‘This is very real redlining’: outrage in Little Rock as two datacenters loom
Two proposed hyperscale datacentres in and near Little Rock have prompted cross-party opposition, with residents and local leaders worried about pressure on water supplies, electricity bills and natural resources. Critics also argue that the developments risk repeating racial and economic inequities by converting rural, Black-owned land to industrial use, while supporters point to investment and growth.
Google plans a $1bn, 1.43m-square-foot facility on 384 acres at the Port of Little Rock, while Avaio has proposed a $6bn site about 10 miles south in unincorporated Pulaski County. Arkansas law prevents local governments from banning datacentres outright, although they can regulate them; the provision was added to a 2023 law initially focused on crypto mining. Cheap land and industrial power—around 5–7 cents per kWh, below the US average of 8.71 cents—have made Arkansas attractive to such projects.
- Two huge datacentre proposals face fierce opposition near Little Rock.
- Residents fear higher utility costs and depleted natural resources.
- State law limits local power to block developments.
New here? Start with this
Datacentres are large industrial buildings that house computer servers and use substantial amounts of electricity and water for cooling. Google and Avaio have proposed two such facilities in the Little Rock area, at the Port of Little Rock and in unincorporated Pulaski County. Supporters say the projects could bring investment and growth.
Residents and local leaders have raised concerns about pressure on water supplies, electricity costs and other natural resources. Some critics also say converting rural land owned by Black families to industrial use could deepen existing racial and economic inequalities; supporters point to the potential economic benefits.
Arkansas law does not allow local governments to ban datacentres outright, though they can regulate them. A provision added in 2023, initially in a law focused on cryptocurrency mining, has shaped what local authorities can do. Cheap land and relatively low industrial electricity prices have also helped make the state attractive to datacentre developers.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates contend that these datacentre investments represent substantial economic opportunity for Arkansas through large capital injections, job creation in construction and operations, and tax revenue to improve public services. They argue that leveraging the state's existing competitive advantage in affordable electricity and available land constitutes a legitimate development strategy employed by regions worldwide.
The case against
Opponents raise serious concerns about equity and environmental sustainability, arguing that siting industrial facilities on rural, predominantly Black-owned land echoes historical redlining by concentrating negative externalities on vulnerable communities whilst profits flow elsewhere. They contend that state law removing local authority to refuse these projects denies communities meaningful voice in decisions affecting water supplies, electricity costs and land use, potentially perpetuating cycles of extraction without equitable benefit-sharing.