Back to AI & Tech

What Americans weigh when a data center comes to town

Overview

The data-center buildout behind the AI boom meets a skeptical public at the local level. When residents picture one proposed nearby, cost and environmental worries dominate, and concrete benefits like jobs and tax revenue draw far less attention.


That skepticism translates into a willingness to act. Opposition far outweighs support, and only a minority say they would do nothing at all.

Topline

58.8% would weigh higher energy or water prices.

If a company proposed building a new data center in your community, and you were considering whether or not to support it, which of the following would you think about? (Check all the apply)

  • Higher energy or water prices 58.8%
  • Negative environmental effects, such as pollution 50.4%
  • Job losses from AI or automation 43.7%
  • AI changing society for the worst 36.5%
  • More jobs for the local community 27.1%
  • More tax revenue for the local community 26.7%

2026 · base n 1,000 · +/- 3.2%

Verasight MPSA Omnibus Survey #2026-050

View source data

Costs and the environment top the list

58.8% say higher energy or water prices would be on their mind, and 50.4% cite negative environmental effects such as pollution.

Local benefits register with fewer people: 27.1% mention more jobs for the community and 26.7% more tax revenue.

AI itself drives much of the unease

43.7% point to job losses from AI or automation, and 36.5% say a data center would mean AI changing society for the worse.

Only 13.6% associate it with AI changing society for the better.

Topline

40.1% would sign a petition opposing a local data center.

If a new data center were proposed in your community, which of the following would you consider doing?

  • Sign a petition opposing the project 40.1%
  • Take no action 37.5%
  • Contact a local official to oppose the project 27.9%
  • Publicly oppose the project at a local meeting 25.5%
  • Attend a protest to oppose the project 20.4%
  • Contact a local official to support the project 9.5%

2026 · base n 1,000 · +/- 3.2%

Verasight MPSA Omnibus Survey #2026-050

View source data

Most would push back

40.1% say they would sign a petition opposing the project, 27.9% would contact a local official to oppose it, and 25.5% would speak against it at a local meeting; 20.4% would attend a protest.

Support is rare: 9.5% would contact an official in favor and 8.9% would speak up to support it. 37.5% would take no action.

Methodology

Full methodology
Mode
Verasight panel recruited via random address-based sampling, random person-to-person text messaging, and dynamic online targeting
Population
US adults age 18+
Field dates
2026-06-21 → 2026-06-21
Base (unweighted)
1,000
Margin of error
+/- 3.2%
Module
3
Sponsor
Verasight
Weight variable
weight
Weighting targets
age, race/ethnicity, sex, income, education, region, metropolitan status

Sources

[2]

Citation

Verasight MPSA Omnibus Survey #2026-050, fielded June 21-21, 2026, N=1,000 US adults age 18+, +/- 3.2%.

https://reports.verasight.io/r/mpsa26#q-4

Verasight survey methodology

How Verasight conducts surveys.

This page describes the Verasight general survey contract, separate from how the Data Library packages it. When a wave report is published, its field dates, sample sizes, and module breakdown are listed in that report.

Mode
Verasight panel recruited via random address-based sampling, random person-to-person text messaging, and dynamic online targeting.
Population
US adults age 18+.
Sample design
Surveys are run as omnibus or single-topic waves. Omnibus waves are split into modules with their own respondent set, typically around one thousand respondents per module.
Field window
Each wave specifies its own field dates. Most omnibus waves field across roughly two weeks.
Weighting
Per-module weighting to CPS targets including age, race and ethnicity, sex, income, education, region, and metropolitan status.
Partisanship benchmark
Pew Research Center's NPORS benchmarking surveys, three-year running average.
Vote benchmark
2024 presidential vote population benchmarks.
Margin of error
Typically about plus or minus 3.4 to 3.6 percent per module at standard module sizes. Question-level MoE is recomputed when a base shrinks materially below the module baseline.
Reporting
The canonical report hub is reports.verasight.io. Verified legacy reports remain on their original hosts, and unpublished reports are marked pending.
Transparency
Verasight is a member of the American Association for Public Opinion Research Transparency Initiative.

The canonical report hub is reports.verasight.io; older reports may remain on verified legacy hosts.