But they also want to build an on premise 1000MW natural gas power plant and a 500MW biomass plant that will take millions of acres of forest to sustain.
It feels like at some point our society forgot that the government is supposed to pass laws, and not just block things we don't like. Data centers are being built with polluting power sources, why is the instinct "stop all the data centers" and not simply, you know, require them to not use polluting power sources?
Also, while I'm glad you're focused on what matters, 90% of the outcry I've heard about DCs is about water. Or noise pollution, or them looking ugly... for buildings that, again, are mostly being built on razed industrial land or empty fields. According to the OP, "electrical grid" is the fifth most common concern, and air pollution is wayy down the list.
As far as power plants go, to march the current estimates for data center demand over the next decade are astronomical. A large percentage of that power generation is going to be natural gas and biomass. You can’t really build these massive data centers on the timescale needed without them.
Is it stupid lump in a small data center with these massive projects? Yes it is.
Yeah, I'm not saying I'm on their side. We shouldn't be building at a pace that can only be enabled by new fossil fuel plants, correct. But the problem is the power plant, not the DC itself.
I'm also not convinced that gas/biomass plants are the only way. They're an easy way, sure, but solar these days is very cheap and quick to install. And these companies have a lot of money to burn! It feels like we have a great opportunity to force some very rich entities to build out renewable power and instead we're all wringing our hands about DCs sucking up water and looking ugly. It's all kind of a waste.
EDIT: Also, a big reason for the on-site power plants afaik is because grid/transmission construction takes forever. It'd be nice if we could actually fix that, perhaps with all this new money flowing in, but y'know...
That said, I agree they should put them in Canada and similar regions, it seems like a no brainer resources-wise for the reasons you mentioned. The reason they don't is probably that it's vastly more expensive to work on remote sites like that. Mines and dams do it by necessity, but it's a big undertaking to build stuff a full day's drive (or bush plane flight) from the nearest city.