A new report from the nonprofit Data & Society draws on 18 months of ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with 44 Pennsylvanians conducted between 2024 and 2026. Rather than measuring the empirical impacts of data centers, the researchers set out to understand how people experience and interpret debates over proposed data center construction in their communities.
Context and scale
The report arrives amid an industry conviction—especially among frontier AI labs—that expanding computing capacity is central to advancing artificial intelligence. Companies have announced plans for data center projects that, in aggregate, amount to trillions of dollars. At the same time, public opinion surveys indicate more than 60% of Americans favor limiting new data centers, particularly in their own communities. Trackers at Data Center Watch report that $68 billion worth of data center projects were disrupted by local opponents in the second quarter of 2026.
In Pennsylvania, the tension is visible in recent policymaking and public events. Governor Josh Shapiro headlined a July 2025 summit celebrating $90 billion in data center and AI infrastructure investment; about a year later he signed an order adding requirements for data center projects and removing them from a regulatory fast‑track initiative.
Historical context and mistrust
The researchers say industry messages framing AI deployment as "inevitable" have not landed well with many Pennsylvanians. State residents draw on long histories of industrial booms and busts—coal mining, early oil, steel production and fracking—that have left communities wary of promises about utopian industrial transformations.
"People in Pennsylvania especially have incredible experience with industrial change, have deep lineages of industrial trauma, enough to sniff when things don’t feel right to them," said Maia Woluchem, program director at Data & Society and a co‑author of the report.
Material concerns are central
While some opposition is ideological, the report highlights that many objections are rooted in tangible, material worries: whether data centers will raise local electricity costs, depress property values, strain water supplies, or increase local emissions. Residents also object to tactics they see as heavy‑handed from developers—such as asking local officials to sign non‑disclosure agreements.
"One of the strengths of ethnography and doing research on the ground for an extended period of time is piercing the bubble of AI hype," said Livia Garofalo, a Data & Society researcher. "People are making sense of the dissonances between AI being the next inevitable industrial revolution, and fears about AI."
A broad and unusual coalition of opposition
The researchers were surprised by how diverse the opposition is. Rather than a neat bipartisan split, they describe the movement as post‑partisan—drawing together traditional NIMBYs, environmental groups focused on water use and emissions, people who distrust large tech firms and AI as a technology, and community members concerned about public health.
Trade unions represent a notable counterweight: although built data centers are not expected to generate large, long‑term local workforces, unions often support projects because they may provide short‑term jobs and an opportunity to rebuild membership.
Industry advocacy and local pushback
Contrary to some industry claims that resistance is driven by foreign interference, the Data & Society researchers portray some pro‑industry efforts as influence campaigns. They point to the Data Center Coalition, which has created promotional websites such as "Pennsylvania Connects" and spent at least $19,000 lobbying the state government last year.
Despite boosterism, resistance has continued to grow. The patchwork of motivations—economic, environmental, democratic process and health—makes it difficult for companies to address all concerns with a single strategy. The core obstacle identified is trust: not just distrust of big institutions in the abstract, but the erosion of intimate, local relationships when large corporate actors enter community decision‑making.
"It is an intimate and relational trust that is now being inserted in people’s lives by these industries," Garofalo said. "I’m alone in my house, and I’m talking to a chatbot, and I’m feeling loved and cared for, and yet I know that this is a commodity, and I know I’m being extracted upon."
Implications
The report suggests that overcoming opposition will require more than technical explanations or economic promises. For communities with long memories of disruptive industrial projects, restoring trust and addressing concrete local impacts—on energy, water, property values and governance processes—will be essential if data center expansion is to proceed with community support.
