TL;DR

  • Growing community rebellion: Mounting public backlash against AI data centers over power, water, and land use is turning sustainability into an urgent license-to-operate challenge.
  • Educational transparency over PR: To protect proprietary business secrets while building local trust, developers must move beyond generic PR to clearly explain technology categories and tradeoffs.
  • Distinguishing efficiency from total demand: Communicators must clarify that efficiency gains often support higher compute densities rather than reducing a facility’s overall energy or resource consumption.
  • Proactive communications readiness: PR teams must partner early with engineering, legal, and executive leadership to prepare credible, context-rich answers before introducing projects publicly.

# # #

By Lisa Ann Pinkerton, CEO and Founder of Technica Communications

Earlier this year, The Wall Street Journal described the growing pushback against artificial intelligence as an “American rebellion against AI.” In the months since, that backlash has become even more tangible for the data center industry.

Communities across the country are scrutinizing proposed facilities over electricity costs, water use, pollution, land use, jobs and who ultimately benefits from the massive investments required to support AI. Some local governments have paused new data center development while they reconsider the rules governing these projects, and opposition is increasingly moving from public meetings into organized campaigns.

For data center developers, this is no longer simply a sustainability challenge. It is becoming a license-to-operate challenge.

But you don’t quell a rebellion with PR.

Sustainability Is Important, But It Is Not Self-Explanatory

Many data center developers are making serious investments in better infrastructure. The industry is advancing more efficient and sustainable systems and more sophisticated approaches to facility design. These innovations matter, and in many cases, they can materially reduce a project’s environmental or community impact.

And while sustainable infrastructure may be one of the most important ways they earn or regain their license to operate, simply telling people it’s better for water or energy use is not sufficient. Communities must easily understand what is being used, why it was chosen, how it changes the facility’s impact, and how it could benefit their region.

The challenge is that most of these technologies are not easily understood outside the industry, simply because the industry has never had to communicate them before. A cooling system that dramatically improves thermal performance may sound impressive to an operator. However, a nearby resident may still want to know whether the facility will draw from local water supplies.

This is why sustainability claims are no longer enough. The public is not simply asking whether a data center is efficient. Communities are asking how that efficiency translates into shared benefit. They want to know the real-world results. And if the industry treats local questions as uninformed or hostile, it risks deepening the mistrust it needs to overcome.

Data Centers Have a Real Confidentiality Challenge

The obvious recommendation is often to be more transparent, and in many ways that is correct. However, transparency in this sector is not as simple as publishing every detail.

During interviews for the Earthlings 2.0 Data Center series, I was struck by how many developers, hyperscalers, and operators viewed infrastructure decisions as closely guarded business assets. From cooling and backup power systems to vendor selection, energy strategies, facility design, and operating models, these choices are often seen as sources of competitive advantage that companies are understandably reluctant to disclose publicly.

These infrastructure decisions are not merely technical details. They are strategic assets that influence deployment speed, compute density, operational performance, and competitive positioning. That creates a legitimate communications tension. Communities deserve enough information to understand whether a project is responsible, beneficial, and accountable. Companies, at the same time, require enough confidentiality to protect commercially sensitive systems and maintain their competitive advantage. Pretending this tension does not exist hurts everyone.

A more balanced approach is educational transparency rather than total disclosure. Data center companies do not necessarily need to reveal every proprietary design decision to communicate responsibly. They get a chance to explain the categories of systems being used, the purpose those systems serve, and the tradeoffs involved. Such information will help communities be better informed when evaluating the safeguards in place and the outcomes the region can reasonably expect. This approach respects both the company’s need for confidentiality and the community’s need for trust.

Efficiency Requires Clear Explanation

One of the most important nuances in this conversation is that a more efficient data center does not necessarily use less total energy. In the context of AI, efficiency can often enable greater computing power. In other words, a facility may do more work with the same amount of energy. From an operational standpoint, that can be a meaningful improvement. From a community standpoint, however, the total demand on the power grid, land, and water may remain significant.

This is where data center sustainability messaging can become vulnerable. If a company implies that efficiency automatically means lower overall resource use, and the community later learns that the facility is simply using those gains to support more compute, the message can feel misleading even if the technology itself is valuable. Efficiency is not the problem. Overstating what efficiency means is the problem.

A more credible communications model would distinguish between resource intensity and total resource demand. A data center may reduce energy use per unit of compute while still increasing overall energy consumption as workloads grow. Similarly, a cooling system may use less water than alternatives while still creating a water demand profile that communities deserve to understand.

This level of explanation may feel uncomfortable for companies used to communicating in technical or investor-oriented language. But it is increasingly necessary. Communities do not need simplified claims that obscure complexity. They need clear explanations of how projects affect their communities.

Communications Readiness Matters More Than Speed

For public relations (PR) professionals, this moment requires more than starting communications early. It requires communications readiness before a project is ever introduced publicly.

By the time a company is seeking approvals for a new AI data center, every stakeholder will have questions about water use, electricity demand, emissions, jobs, land use, reliability, and community benefits. If leadership is still developing answers as those questions arise, communications become reactive rather than strategic.

That is why PR teams should work alongside engineering, operations, permitting, legal, and executive leadership well before a project enters the public eye. The goal is not simply to draft messaging. It is to understand the rationale behind key infrastructure decisions, identify where legitimate concerns are likely to arise, and build messaging that explains both the opportunities and the tradeoffs in language non-technical audiences can understand.

Communications cannot solve underlying business or infrastructure challenges. PR cannot make a water-intensive project water-light, turn a vague jobs promise into a workforce development plan, or eliminate legitimate concerns about power demand. What it can do is ensure companies are prepared to answer difficult questions with consistency, context, and credibility rather than improvising under public pressure.

The goal is not to persuade communities to accept every data center project. It is to ensure companies enter the conversation prepared—with messaging that is accurate, transparent, and grounded in the realities of the project rather than developed in response to controversy.

The New License to Operate

The Wall Street Journal’s coverage of an “AI rebellion” is useful because it signals how quickly public sentiment around AI is changing. But the more important story for the data center industry is that communities are beginning to connect AI’s lofty or apocalyptic promises with its real physical demands on their regions and their people. That means the license to operate data centers will increasingly depend on factors beyond technical performance, capital investment, and broad sustainability language. It will depend on whether companies can explain their infrastructure choices in a way that is credible, understandable, and connected to community benefit. For communicators, the challenge is no longer simply translating technical performance into marketing messages. Increasingly, it is translating infrastructure decisions into outcomes that communities can understand and evaluate.

# # #

About the Author

From the newsroom to the boardroom, Lisa Ann has used her keen analytical skills to share technology stories with the world since 2001. She is the founder and CEO of the award-winning Technica Communications, founder and CEO of the PR software platform PRVIEW, founder of the non-profit Women In Cleantech & Sustainability, host of Earthlings 2.0 and an international speaker, moderator and documentary filmmaker. She was named a 2026 PRNEWS Top Woman in PR, the PRNEWS 2021 Industry Innovator, PR Executive of the Year by the American Business Awards (2020), Female Entrepreneur of the Year for Advertising and Marketing by the Women in Business and the Professions World Awards (2020), and a Woman of Influence by the Silicon Valley Business Journal (2017). She got her start as a broadcast journalist covering environmental science stories for NPR and PBS for over a decade.