PHILADELPHIA — Public resistance to new data centers has risen sharply across the United States, even as Americans’ overall views of artificial intelligence remain largely unchanged, according to a nationally representative survey from the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. The findings reveal a growing divide between public attitudes toward AI as a technology and attitudes toward the physical infrastructure required to operate it. While many people continue to see potential benefits from AI, particularly in medical research, opposition increases substantially when the technology is associated with a large industrial facility being built near their homes.
The survey found that 61% of U.S. adults somewhat or strongly oppose the construction of new data centers in their communities. That figure is 12 percentage points higher than the 49% recorded in an earlier APPC survey conducted in February and March. Support fell during the same period, from 21% to 14%. The change comes as communities across the country debate the environmental, economic, and social consequences of rapidly expanding computing infrastructure used to train and operate advanced AI systems.
Data centers are specialized facilities filled with servers, networking equipment, cooling systems, backup power supplies, and security infrastructure. AI applications can require enormous amounts of computational power because they process vast datasets and perform calculations across billions of model parameters. Training a large AI model may require thousands of processors operating simultaneously, while everyday use also depends on data centers to generate responses, analyze images, translate languages, and carry out other tasks. These facilities can consume substantial amounts of electricity and water, making their construction a highly visible local issue even when the software they support is used remotely.
Opposition to local data centers crosses political boundaries. Majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents said they opposed new facilities in their areas, although the proportions differed: 69% of Democrats, 54% of Republicans, and 53% of independents expressed opposition. Resistance was strongest among adults younger than 30, reaching 70%, and declined to 57% among people 65 and older. The pattern is notable because younger adults are often assumed to be more comfortable with emerging technologies and are more likely to use AI-powered services in education, work, entertainment, and communication.
Despite the shift in views about local infrastructure, broader opinions about AI have remained stable. Thirty-nine percent of respondents said they expected AI’s impact on the United States over the next decade to be somewhat or very negative, compared with 18% who expected a positive impact. The result was statistically unchanged from the spring survey. In addition, 68% said the federal government has done “too little” to regulate AI, a view shared by majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. The results suggest that concerns about AI regulation have become persistent rather than being driven solely by short-term news events.
Respondents distinguished sharply between areas where AI might produce public benefits and areas where it could create risks. Among 13 sectors examined, medical research and scientific discovery was the only category receiving a net-positive assessment, with anticipated benefits exceeding expected harms by 41 percentage points. AI systems are increasingly being used to identify patterns in biological data, predict molecular structures, assist with medical imaging, and help researchers screen potential treatments. These applications may accelerate work that would otherwise require years of laboratory experiments, although they still depend on human validation and carefully controlled clinical studies.
The most negative assessments involved personal privacy and data security, which registered a net score of minus 63 points. Children’s online safety followed at minus 50 points, while employment and jobs reached minus 46 points. These concerns reflect the technical and social consequences of deploying AI at scale. Models may be trained on or exposed to sensitive information, automated systems can make decisions that are difficult to explain, and workplace applications may alter or eliminate certain tasks. The survey does not measure whether these risks will materialize in specific industries, but it indicates that many Americans view them as more immediate than AI’s possible benefits outside medicine.
Personal experience with AI was associated with more favorable opinions about its national impact. Among respondents who said they had never used AI during the previous month, 54% expected its effect on the country to be negative. That proportion fell to 40% among light users and to 29% among those who used AI many times or almost every day. However, frequent use did not make people more supportive of data centers. Opposition to building new facilities near respondents’ homes remained essentially flat across different levels of AI use. This distinction suggests that familiarity may influence perceptions of digital tools, while concerns about electricity demand, water consumption, noise, traffic, land use, and local utility costs may remain regardless of personal experience with AI software.
“The people who use AI the most are the most optimistic about what it will do for the country, and that has been consistent across our surveys,” said Matt Levendusky, a University of Pennsylvania political science professor and the Stephen and Mary Baran Chair in the Institutions of Democracy at APPC. He said that optimism had clear limits, particularly when questions involved privacy, employment, or the construction of a data center nearby. The survey was conducted by SSRS for APPC’s Institutions of Democracy division among 1,320 U.S. adult citizens from June 16 through July 19, 2026. Respondents were surveyed primarily online, with a small telephone sample, and weighted to match population benchmarks. The margin of error for the full sample was plus or minus 3.5 percentage points, with larger margins for subgroups. Together, the findings indicate that the next phase of the AI debate may be shaped less by abstract promises about intelligent software than by negotiations over the highly physical systems that make it possible.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Opposition to Local Data Centers Rises Sharply as Views on AI Hold Steady
Web References: Annenberg Public Policy Center news release; Reuters; The New York Times; Associated Press
References: Annenberg Public Policy Center Institutions of Democracy national survey, June 16–July 19, 2026; APPC AI topline survey data; APPC survey methodology
Image Credits: Annenberg Public Policy Center
Keywords: Artificial intelligence, data centers, public opinion, AI regulation, medical research, privacy, data security, employment, social surveys, political science
