Data Centre Game Plan: Stop Defending, Start Building Support

The opposition is real, organized, and growing. In Hamilton, 1,200 public comments and a 6,000-signature petition helped sink the Steelport planning application. Vancouver has seen two protest marches in a month and a 15,000-signature petition. An Angus Reid poll found 68% of Canadians would oppose a large AI data centre within a few blocks of home — and with 96 facilities proposed or under construction across the country, that sentiment will be tested in council chambers from coast to coast.

In that face of what seems like a tidal wave of opposition, new research from Milltown Partners, a survey of 6,872 voters, tested which pro-data-centre messages and pledges are most likely to move opinion. While this is U.S. research, the insights are instructive for Canadian data centre proponents.

Here’s what the evidence says proponents should do to earn support:

1. Make the fight broad, not just local

Most opposition to data centers doesn’t come from nearby neighbors: only 8% of data centre opponents live near one, while supporters are almost four times more likely to have one in their community. Opposition is driven by national anxieties over AI, corporate power, and the cost of living.

The strategic implication: a communications program focused only on immediate neighbours is unlikely to work. The best defense is a good offense, and to win local approval, proponents must actively shape the broader narrative.

2. Lead with affordability

The research shows one message wins decisively: affordability.

The idea that new data centres can help families save money through local tax contributions, commitments to keep utility costs down, and energy infrastructure investment, lifted support by +11.4 points, ahead of AI benefits, local economic benefits, and international AI competitiveness.

The reason is in the opposition’s own words: 67% believe data centres push up household energy bills, ahead of corporate benefit (59%), water use (57%), and house prices (55%). Local irritants rank lower: noise at 36%, aesthetics at 24%.

3. Make pledges that put money back in residents’ pockets

• Milltown’s pledge testing offers a procurement guide for community benefit agreements:
• Paying 100% of the energy and infrastructure costs of the project convinced 60% of voters
• Reducing power draw during peak times convinced 56%
• Investing in upgraded local roads, water systems, and infrastructure convinced 54%
• Covering any increases in household electricity bills convinced 49%, which tied with funding grants to local schools, food banks, and libraries
• Free training and apprenticeship programs convinced 48%

At the bottom: buying renewable energy to match the electricity used, at 41%.

Pledges that protect household finances outperform corporate sustainability pledges. Renewable commitments are table stakes, not persuasion.

A winning public campaign must focus on what voters actually reward: a guarantee that developers will pay their own way, reduce peak grid demand, upgrade local infrastructure, and protect household energy bills. To make this message tangible, companies should deliver a plain-language “data centre dividend” directly to nearby households.

4. On water, pledge action first – context never works

Water is a top opposition concern (57%) and a critical issue in Canada, shown by recent protests in Vancouver as the city tightens regional water restrictions.

The research is clear about what works: explaining that a facility cools its site using reclaimed wastewater convinced 64% of voters, the strongest message tested by Milltown. Closed-loop cooling that recycles the same water convinced 61%.

Every contextual comparison underperformed: less water than 1% of irrigated corn (45%), less than half a golf course (44%), 0.2% of freshwater use (43%), or a fraction of a single farm’s hot afternoon (40%). The cleverest analogy, comparing an hour of PlayStation to 200 AI prompts, was the weakest of all, at 27%.

Voters view comparisons as deflection, whereas direct engineering solutions demonstrate true accountability.

The game plan: feature reclaimed-wastewater and closed-loop commitments in the initial announcement, before opposition can form in strength. Hamilton shows why sequence matters – the proponent’s closed-loop assurance arrived after distrust had hardened.

5. Sell AI through the hospital, not the economy

AI has become toxic. Ipsos’ July 2026 global survey found 67% of Canadians report feeling nervous about AI, which is the highest rate among all countries surveyed, and 17 points above the global average.

The focus can’t be on AI. But it should be on what outcomes data centres can help deliver for people. Milltown’s testing is clear: “AI is helping doctors find cancers months earlier from routine scans and design more effective, personalized treatments” was rated most convincing by 46% of voters, and least convincing by only 7% – the strongest result in the study. “AI is accelerating scientific work that used to take decades” followed at 24%. Economic-growth framing convinced 11% and was rated least convincing by 24%.

In Canada, the direction is obvious. Healthcare sits at or near the top of every public-concern ranking. The most persuasive argument for the AI buildout: medical diagnosis, earlier cancer detection, and faster science, fits Canadian public sentiment far better than growth projections.

A winning narrative

Together, these strategic moves give the industry a concise, evidence-backed story:

• We pay our own way by covering 100% of our energy and infrastructure costs (the pledge 60% of voters find convincing), protecting your bills and directly addressing the 67% who fear price hikes
• We recycle our water through closed-loop systems and reclaimed wastewater: rebuttals that persuade over 60% of voters
• We power essential progress, helping build systems that can allow your doctor to catch cancer earlier – the single most convincing argument tested, at 46%

Told once, at a meeting after the petition launches, this story is insufficient. Shared early and continuously through an integrated public affairs campaign, it can move voters and build the permission space needed for officials to green light projects.