Why it matters. AI's hidden physical footprint — vast electricity and water demands — is becoming a political flashpoint worldwide, and Korea is betting on the same facilities Americans are starting to reject.
Background. South Korea holds nationwide local elections on June 3, 2026, and 'balanced regional development' — steering investment away from the dominant Seoul capital area to lagging provinces — is a perennial campaign theme. The new AI Data Center Special Act reflects Seoul's national push to compete in AI, but critics note the law eases permitting without mandating power, water, or community-consent safeguards.
What to watch next. Watch whether U.S.-style local resistance and the new civic-group checklist force Korean candidates to attach environmental and resident-participation conditions to their data center pledges.
As South Korea heads into its June 3 regional elections, candidates across the country are competing to promise new AI data centers for their districts — even as polling shows that in the United States, the world’s most advanced AI market, roughly seven in ten residents now oppose having one built nearby.
The contrast is striking. In Korea, attracting a large data center is being sold as a engine of jobs and balanced regional growth, especially outside the Seoul capital area. A newly passed “AI Data Center Special Act,” which streamlines permitting, has poured fuel on the trend. In the U.S., the same facilities are increasingly treated as locally unwanted infrastructure.
Why Americans Are Pushing Back
A Gallup poll conducted in March and released recently found 71% of Americans oppose an AI data center in their own community — 46% strongly. That exceeds opposition to nuclear power plants (53%) and tops even the highest anti-nuclear figure Gallup has ever recorded (63%). Half of opponents cited excessive water and energy use and environmental harm; others pointed to traffic, population strain, and rising utility bills.
The backlash is concrete. The U.S. already runs more than 3,000 data centers, with over 1,500 more planned — and 67% of new projects target rural areas, according to Pew Research Center. In Maine, residents pushed lawmakers to pass a moratorium pausing approvals for centers needing more than 20 megawatts through late 2027 (the governor vetoed it). South Dakota handed pause-power to local governments. Ohio and several Wisconsin towns are moving to require voter approval for new centers or their tax breaks.
Electricity, Water, and Broken Promises
The most direct fear is soaring power bills. The International Energy Agency expects data centers’ share of global electricity demand to roughly double from 1.5% in 2024 by 2030. Monitoring Analytics, a watchdog for PJM — the largest U.S. grid operator — reported that PJM wholesale prices nearly doubled in a year, blaming data centers. Critics ask why ordinary ratepayers should subsidize Big Tech’s profits.
Water is the other flashpoint. Politico reported that in Fayetteville, Georgia, residents suffering sudden drops in water pressure traced the problem to a nearby data center run by Quality Technology Services, which used 29 million gallons — equal to 44 Olympic pools — over several months without paying properly, far above its agreed cap, during a statewide drought and conservation advisory.
Pledges That Failed to Reassure
In March, the Trump administration summoned Google, Microsoft and other tech giants to the White House to sign a “taxpayer protection pledge,” promising to generate or separately buy their own power and pay distinct rates so the broader grid isn’t burdened. Consumer and environmental groups dismissed the voluntary pact as toothless, and it instead accelerated state-level regulation.
Korea is beginning to see its own friction. In Seoul’s Geumcheon district, residents fighting a new data center have escalated into a legal dispute with the builder. On May 13, three civic groups — the Solutions for Our Climate–linked Green Transition Institute, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, and Environmental Justice — issued an eight-point checklist urging election candidates to spell out power, water, renewable-energy and resident-participation plans rather than simply chasing investment.
