Trump is giving data centers a pass to pollute
Former US Environmental Protection Agency officials have accused the Trump administration of dismantling pollution safeguards to fast-track the construction of AI data centres, warning that the resulting reliance on fossil fuels and lax oversight poses growing health risks to Americans. The group, now part of the Environmental Protection Network, is calling on President Trump to adopt a "Data Center Health Protection Pledge", though they concede the appeal is unlikely to succeed given the administration's deregulatory agenda under EPA administrator Lee Zeldin.
A new report from the network identifies 30 federal actions taken since January 2025 that it says worsen health risks linked to data centre pollution, 17 of which specifically target AI infrastructure or data centres. These include Trump's July 2025 "AI Action Plan", which proposed loosening protections under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Superfund law, alongside moves that favour new gas-fired power plants and have revived production of persistent "forever chemicals" used in chip manufacturing. The report cites research suggesting AI-related air pollution could cause up to 1,300 premature deaths and $20 billion (£15.7 billion) in public health costs by 2028, a toll former officials warn could rise further, noting the harm can extend far beyond communities living near the data centres themselves.
In short
- Ex-EPA officials say Trump is easing rules to speed up AI data centre building.
- Report links 30 policy changes to rising data centre pollution risks.
- Study estimates up to 1,300 premature deaths, $20bn health costs by 2028.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of faster data-centre construction may argue that AI infrastructure is economically and strategically important, and that easing regulatory hurdles can help meet rising demand for computing and electricity. They could contend that newer facilities and power systems can be managed responsibly, while existing environmental laws and targeted oversight remain available to address concrete harms.
The case against
Critics argue that weakening air, water and chemical safeguards while expanding fossil-fuel power shifts health costs onto the public, including people far from the facilities. They point to projected pollution-related deaths and medical costs as reasons to require stronger protections and oversight before accelerating construction.
Explained simply
Data centres house the computers that store information and run online services, including artificial intelligence tools. They need large amounts of electricity and water, and the power can come from gas-fired plants that release air pollution.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency enforces laws covering air and water pollution and the clean-up of hazardous waste. The former officials behind the report say changes to these safeguards could increase health risks linked to data centres and the industries that supply them; the administration’s approach is to reduce regulation and speed up AI development.
The debate matters because pollution from power generation and manufacturing can affect people well beyond the areas where data centres are built. The report estimates possible health and economic costs, but those figures are projections rather than a count of harm already recorded.
AI Elections Environment Government Politics Science Technology