This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.

Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
In districts across the country — from North Carolina to Texas to Indiana — voters and candidates are making the computing boom a central issue.

Data centers are already dominating this year’s elections. As a campaign issue, they’re primed to disrupt races across the country, big and small, right and left.
Candidates at every point of the political spectrum are being buried with questions about data centers and artificial intelligence. Interest groups are making data center support a deciding factor in whether they support a given candidate, alongside other boogeymen such as the “green new deal,” Big Tech billionaires, and Israel. In Florida and Ohio, underdog Republican candidates for governor are railing against data centers as they try to win their party’s nomination over establishment-backed candidates. In Michigan, a former GOP statehouse speaker is making the issue his biggest talking point in a bid for the governor’s mansion.
Perhaps my favorite race to watch right now is in Texas, where farmer Clayton Tucker, the Democratic nominee to flip the state’s agriculture commissioner seat, is running against the state’s data center growth. I spoke with Tucker, whose campaign focuses on how the authorities of the commission could be leveraged against data center developers. One of those ideas is to conduct “impact studies” on data centers, water, and cropland.
“To me this is an AI bubble, 2008-style. They’re not going to be used for anything important or that’s going to help society or our country,” Tucker told me. He explained how his campaign first focused on a bigger topic – monopolies like in the beef industry – before he ultimately pivoted to data center frustrations, which he groups together with other complaints farmers have about Big Business.
“It’s about being laser focused on who is the true problem, who our true enemies are: the monopolies, the tech bros, and the people who are just trying to rig everything and who are forcing these data centers down our throats.”
I chronicled how the 2025 elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Georgia were stuffed with data center-coded rhetoric about rising electricity bills and energy costs and protecting the environment from new AI-backed industrial development. There was an unmistakable populist tinge to any and all arguments against data centers on the campaign trail back then, for sure. But let’s be honest: We were still in the infancy of the boom in data center development. The outcry over these projects has exploded even since November.
Primary voters last week in Stokes County, North Carolina ousted two county commissioners – Rick Morris and Brad Chandler – who’d voted days earlier to approve a zoning request for Project Delta, a large data center proposed by developer Engineered Land Solutions. Situated in the rural, mostly undeveloped farming community of Walnut Cove, the Project Delta proposal has become controversial over its close proximity to a river and local worries about noise, among other grievances. Nearby residents and environmental advocates filed a lawsuit yesterday against its construction.
It’s unclear whether what happened in Stokes County will matter in North Carolina come the general election this fall, or whether the issue will have the same saliency in higher-level races. The reliably red county is represented in Congress by Virginia Foxx, one of the GOP’s staunchest conservatives. The Cook Political Report rates Foxx’s congressional district a “Solid R” because Donald Trump won the presidential vote there last time by 18 points. Elsewhere in North Carolina, two congressional candidates backed by AI companies – Representative Valerie Foushee and Republican candidate Laurie Buckout – won their primary races over candidates more vocally critical of local data center projects.
In other places, though, it’s easy to see how data center fights could have a decisive impact, even at the congressional level.
Take Indiana’s 1st Congressional District, a mixture of suburban and rural communities bordering Michigan and Illinois. The 1st has seen some of the worst spikes in electricity bill costs of anywhere in the Midwest, according to data compiled by MIT researchers and Heatmap Pro. The 1st is represented by Frank Mrvan, a moderate Democrat who has previously championed the use of federal funds to support data center growth, but is now criticizing the potential ramifications for energy and farmland. Mrvan is going up against Barb Regnitz, a Republican county commissioner running a self-funded campaign who has said she would vote against any data center proposal; data center developer QTS recently withdrew plans for a large data center in the county, though it’s unclear what role if any Regnitz played in that story. The Cook Political Report finds it is “likely” that Mrvan keeps his seat, but it also also says that the seat has “all of the characteristics of a district that should be moving in Republicans’ direction.”
Other congressional races are being dominated by data centers in Indiana, which is one of the top states for data center development. Indianapolis – a hotbed for data center strife – is represented by Andre Carson, who is facing his most contested primary election since winning his seat in 2008. One of his primary opponents, Destiny Wells, is railing against data centers in the district and pledging not to take utility industry money. Another primary candidate, George Hornedo, is getting flack from the grassroots left for not fighting hard enough against data centers.
Whether data centers will decide any statewide primary elections is a bigger question. Take the GOP gubernatorial primaries in Florida and Ohio, each of which features a Republican hardliner — James Fishback and Casey Putsch, respectively — campaigning loudly against data centers; both candidates appear to be longshots at the moment. In Texas, the GOP’s nomination for agriculture commission went to Governor Greg Abbott’s preferred candidate instead of an incumbent calling to restrict data centers on farmland.
When it comes to Tucker’s race for agriculture commissioner, which won’t be decided until November, he’s not “counting his chickens before they hatch.”
“I don’t believe in that as a farmer,” he said. “I get too superstitious to be doing that.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The movement against data centers is raising up a raison d'etre of the anti-renewables movement: protecting would-be farmland.
Farm owners and operators across the U.S. are winning national headlines almost every week for rejecting big dollar offers from data center developers. In Hanover County, Virginia, protestors are chanting “Grow Tomatoes, Not Data Centers.” In Pennsylvania and elsewhere, Republican legislators are mulling proposals to block the sale of so-called “prime farmland” for data center development. In Texas, the fight over data center development has engulfed the race for the state’s ag commissioner seat. In the Midwest, where agriculture reigns supreme, statewide races and congressional campaigns are slowly but surely being defined by the issue. Like in Nebraska where Austin Ahlman, an independent candidate running for Congress in Nebraska’s first district, told me he believes the data center backlash is reflective of a populist politics that broadly criticize elites and top-down control of the economy: “I think sometimes people misunderstand the anxieties of rural Americans when it comes to these data centers because a lot of their fears are about control long term.”
Unlike the farmland backlash around renewable energy development, the loudest critics are on the anti-monopolist left. On Wednesday, the prominent opposition group Food and Water Watch signaled farmland could soon be a watchword in the national data center debate – in a fashion analogous to what we’ve seen with renewable energy. The organization’s blog post entitled “The AI Data Center Boom Is Coming for Farmers” declared data centers verboten because of the threat they posed to “small and midsized family farmers.” Mitch Jones, deputy director of the campaign outfit, said he believes the threat to farmland is “a compelling reason to oppose data center development” but that his organization’s fight is primarily focused on protecting small business owners and an anti-monopoly sentiment.
“If data centers are coming into their areas, this puts even more pressure on them. It drives up the cost of their electricity, just as it does anyone else. It competes with them for water for crops, and it affects the value of their land in a perverse way,” Jones told me.
None of this should be surprising. An agricultural workforce has always been a good barometer for figuring out if a community will accept new infrastructure of any kind. We’ve seen as much time and time again with renewable energy, carbon capture, fossil energy and mining, just to name a few industries.
This same rule is true with data centers. In April, county commissioners in Kosciusko County, Indiana, unanimously rejected a Prologis data center; nearly 90% of acreage in Kosciusko County is being actively farmed, according to the Heatmap Pro database. Linn County, Iowa, in February enacted a rule severely restricting data center development in unincorporated areas; almost three-fourths of the land is used by the ag sector. A potential Amazon facility is causing heartburn in Clinton County, Ohio; nearly all land in the county is used for farming and utility-scale solar development has a recent history of conflict with landowners.
To be candid, I’m struck by the similarity in the backlash over siting data centers on farmland – a resemblance so close that some counties are starting to restrict renewable energy and data center development on farmland at the same time. This week, Eau Claire County, Wisconsin created a new “farmland preservation plan” discouraging utility-scale solar energy and data centers on any potential farmland. (More than 40% of land in this county is currently being used for farmland, according to Heatmap Pro.)
Jones at Food and Water Watch said his organization taking on the “protect farmland” mantle had nothing to do with the success this argument has had against renewable energy. “That thought never entered my head,” he told me, adding that if communities respond to the data center backlash by taking steps that short-circuit solar and wind too, that’s “a coincidence.”
I kept pressing. What if the pivot to farmland protection leads to more communities restricting renewable energy along with the data centers? “If you’re looking for a reason to oppose solar and wind, you can come up with that without having to attach data centers to it,” Jones said. “We’ve seen rural communities oppose solar and wind before data centers blew up across the country. It’s nothing new.”
And more of the week’s top news around project fights.
1. Virginia Beach, Virginia – The right-wing interest group lawsuit against Dominion Energy’s Coastal Virginia offshore wind is now dead, concluding one of the wackier tales of the Trump 2.0 energy era.
2. Box Elder County, Utah – Call it the Box Elder County massacre.
3. Davidson County, Tennessee – We have the latest updates in the Nashville Zoo data center drama and they’re a doozy and a half.
4. Clark County, Ohio – Yet another utility-scale solar farm is in the Ohio state permitting graveyard.
A conversation with Hanson Wood of RWE
This week’s conversation is with Hanson Wood, chief development officer for solar developer RWE. Wood’s perspective felt crucial at a moment when the data center boom is leading to so much deal volume – even after the repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act. So I reached out to his team to see if we could talk about how he’s evaluating all things Fight-related, including the impacts of the data center backlash on solar itself. The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.
How is solar finding opportunities in the data center development space? I know there’s conversations about speed-to-power and some deal volume, but help us get a better sense of the level of capacity being sought versus fossil or other forms of energy.
Great question. To contextualize, I think it just makes sense to talk about energy demand overall. Solar is filling the base of where the majority of load growth and generation is coming from and going to be served.
Over the last decade, the cost of solar has gone down dramatically. It’s become a very modular technology being deployed in a variety of locations. It can be deployed very quickly at low cost. It can ramp to meet short-term demand needs. And within the space of just energy demand, across utilities and large industrial data center companies, the reality is no single technology is going to be able to serve overall demand. Everything from solar to onshore wind and geothermal and other forms of flexible generation are needed.
What this speaks to is how our grid is pretty finite. We have to be able to mix and match a variety of products to be able to meet an ever-growing reliability need. To make it simple, I think solar’s going to serve the largest base of growing demand because it's cheap and it's available. But it’s not going to be the only technology. We need to be able to serve this load growth reliably. And we know this is going to require a diversity of technologies.
From a social license perspective, does solar power for a data center make it more acceptable for a community? Less acceptable? More friendly?
One thing I want to be clear about: I don’t develop data centers. So I’m looking at it through the same view many people in the industry and the public see it.
I think there’s manifold reasons why people have concerns about data centers, overall. I can’t speak for all of them. But what solar does address is, we don’t want to see large price spikes in the short term and solar can really help in that regard. It can provide near-term generation immediately in a lot of instances at one of the lowest costs in the market.
Whether the broader public makes that connection, it’s probably too early to see. There’s probably a lot of anxiety that has to be addressed by that [data center] community.
When it comes to the state of solar development, have the feelings around data center infrastructure we’ve seen in various places impacted solar projects?
Solar is more often in what we consider rural areas where there’s more of a conservative viewpoint generally.
Where I think we stand in the solar industry is that in the 2010s we were looked at as a one-off, and now what we see as the challenge is that as solar scales, communities are looking at the scale and potential of what solar will be bringing. A lot of the conversations we have with [them] are, is this changing the local character? How is this impacting our way of life?
And the way we try to approach that is to highlight a lot of the public benefits. Renewables are generating significant jobs, locally as well as through funding local services. Farmers setting aside land for renewables are also funding their farms and way of life. I’ve heard testimonials from farmers who’ve said they wouldn’t be able to continue on without the revenue from solar or BESS projects.
The broader community is concerned solar is displacing rural farming, but what we hear from rural landowners is that these projects are allowing them to keep their farms.
Most people when they start looking at renewables, they don’t make that connection. They’re primed to ask, what’s the downside here? But it’s nothing in terms of physical land while the economic value it brings is long-term. It’s 30 years — at a time when the American public is seeing lots of headwinds.
I know at a broader level, you’re addressing the conflicts in solar energy. Do you think the solar industry offers any lessons for the folks now trying to get data centers built?
Anyone who is building large infrastructure projects can’t ignore early community engagement. One of the things people should be thinking about as they’re developing projects is these things are going to be here 20, 30 years, right? When we develop those projects we are trying to build relationships in a sustainable fashion.
We really take into consideration the concerns we hear. Again, people are primed to see the downside in any development, and without that early engagement – genuinely – you risk whether other people come along and hear the benefits or feel like their voice mattered in the process of development.