President Donald Trump has dismissed Americans who oppose the rapid expansion of data centers, arguing on social media that communities rejecting the facilities are choosing to remain backwards and poor.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump contended that data centers bring lower taxes and numerous jobs, writing that the only reason that communities throughout the U.S.A. should not want Data Centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor.
He further claimed that opposing such infrastructure benefits geopolitical adversaries, stating that China could not be happier with this anti Data Center movement.
Trump Dismisses Data Center Opposition as Bipartisan Backlash Grows
The president’s remarks triggered immediate political fallout. Right-leaning Democratic Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania voiced support for the administration’s push, writing Agreed
on X and asserting that the U.S. must win the war for AI supremacy over China.
Fetterman acknowledged the political cost, noting that agreeing with Trump on data centers is damaging for Democrats, yet maintained it is the correct stance. Conversely, Democratic Congressman Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania condemned the president’s comments as disrespectful to citizens with legitimate concerns over electricity costs, water supplies, union jobs, and the societal role of artificial intelligence. Vice President JD Vance defended the administration’s position during media appearances, emphasizing that data centers are vital to the AI economy and arguing that companies should construct necessary power generation alongside the facilities.
Polls Reveal Deep Public Resistance Across Party Lines
Public sentiment regarding the sprawling, server-packed facilities remains overwhelmingly negative. A national survey published by Politico found that voter attitudes toward data centers have grown increasingly sour and politically polarized over a six-month period. Public First polling head Seb Wride noted that rapid attitude shifts are rare in the current political landscape.
Polling data underscores widespread bipartisan skepticism regarding local data center construction:
- Total Opposition: A Fox News poll indicated that 70 percent of respondents oppose building a data center in their local area, with only 30 percent in favor.
- Democratic Pushback: Roughly 76 percent of surveyed Democrats expressed opposition to nearby data center construction.
- Republican Pushback: Approximately 60 percent of surveyed Republicans opposed similar projects in their communities.
Grassroots resistance has emerged across multiple states amid concerns regarding environmental degradation, air and noise pollution, labor impacts, and soaring utility bills for ordinary consumers.
Regulatory Push for Cooling Chemicals and Industry Pressures
The data center boom has driven a parallel surge in demand for coolants, water treatments, coatings for semiconductors, and fire suppressants. Market research indicates that immersion-cooling fluid markets are projected to grow significantly by the end of the decade. This expansion has opened a pathway for chemical manufacturers seeking regulatory easements from the administration.
The chemical company Chemours has pursued fast-track approval for Opteon 2P50, an immersion-cooling liquid intended to replace discontinued products previously manufactured by 3M. Chemours states that the compound enables closed-loop, two-phase immersion cooling that can reduce cooling energy by 90 percent, shrink a data center’s physical footprint by 60 percent, and nearly eliminate water consumption.
However, the compound’s classification as a polyfluoroalkyl substance—commonly known as a PFAS or forever chemical
—has drawn sharp criticism from environmental, public health, and watchdog groups. An Earthjustice-led coalition representing 17 environmental organizations formally petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to deny the premanufacture notice for Opteon 2P50, arguing that the substance presents an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment. Two data center-related PFAS compounds remain under review by the EPA.
Продолжение темы
