The construction of new data centers is shaping up to be a defining issue in the 2026 midterm elections. Politicians in both parties have been distancing themselves from data centers in the face of public discontent around the issue, with public backlash leading to the freezing of dozens of data center projects nationwide this year.
Recently, government officials have considered multiple new ways to construct data centers, including building data centers on federal lands and trading park lands with developers for data center construction.
In this Q&A, Hannah Wiseman; professor at Penn State Dickinson Law and the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, who specializes in land use regulation and energy law; and Derrick Taff; The Suzie and Allen Martin Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management and a former park ranger who studies the relationship between humans and wilderness areas; discuss potential issues associated with building data centers on federal land.
Q: Will data centers be a factor when people vote this fall?
Wiseman: Data centers are a bipartisan issue, in part because many of them are now being constructed in areas that have not experienced this type of development before. The Pew Research Center has an interesting study showing that the majority of data centers are emerging in rural areas, and many of them are in counties that have no existing data center infrastructure.
The "hyperscale" data center is a relatively new form of development. A data center is essentially a very large warehouse, but unlike many warehouses, they use a lot of water and energy. And hyperscale data centers are huge, with some occupying several thousand acres of land.
Most people do things every day that require conventional data centers, such as streaming movies. But hyperscale data centers use approximately 100 megawatts of electricity or more, though definitions vary. One of these centers uses the same amount of electricity daily that a medium- or large-sized city - around 80,000 houses or even 800,000 homes - would use daily.
Hyperscale data centers primarily power technologies that are different from our typical daily use, like complex artificial intelligence (AI) models. Although these data centers are necessary infrastructure for AI, not all individuals use AI for complex tasks on a daily basis. Many of these AI models are designed for very sophisticated business uses, so some communities are asking, "Hey, wait a minute, do we really need this hyperscale AI data center?"
Residents are starting to see how this could change their communities. They are speaking with their state leaders, which is why we're seeing a pause on all new data centers in states like Texas, and a new executive order from Governor Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania placing more requirements on data center construction.
Q: Can you explain the executive order that was intended to facilitate data center development?
Wiseman: In 2025, the federal government issued an executive order titled, "Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure." It directs federal agencies to utilize federally owned land and resources for the expeditious and orderly development of data centers.
There is now one approved data center on public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management, although construction is currently paused. Recently, the federal government has also encouraged data center construction on federal lands that are already polluted. These are not necessarily recreation areas, but former military sites - areas previously used for the development and testing of weapons.
Q: Are there specific concerns about data centers on federal lands?
Wiseman: A data center on federal lands that are not polluted would contradict what many residents in the United States think of as the purpose of federally protected land - for wilderness purposes, recreation and the preservation of cultural and aesthetic resources. These are similar to concerns surrounding mining or oil and gas development.
Many of these lands are supposed to be multi-use. There are congressional directives about the how these lands should be available for all Americans and used for a variety of purposes. Some of those purposes are for economic development. Some federal lands can be used for livestock grazing, and many are used for oil and gas development or mining.
For many residents, a data center seems to push that logic too far. It's simply not using the natural resources on the land. The facilities constructed would be relatively permanent, resource-intensive infrastructure.
Q: What would be the impact of building data centers in national forests?
Taff: National forests are administered by the Department of Agriculture and are under different mandates than our national parks. Regulations in these forests allow for recreation, but also extraction of natural resources. However, national forests are often located adjacent to our national parks; if data centers are built on national forest land, that very well could affect any adjacent national park as well.
Even though we have boundaries to parks and forests on paper, wildlife doesn't recognize these distinctions, and human-caused light and noise pollution travels beyond those boundaries. Data centers are going to require a lot of infrastructure and a lot of energy. As a society and as scientists, we're not sure how data centers would impact the surrounding communities or the ecological health of national parks or forests.
It's something that we need to be very mindful of, and I think there needs to be a lot more research before things move too quickly.
Q: What risks does development pose to wild animals and humans?
Taff: I'll use the impact of light as an example. Over the last century, humans have rapidly decreased our ability to see the natural night sky, as sky glow from lighting is increasing at a rate of approximately 10% each year. Historically, the night sky has been very important to human culture. Today, only around 20% of the U.S. can see the Milky Way. So, a national park or national forest, where you can still go out and see the Milky Way and the stars at night is an import cultural - as well as natural - reserve for people.
Additionally, my collaborators and I have conducted studies on light and sound in national parks. We know that wildlife is more impacted by human-generated light and noise than by natural light and sounds. It can compromise animals' abilities to thrive, by masking natural sounds or dark skies that are crucial for their survival. Our coupled human and wildlife studies examining natural sounds and natural dark skies have demonstrated that we need these resources for our survival as well, as they promote human health benefits.
Many people want to recreate in these spaces, and some people want to develop these spaces. All these activities need to be undertaken with the future in mind. We want our kids, their kids and future generations to all be able to experience these spaces.
Rapid technological changes could change things in ways that we cannot foresee. Our parks are really special, and we want to keep them that way forever.
