An investigative report has revealed how the rapid expansion of data centres, the physical infrastructure behind AI and cloud computing, is quietly reshaping landscapes and communities across the world – often without their knowledge or consent.
In South Africa, the development of Equinix’s $160-million JN1 data centre east of Johannesburg is cited as a case of missed transparency and limited public engagement, raising concerns about electricity and water strain in an already resource-constrained region.
The report, Where Cloud Meets Cement, compiled over five months by The Maybe, examines hyperscale data centres in Chile, the US, Mexico, the Netherlands, and South Africa. It draws on interviews, case studies, and field research to uncover a pattern of opaque development processes, exaggerated economic promises, and growing grassroots resistance – especially in communities with little access to the information that would allow them to challenge these projects.
“Data centres are marketed as engines of innovation and local economic growth, but our research shows a different picture – one where communities are left in the dark, environmental ecosystems are strained, and governments often prioritise corporate incentives over public good,” says Hanna Barkat, one of the report’s lead authors.
South Africa’s invisible data centre
In the South African case study, the Equinix JN1 facility in Ekurhuleni is described not as an outright scandal but as a cautionary example of what happens when developments proceed with little community involvement. The report says that many nearby residents were unaware of the centre’s construction or its potential demands on the region’s strained electricity and water systems. Despite launching with fanfare in 2024, including attendance by the South African Minister of Communications and the US ambassador, JN1’s long-term environmental impact remains unclear.
Johannesburg and its surrounds have experienced rolling blackouts and severe water shortages. While Equinix claims the facility will run on 100% renewable energy by 2026, it has not disclosed how this will be achieved or what its current consumption levels are. Researcher Samantha Ndiwalana, cited in the report, found that attempts to get basic information from utility providers went unanswered, highlighting the lack of regulatory and public accountability.
The report says the facility is being celebrated as a strategic gateway for Africa’s digital future, but it’s unclear if local communities will benefit — or even be informed.
A global pattern of disempowerment
The report’s other case studies show more overt resistance: in Chile, Google’s Cerrillos data centre was stalled after activists demanded transparency over water rights in a drought-ridden area; in Missouri, USA, residents stopped a $1.5-billion project by targeting local officials; in Mexico, Microsoft’s operations sparked protests over water privatisation and Indigenous land rights; and in the Netherlands, Meta’s “Operation Tulip” was scrapped after a national outcry.
Each case reflects recurring themes, summarised in the report’s key findings:
- Geopolitical pressure and local disempowerment: Governments often present data centres as national strategic assets, fast-tracking approvals and sidelining local communities without meaningful consultation or transparency.
- Corporate greenwashing: Technology companies frequently obscure or fail to disclose the true environmental costs of their facilities, particularly water and energy usage.
- Inflated economic promises: Big Tech firms routinely overstate the benefits to local economies – promising jobs and investment that often fail to materialise at the promised scale.
- Information asymmetry: Community members, journalists, and even researchers struggle to access critical project information due to opaque permitting processes and non-disclosure agreements.
- Grassroots resistance works: Local organising – through protest, legal action, investigative journalism, and social media – has successfully delayed or halted major projects, including Google’s stalled development in Chile and the cancellation of a $1.5-billion facility in Peculiar, Missouri.
Resistance meets risk
Where communities have resisted, success has come at a cost. In Mexico, journalists covering Microsoft’s facilities have faced intimidation, and in some cases, requested large sums just to report on community issues. In Querétaro, where Microsoft, Google, and AWS are expanding, 76% of water sources are reportedly contaminated – yet clear data on corporate water use is lacking.
Despite these risks, community-led organisations such as Voceras de la Madre Tierra and Bajo de Tierra Museo continue to advocate for legal reforms and environmental justice. In contrast, the South African case reflects a lack of organised resistance, not because of agreement, but due to limited awareness and capacity.
What needs to change
The report provides five urgent recommendations:
- Equip local governments and communities with credible information to challenge corporate narratives.
- Institutionalise meaningful community consultation early in the process.
- Fund grassroots resistance efforts, including legal and journalistic support.
- Mandate public disclosure of environmental and infrastructural data.
- Build global networks of affected communities, researchers, and advocates.
With Africa poised to become a new frontier for data infrastructure – backed by US and EU investments – the authors warn that the continent’s regulatory gaps and socio-economic vulnerabilities may make it particularly susceptible to exploitation.
The report warns that without improved transparency and environmental accountability, South Africa may face a future where digital progress comes at the expense of water, power, and community wellbeing.
* Read the ‘Where Cloud Meets Cement’ report here.
