Matt Garman, chief executive officer of Amazon Web Services (AWS), wrote in a longer blog post that the company has stopped using nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) with government agencies when seeking approvals for new data center projects. The remark was part of a wider effort in his post to argue that data centers can benefit local communities.
Why NDAs are controversial
NDAs have become a focal point in debates about data center transparency. Environmental activist Erin Brockovich said the top complaint she hears is lack of transparency: a common pattern, she said, is projects being announced after permits are already secured, developers not returning calls, and local officials signing NDAs before neighbors even know a project is being considered.
Moratoriums and policy responses
In response to pushback, New York announced a one‑year moratorium on permits for large data centers. According to Garman, more than 100 data center moratoriums are currently being considered across the United States. He warned that if such measures are enacted, the U.S. could fall behind in the sector and face multi‑generational consequences.
Four myths Garman addressed and the figures he cited
In his post, Garman sought to rebut four widespread concerns: that data centers use too much water; that they drive up electricity costs; that they are a major source of pollution; and that they bring no local benefits.
- Water use: Citing an Amazon report, Garman said "direct data center water consumption" constitutes only 0.5% of all industrial water usage in the United States, far less than activities like golf courses or almond farming. He and others point to technological advances, and Nvidia has claimed its new cooling system eliminates "pretty much all water usage" inside the data center. However, such statements do not necessarily account for the broader water footprint tied to electricity generation and chip manufacturing.
- Electricity rates: Garman argued that energy prices have risen only in some states with high concentrations of data centers, while in others rates have fallen or increased more slowly. He added that where rates are rising, it is often due to aging grids that were not upgraded before demand increased. An independent watchdog, by contrast, recently attributed a 76% year‑over‑year price increase on America’s largest electrical grid primarily to data centers.
- Pollution: Garman criticized critics for focusing on maximum permitted emissions in data center permits. He noted that a planned Amazon data center in Texas is permitted to release up to 33 million tons of carbon dioxide per year, more than any other U.S. power plant's permit. At the same time, he said data center backup generators "almost never run," estimating they are idle 99.9% of the time and operate roughly 10 hours per year, mainly for maintenance testing.
- Community benefits: Garman wrote that Amazon no longer uses nondisclosure agreements with government agencies on its projects, and that over the past three years Amazon has contributed more than $1 billion to communities across the U.S. where it has a meaningful data center presence.
Scientific, legal and trust issues remain
Researchers have urged independent study of data center water and energy use because there are no federal or state requirements for how tech companies must report these figures. Legal disputes continue to surface: the NAACP is currently suing Elon Musk’s SpaceX/xAI over pollution concerns, highlighting the broader legal and civil‑rights dimensions of infrastructure projects.
Public skepticism and the trust problem
Despite Amazon’s public statements and numbers, community suspicion may persist. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has described the AI backlash as "fundamentally a crisis of trust," where the public assumes governments and tech companies are "cooking up some new way to screw them over." Writer Jasmine Sun noted that when data center opponents hear the tech companies’ arguments, a common response is: "I don't believe them."
Conclusion
Amazon’s decision to stop using NDAs with government partners is a step meant to address transparency concerns around data center projects. Nonetheless, disputes over water and energy usage, pollution, electricity prices and local benefits continue to fuel moratoria and public opposition in multiple U.S. states.
