Why the NAACP is working to protect Black neighborhoods from AI data centers

xAI’s infamous data centers near Memphis, Tenn., are aptly named Colossus 1 and Colossus 2. The supercomputers that power the Grok chatbot are really big — they’re also an environmental hazard, according to the NAACP.

A human rights group sued Elon Musk’s xAI last year over Colossus’ many methane gas engines, saying the company used a legal loophole to install them without permits and, in doing so, threatened the health of the nearby black-majority community of Boxtown. Shockingly, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agreed with the NAACP, ruling in January 2026 that the Colossus wind turbines were exempt from air quality permit requirements. Reducing the turbines, which release nitrogen oxide into a community already experiencing high levels of pollution, was a victory for the NAACP and Abre’ Conner, executive director of the Center for Environmental and Climate Justice.

Just this month, Conner and the NAACP cheered when New York state introduced a three-year moratorium on data center construction, which could give lawmakers time to enact regulations for energy-absorbing facilities. Conner, an attorney and longtime environmental justice leader, spoke with Mashable about his work and how data center construction is reminiscent of the destructive highway construction of the last century.

Tell us why the NAACP is making data centers a priority.

Conner: Most of the time, people will say that the AI ​​bubble that might pop up on their search screen is related to something that lives in the cloud, but it’s not. It uses physical infrastructure to power these AI applications.

The reason we are interested and concerned about this is that for decades, the NAACP has understood that issues of environmental and climate justice are issues of racial justice. Many technologies and promises, as they relate to energy, have been seen in Black and mainstream communities in the past, from fracking to crypto mining.

Much of this industrialization tends to be concentrated in certain areas, and we saw that clearly last year when Elon Musk and xAI decided to build a data center near Boxtown, which is south of Memphis, and which is a historically Black community. Even more troubling was that there was a standard process you went through to get approval, and then, at that point, it would be decided if you could have surgery and what that surgery should look like. And that data center ran on unregulated methane gas engines.

So we were concerned about whether we would see some of these jobs now that you have billions in technology [showing interest] in other communities. Of course, we started to see the AI ​​boom [manifest] throughout the year in different ways; non-disclosure agreements, home invasion agreements, and other environmental pollution were being signed that were beginning to focus on communities that have been struggling with environmental justice and climate concerns.

[B]because of the people in the technology space, they promise that in one way or another [the data centers are] different. Even if they use the same industrial design – the same types of diesel fuel, methane gas – somehow that will not be as dangerous to human health as it was done in the past.

What have these technology companies been telling members of the public?

[That’s] if they come and talk to members of the community at all. Many times, they don’t talk to members of the public; they may speak to one or two elected officials. They might talk to someone at the agency level, maybe. But not many conversations are actually happening with the people most affected. That’s part of the problem — there’s no transparency. By the time people find out about it, the site design has been redone, and construction may already be taking place. In the case of xAI, they are already working, and then they want to talk to the community after they are in it.

Because [the tech companies are] going to places where there has been no investment for decades and decades, we see the same playbook being used, like promising social justice or investment in schools. That has nothing to do with the pollution they bring to communities, or the hundreds of millions of gallons of water they use to run a data center, or noise concerns. We’re seeing some of the same plays we saw in the coal-fired power plant boom, from fracking and crypto mining.

Mashable Light Speed

But what is interesting and unique is that because they are people in the technology space, they promise that somehow. [the data centers are] different. Even if they use the same industrial design – the same types of diesel fuel, methane gas – somehow that will not be as dangerous to human health as it was done in the past.

It seems reminiscent of the construction of the US highway system in the 20th century, when black and minority neighborhoods were leveled for expressways. Are there similarities?

Definitely. Redlining, the concept of NIMBYism, that whole kind of framework is what we’re seeing now. There’s also this promise of a better future, but when people who work in these companies are asked, “Would you like that data center in your backyard?” They’re like, “Well, let’s pause.”

If we look at the redirection from highways to railways, there was an element of systematic racism in it. If i [tech companies are] advising, for example, to build in areas where there is already existing infrastructure, which will deepen the environmental and climate concerns of people who do not want more pollution [their] communities.

I think the response of governments to data centers is very different depending on where they are. Tennessee, for example, is not a hotbed of environmentalism, while states like New York are considering setting up data centers. How does that geographical inconsistency affect your efforts?

For me, as someone who has done environmental and climate justice work for a decade and a half, the most hopeful thing for me is seeing people across political lines, in urban and rural communities, all asking questions. They said, “Do we have enough answers to move forward with a data center in our community?” That’s something that’s really different from what we’ve seen in other industrial buildings in the past.

People ask, “Why are you signing a nondisclosure agreement about our public services? Shouldn’t we be able to see what you’re talking about if we pay taxes in this community? Shouldn’t we be part of that conversation?”

Because people see their utility bills go up, they see the impacts of data centers even before one is built. That changed the tone of the conversation. That’s why we see places like New York, saying, “Do we have enough information to move forward?” In [the NAACP’s] 2026 playbook, that was something we shared. If there is not enough information, call for a moratorium until you have the necessary information to move forward in a way that feels responsible to the community that will feel those impacts.

Questions are asked [of the tech companies, like]”Okay, you say jobs. How many?” The highest we see is more; most of them are temporary.

Are tech companies trying to sell the idea of ​​creating jobs with these data centers?

It’s just like a playbook that says, “There will be jobs. It will be good for the local economy. This is something we’re going to do in a very clean way.” Questions are asked [of the tech companies, like]”Okay, you say jobs. How many?” The highest we see is more; many of them are temporary, many of them are on the construction side, many of them will deepen the same concerns that we see when it comes to working in places where you will be exposed to a lot of non-stop pollution.

In our flagship framework that we released last year, more than 100 organizations, partners and coalition partners came together to say that jobs will not be more important than the lives of the community members who live there.

What does environmental justice work like in 2026, when the federal government supports AI and expresses very little concern for the environment and minority communities?

When we saw Project 2025, we knew what that would look like. We knew there was no going back on our environment and climate protection. We knew that was coming.

At the NAACP, at our roots, it has always been about people power. It was about highlighting what we can do with or without government support at the federal level.

Back in North Carolina, in Warren County, where you had a Black community that said, “We don’t want to be abandoned in our community,” there was no federal government support at that time. The state asked, “Well, we’re not sure we want to get involved in that.”

It was the lowly people who gathered and said, “We’re not going to take this anymore.” They built the audience that was needed on a national level, and that’s what we’re seeing now. Even though we don’t have managers at the government level that are helpful, I hope people understand what this means. We are in the middle year; we have the opportunity to have people in positions that represent our views. Motivation, organization, quality work will always be there, and as long as we have communities willing to push back, I think we still have a fighting chance regardless of who is in office.

Learn more about the NAACP’s environmental work here.