Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Daily Briefing

The No. 1 Reason Americans Would Support a Data Center

The computing facilities rise and fall on tax revenue, our new Heatmap Pro poll finds.

•
A data center.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

This is Heatmap Daily, a weekday digest written by our executive editor. Subscribe here.

Americans know why they like data centers, and they know why they don’t like them. They just can’t decide what to do about it.

That’s one takeaway from Heatmap Pro’s new poll, conducted by Embold Research, which earlier this month surveyed Americans’ fast-changing sentiment about data centers.

The poll asked more than 2,500 Americans about their views on data centers, clean energy, and economic development during the first half of October.

As I wrote yesterday, it found public opinion about data centers has rebounded slightly since the late summer. While more than 70% of Americans still say they would oppose a hypothetical data center slated for their area, support for the projects increased in our survey for the first time in more than a year.

The new results we’re releasing today add to that story. They reveal what pro- and anti-data-center arguments Americans find convincing, at least according to registered voters themselves, and they reveal the fissures over how to move forward.

Let’s start with what Americans say motivates them most to support data centers. When allowed to select up to three reasons why they might support a data center project, respondents gravitated to a few answers. Voters’ No. 1 reason to support a project is that it can generate huge amounts of tax revenue, our polling shows. Other popular answers are that data centers can help keep property taxes low or improve local sewer systems or the power grid.

Americans also seem to admire what data centers do for the economy … as long as they’re not the kind that is involved in AI. When a data center runs traditional cloud-based services like streaming, online banking, and GPS, Americans are much more likely to be in favor of it.

Bar chart titled \u201cWhat Makes Americans Like Data Centers? Tax Dollars.\u201d Heatmap News asked which benefits are the most convincing reasons to support data centers locally. Respondents could choose up to three. Results: Generate tax revenue for schools and emergency services, 35%. Power everyday services like streaming, GPS and banking, 35%. Help keep property taxes low, 26%. Create high-paying jobs, 23%. Fund sewer and grid improvements, 21%. Help America beat China in the AI race, 20%. Many run on renewable energy, 20%. Essential infrastructure for businesses and government, 19%. Enable the building of AI, 14%. Survey of 2,537 U.S. registered voters, October 3\u201315, 2026. Source: Heatmap Pro, Embold Research.

As you might expect, the arguments against data centers that Americans find most convincing also have a lot to do with money. The No. 1 reason to oppose a data center, respondents told us, is that it could raise power or water bills. Americans also dislike when a community has little transparency into a data center deal, when there’s a risk of local environmental harm, or when their own tax bills could go up to pay for the project.

It’s worth noting that these arguments don’t necessarily align with what actually dooms projects. Heatmap Pro’s market intelligence data suggests that loud noise is one of the biggest drivers of data center cancellations. But only about one in 10 Americans told our poll that a data center being “noisy” would cause them to oppose it.

Bar chart titled \u201cWhat Makes Americans Hate Data Centers? Higher Bills.\u201d Heatmap News asked which concerns are the most convincing reasons to oppose data centers locally. Respondents could choose up to three. Results: Raise electricity bills, 40%. Raise water bills, 31%. Little transparency about developers or local impact, 31%. Pollute local water, 27%. Use up farmland, housing or green space, 23%. Get tax breaks that cut local services, 19%. Pollute air with gas turbines and diesel generators, 17%. Noisy, 13%. Few permanent local jobs, 12%. Raise local temperatures, 12%. Emit electromagnetic fields, 10%. Enable the building of AI, 10%. Risky long-term investment, 9%. Look bad and change community character, 6%. Construction is disruptive, 6%. Survey of 2,537 U.S. registered voters, October 3\u201315, 2026. Source: Heatmap Pro, Embold Research.

One takeaway from these results: Americans aren’t very motivated in either direction by progress in artificial intelligence. That data centers “enable the building of AI” convinces the smallest share of Americans to support a given project. Yet it’s also among the worst-performing reasons to oppose data centers. People just don’t seem particularly exercised about AI as a technology, at least when they’re thinking about the infrastructure that might house it.

So what does all this mean for national policy, and the federal government’s outlook on data centers? Voters are split over what to do, but most prefer slowing down or restricting the boom in some form.

The plurality of Americans believe the country should keep building data centers, but “require stronger protections for electricity customers and nearby communities.” At the same time, about half of the country wants to hamper the buildout through either a temporary pause or a more aggressive permanent restriction.

Bar chart titled \u201cFew Americans Want Unrestricted AI Data Center Build-Out.\u201d Heatmap News asked what the U.S. government should do about data centers that support AI. Results: Encourage the development of AI data centers, 5%. Allow development but require stronger protections for electricity customers and nearby communities, 41%. Temporarily pause new construction, 19%. Prevent AI data centers from being built in most cases, 36%. Survey of 2,537 U.S. registered voters, October 3\u201315, 2026. Source: Heatmap Pro, Embold Research.

Reading these results, I can’t help but think of the bipartisan Senate permitting reform bill, which, as I’ve written, would force AI data centers to pay for grid expansion and lock in protections for normal ratepayers. The debate over that proposal — and the relative importance of those provisions vis a vis the broader package — seems to get at these questions in miniature. Many climate advocates are happy about a policy that would “require stronger protections for electricity customers.” Others just want the boom to stop — at any price.

The Heatmap Pro poll of 2,537 American registered voters was conducted by Embold Research via text-to-web responses from October 3 to 15, 2026. The survey included interviews with Americans in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

Blue

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe to access Heatmap's exclusive climate and energy polling, award-winning journalism, and subscriber-only events, now just $99 $79.20/year.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Politics

John Podesta Says Permitting Deal Hands Trump ‘a Loaded Howitzer’

It should only pass if lawmakers disarm a key provision, the former Biden senior climate adviser says.

John Podesta.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Former Biden senior climate adviser John Podesta wants lawmakers to take a red pen to the bipartisan permitting deal.

Podesta criticized a key part of the Senate’s bipartisan permitting deal on Friday, according to a recording I obtained of a fireside chat at the University of Colorado Boulder. He praised the bill’s transmission reforms, but argued Democratic negotiators had handed President Trump “a loaded Howitzer” in their quest for permitting certainty for renewable energy projects, and that it should only pass if lawmakers remove the weapon.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
Electric Vehicles

The Ford Fathom Will Bring Bi-Directional Charging to the Masses

Ford reveals a promising tidbit about its upcoming electric pickup.

The Ford logo.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

When the Ford Fathom debuts in 2027, much of the attention will focus on its size and its price. As it should: The all-electric mid-size truck is promised to start under $30,000, and the success or failure of that car at that price will tell us a lot about the future of Ford, as well as mainstream America’s true appetite for EVs.

While we wait for our first real look at the truck and the full list of its specifications, Ford just revealed a promising tidbit. The automaker has been working in the background to make it simpler and cheaper for Fathom drivers to use bidirectional charging: the ability for power to flow both ways so that EV drivers can use the energy stored in the vehicle battery to power secondary loads, to back up a home power supply during a blackout, or even to feed back onto the power grid.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
AM Briefing

A New Gas Goliath

On Petrobras’ election hangover, wind’s tailwinds, and Indian solar

Natural gas pipelines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Tropical Storm Olana is headed for Hawaii with yet more flooding and powerful winds as the state continues to recover from previous storms • Tropical Cyclone Arnab is strengthening into a “severe” storm as it approaches the northern coast of India’s Andhra Pradesh state near the port city of Visakhapatnam • In-fa has become a typhoon, en route by the end of this week to the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. territory that took the brunt of this month’s Super Typhoon Champi.


THE TOP FIVE

1. What worries Anthropic

Call it Anthropic’s magnum Opus 5.5. The Claude maker filed its public paperwork Monday ahead of its planned stock market debut. Aside from the basic details of how the company makes money and what risks its technology may pose to humanity itself, Anthropic mentions the word “energy” at least 14 times in the section of the document outlining the risks to its business. “Climate” and “climate change” are mentioned just four times. The overarching concern, per my colleague Matthew Zeitlin’s rundown of the S-1 filing, is that the company “might not get enough power for data centers running its large language models,” and that “the pace of the energy infrastructure build-out “is generally behind the need.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue