The anti-data center movement has gained rapid traction across the United States. Often portrayed as a purely grassroots response to local concerns, a recent report from the Bitcoin Policy Institute reveals a more troubling reality: significant foreign influence, particularly from actors aligned with the Chinese Communist Party, is coordinating efforts behind the scenes to hinder U.S. artificial intelligence development.
The surge in AI has created massive demand for data centers, which are the critical infrastructure needed to train and run AI models. While these facilities do consume considerable energy and water, public portrayals of their impact are frequently exaggerated. In Karen Hao’s bestselling book “Empire of AI,” for instance, she claimed a proposed Google data center near Santiago, Chile, would use “more than one thousand times the amount of water consumed by the entire population” of a local town of 88,000. Analyst Andy Masley later exposed a unit conversion error (cubic meters vs. liters) that inflated the figure by roughly 1,000 times. Hao acknowledged the mistake and issued a correction, but the book continues to shape public discourse.
Technological improvements, such as closed-loop cooling systems, can reduce freshwater usage by up to 70%. Despite this, data center projects face mounting opposition from communities and environmental groups. In his report “Foreign Influence in the Campaign against American AI,” Sam Lyman of the Bitcoin Policy Institute demonstrates that much of this pushback is not entirely organic. Foreign actors, especially those tied to the CCP, are actively working to slow U.S. AI infrastructure, including data centers.
DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE: NO NEED TO PANIC OVER DATA CENTER ENERGY USE
Lyman identifies three key vectors of influence shaping perceptions of U.S. data centers. First, foreign state media. Chinese English-language outlets such as CGTN, China Daily, and Global Times have run aggressive campaigns against American data centers, blaming them for higher energy prices, environmental harm, and grid strain. At the same time, these outlets tout advancements in China’s AI sector while conveniently downplaying or omitting Beijing’s massive subsidies that cut energy costs for major data centers by up to 50%.
Second, the CCP-aligned Singham Network. This web of U.S.-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit groups is primarily funded by Neville Roy Singham, a Shanghai-based American expatriate. It includes groups such as Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, People’s Dispatch, and Code Pink (cofounded by Singham’s wife, Jodie Evans). Messaging between these organizations and Chinese state media often aligns closely. These Singham-funded groups have a track record of promoting CCP narratives and supporting disruptive protests in the U.S.
Third, foreign billionaire funding. Beyond Singham, Lyman traces substantial foreign-tied money into U.S. advocacy. Charitable vehicles linked to Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss and British billionaire Alan Parker’s Oak Foundation have directed more than $2 billion into American 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups. Much of this has supported climate activism that has increasingly pivoted to opposing data centers.
These foreign influence operations have proven effective. According to DataCenterWatch.org, at least 142 activist groups across 24 states are organizing against data center projects. Collectively, they have blocked approximately $18 billion in projects and delayed another $46 billion.
At the national level, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act in March 2026, which seeks a nationwide pause on new AI/hyperscale data center construction and expansion.
In April, Sanders hosted a Capitol Hill panel on AI regulation, featuring Chinese nationals Zeng Yi and Xue Lan — both with deep ties to CCP-linked AI governance bodies. Xue Lan serves as a counselor of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China and chairs a key Ministry of Science and Technology AI committee.
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent sharply criticized the event: “Instead of harnessing American innovation, Sanders is inviting foreign nationals to tell the United States how to regulate AI. … The real threat to AI safety is letting any nation other than the United States set the global standard.”
DATA CENTERS COULD HELP YOUNG AMERICANS OWN A HOME
Consider a striking example of this reality. A widely used Chinese AI model in the U.S., when asked about the Tiananmen Massacre of June 4, 1989, responded that it was “an ordinary day with no particularly significant public records.” This illustrates the danger of ceding AI leadership to the CCP, which could rewrite history and suppress truth.
A future shaped by AI under the CCP’s control threatens to rewrite history and undermine the truth. Sustaining U.S. leadership in AI is therefore essential, not only for economic strength and national security, but for preserving open inquiry and factual integrity.
Helen Raleigh is a senior contributor at the Federalist.