EHP's The Health Risks of Data Centers infographic directs readers to research addressing several environmental and health issues that may be associated with data center operations.
Among the areas receiving attention are emissions from backup generators and electricity generation, continuous equipment noise, nighttime lighting, water consumption and rising power demand.
The potential impact of a project depends heavily on its design and location. Cooling systems, facility size, energy sources, generator operating hours, grid conditions and the distance between a site and nearby homes can all change the risk profile.
That variation is becoming increasingly relevant during public review.
For developers and operators, broad sustainability commitments may not answer the questions being raised at the local level. Communities are increasingly interested in project-specific figures covering water requirements, expected noise levels, generator use and electricity consumption.
EHP has also published The Dangers of Data Centers, which examines possible health effects and discusses populations the organization believes could be more exposed to the consequences of new development.
EHP approaches the issue from a public-health advocacy standpoint, but its work reflects a broader change in how data center projects are being assessed.
Local debates that previously focused heavily on tax revenue, power availability and economic development are increasingly covering environmental justice, health and quality of life as well.
The shift has practical consequences for the industry. Concerns raised during planning can affect zoning decisions, permit conditions, development schedules and political support.
Addressing issues such as noise control, generator emissions, energy sourcing and water demand at an early stage could therefore become a more important part of project risk management.
EHP is also encouraging residents to become more involved in the approval process.
Its Strategies from the Front Lines: How Communities Fight Data Centers resource draws on the experience of a resident who opposed data center projects and outlines approaches communities can use when reviewing proposed developments.
For operators, more organized local participation means community relations can no longer be treated as a late-stage communications exercise.
Residents may want information before zoning votes or permit hearings, particularly in markets where several projects are being proposed at once. In those areas, scrutiny can extend beyond a single facility to the combined demand that multiple data centers could place on electricity networks, water systems and available land.
That cumulative-impact discussion could increase pressure on companies to disclose more detailed resource-use and environmental data, even where regulations do not explicitly require it.
Pennsylvania is one market where the debate is becoming especially visible.
EHP has drawn comparisons between the state's emerging data center buildout and its experience with shale gas development, arguing that potential public-health effects should be considered before projects become more widespread.
The organization has also urged Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's administration to prioritize renewable energy, including wind and solar, as additional data center capacity comes online.
That position feeds into a larger industry question: how to supply rapidly growing, around-the-clock electricity demand while managing cost, reliability and emissions.
Natural gas can provide dispatchable generation, while wind, solar, storage and grid-supplied electricity are increasingly being combined within corporate energy strategies. The practical balance between those options will differ by market, grid capacity and facility requirements.
For data center companies, the broader takeaway is that securing a site and enough megawatts may not be sufficient to secure local support.
As development reaches more communities, operators can expect closer questions about noise, emissions, water demand, power costs and the effects of multiple projects in the same region.
Providing site-specific data and engaging communities earlier in the development process could increasingly influence whether projects advance smoothly — or face longer and more contested approval processes.
