meta is constructing the nation’s largest data center, a local mayor told Capital B that prices had doubled and families in trailer-home parks had been evicted to make room for higher-earning construction workers. The area’s median home and rental prices rose 80% in just one year.
The EPA said the proposed changes would “responsibly speed up permitting, supporting American economic development and energy dominance.”
Last year, Lee Zeldin, who runs the EPA, said it was now the agency’s top priority to “make the United States the artificial intelligence capital of the world.” The 56-year-old agency was established in 1970 to protect the environment and public health.
“The level of unequalness with these data centers cannot be understated,” Black said. “The government is rewriting the rules and the richest corporations in the world are supporting them so that one of our only ways to make our voices heard is erased.”
The EPA is expected to finalize the proposal within the next year.
Read More:
