For John Zola, the 40 acres of land in northern Pennsylvania were a dream come true. The property featured apple orchards nestled among rolling hills, a barn, meadows, and enough space for four homes: one for himself and his wife, and each of his three adult children. However, what once felt like a paradise has turned into a nightmare.
In late 2024, a contractor hired by the local power utility knocked on Zola’s door and informed him that the company planned to build a 500-kilovolt power line through his property. The proposed project would involve towering metal structures that would reach 10 times the height of the century-old apple trees, looming over Zola’s homes, as well as the basketball court and swimming pool where his grandchildren play.
This type of infrastructure is becoming increasingly common across the United States, as tech companies expand their operations and require more energy to power their massive data centers. These high-voltage power lines are part of a growing trend that has sparked significant controversy, with residents like Zola caught in the middle.
Big Power Lines, Big Data Centers
The expansion of these power lines is driven by the need to support the energy demands of large-scale data centers operated by major tech firms. While advancements in artificial intelligence are seen as vital for economic and national security, they also place an immense strain on the power grid. This has led to a surge in plans for new transmission lines, often spanning hundreds of miles, to deliver the necessary electricity.
However, this growth has not been without opposition. Local communities have raised concerns about the impact of these projects on their land, property values, and natural resources. Opponents argue that the lines threaten private land, sensitive ecosystems, and pristine waterways, all for electricity that may not directly benefit them.
Transmission projects have long faced challenges, including lengthy permitting processes and resistance from local communities. However, analysts warn that the aging power grid is struggling to keep up with rising demand, increasing the risk of widespread blackouts during extreme weather events. Utilities argue that even projects primarily serving large customers, such as data centers, ultimately benefit everyone by improving grid capacity.
Caught in the Middle
The expansion of transmission infrastructure is not just a technical challenge but also a political and social one. Utility companies are forecasting that spending on transmission projects will double from $50 billion a year in 2019 to nearly the same amount by 2028. This growth has sparked resistance from landowners, conservationists, local officials, consumer advocates, and even some states.
In Texas’ Hill Country, the Hill Country Preservation Coalition has emerged to oppose the construction of a 765-kilovolt transmission line that would cross the state. The coalition’s founder, Jada Jo Smith, describes the project as a “Goliath” that will be difficult to stop. They are urging state regulators to consider alternative routes that minimize environmental damage.
“These are real dollars,” said Darryl Lawrence, Pennsylvania’s state consumer advocate, who is challenging a $1.7 billion transmission line that spans over 200 miles. He questions whether cheaper alternatives exist and whether the data center demand it serves will actually materialize.
In West Virginia, residents are fighting against proposed transmission lines that would connect coal-fired power plants to northern Virginia, a region known as the “data center alley.” Meanwhile, in the Midwest, a $22 billion transmission package is facing opposition from multiple states, with utility regulators arguing that the project could negatively impact consumers.
“There’s no amount of money for me,” said Zola, who is resisting the proposed power line that would run close to his home. PPL, the utility company, has offered increased compensation to landowners, but Zola remains unconvinced. His offer was recently raised from $17,000 to $85,000, but he insists that no sum can compensate for the loss of his land.
