Communities weighing new data centers face a question that reaches beyond technology: where will the enormous amount of electricity come from, and who will live with the consequences? The answer can shape both the infrastructure around a facility and the reaction it receives.
Grid power brings costs into view
In Loudoun County, Virginia, data centers have generally connected to the existing grid. At one Equinix facility, diesel generators stand by for backup, while the local utility, Dominion Energy, supplies the electricity. Much of that power is generated by natural gas, which is cleaner than coal or oil but dirtier than renewables.
The average data center operating in this part of Virginia has a power capacity of 54 megawatts—more than the power draw of Denver International Airport. For residents and officials, demand at that scale raises practical questions about transmission lines, electricity costs and how the wider grid will cope.
Those concerns have translated into policy. New state rules require data centers to pay fully for the cost of new transmission lines serving them, rather than spreading the expense among other customers. Developers are also preparing for rules that could cut them off from grid power during periods of peak demand.
Activist Elena Schlossberg says electricity has been central to opposition in Virginia. She has objected to framing the dispute as a culture war, saying, “It was always about power.” Some protesters may also be motivated by broader anti-tech sentiment, but the effects of drawing so much electricity from the grid have helped define the local debate.
Onsite power shifts the footprint
Many AI data centers planned elsewhere are designed for places with little grid infrastructure. Instead of waiting for a connection, companies can bring power onsite, often using natural-gas-powered turbines, with diesel generators for backup.
This approach may reduce pressure on a nearby grid, but it does not make the facility’s energy needs disappear. It relocates part of the burden into the surrounding area, where turbines and backup generators can affect air quality and where communities may have little say in decisions about major power infrastructure.
The amounts involved are unusually large. The smallest sites considered attractive for AI training are 300 megawatts. One developer is considering a former steel mill that can already draw that much electricity. The facilities companies ideally want are closer to 6,000 megawatts, roughly the estimated draw of Chicago, a city powered by more than 20 plants within its limits and dozens more farther out.
Anthropic has reportedly agreed to pay $3.4 billion for gas turbines in what is described as the largest power generation purchase by an AI company. The deal illustrates how power generation is becoming part of the data center buildout itself.
Neighbors weigh the local trade-offs
Generating electricity onsite can bring familiar local costs. Natural-gas turbines release air pollutants, and diesel generators produce even more. The article also points to Elon Musk’s Memphis data center, where dozens of turbines were set up and air quality laws were violated, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Communities may also expect a voice when infrastructure reaches the scale of a public utility project. A large data center can bring the physical presence of a small city of computers, along with power plants and other equipment needed to run it. That can make promises of jobs, tax revenue and community engagement relevant, but not necessarily enough to resolve concerns about the overall footprint.
Electricity is only one part of the backlash. Fears about job losses, existential risks and concentrated corporate power also contribute, as does misinformation. The article notes that many facilities use much less water than people think. At the same time, large electricity consumption is not automatically harmful: advances that improved modern life have also required substantial power.
Where the next projects may go
Industry insiders, according to one developer, see the lack of available electricity as a greater constraint on their plans than public opposition. That tension could push projects toward places where power is easier to secure and fewer people can resist them.
The Permian Basin is one possible destination because natural-gas lines are accessible and populations are sparse. Companies may also build abroad. Google announced the day after the elections that it would spend $15 billion on data center projects in Malaysia.
The source of electricity therefore matters as much as the facility itself. Grid-connected sites can raise questions about shared infrastructure and costs; onsite generation can bring emissions and power plants closer to host communities. Either path makes electricity a central part of the debate over where data centers belong and who should bear the effects.