KLF Build It proposal graphic advocating responsible Ohio data center development, new energy capacity, sustainable water use, infrastructure investment and protection for working people.

Build It. Just Don't Make Ohioans Pay for It.

A KLF Proposal for Responsible Large-Scale Development

By KLF — Kunts Live Forever
August 2026

Data centers are coming.

AI is growing. Cloud computing isn't going away. America's demand for digital infrastructure is going to continue increasing, and Ohio has an opportunity to be part of that growth.

We think it should be.

KLF isn't calling for Ohio to stop building data centers. We're not interested in chasing technology, jobs, construction or investment out of the state.

But there's another side to that conversation that deserves to be heard.

When a private development requires extraordinary amounts of electricity, water, land and public infrastructure, ordinary residents shouldn't be expected to quietly absorb the consequences.

Higher utility costs shouldn't simply become the price of progress.

Neither should excessive water consumption, constant industrial noise, overloaded infrastructure or enormous public subsidies negotiated without meaningful public involvement.

We believe there's a better approach.

And it doesn't need to apply only to data centers.

The Principle Is Simple

If your project creates the demand, your project creates the capacity.

Ohio should establish a new set of standards for exceptionally large, resource-intensive developments.

Data centers may be driving the conversation today. Tomorrow it could be semiconductor manufacturing, advanced manufacturing, hydrogen production or an industry that barely exists yet.

Rather than writing laws targeting one industry at a time, Ohio could establish reasonable standards based upon the demands a development places on the surrounding community.

Build here.

Invest here.

Employ people here.

Grow here.

But don't leave Ohio families holding the bill.

1. Extraordinary Power Demand Should Bring New Power Supply

Large data centers can consume extraordinary amounts of electricity.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, data centers consumed approximately 4.4% of total U.S. electricity in 2023. DOE estimates that could increase to approximately 6.7% to 12% by 2028 as AI and other computing demands continue growing.

That's not an argument against data centers.

It's an argument for building the power capacity necessary to support them.

We believe developments creating exceptionally large new electrical loads should be required to create, finance or otherwise demonstrably add sufficient new generating and grid capacity to support that demand—with reliability, affordability and environmental impact considered as part of the approval process.

That doesn't necessarily mean building a power plant beside every data center.

Solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, energy storage and other emerging technologies could all potentially contribute. The specific solution should be determined by engineers, utilities and regulators based on reliability, environmental impact and the needs of the regional electrical system.

But there should be one important requirement:

The capacity should actually be new.

Simply purchasing credits associated with electricity that was already being generated doesn't create additional electricity for Ohio.

If a development creates hundreds of megawatts of new demand, there should be a credible plan demonstrating how sufficient additional generation, transmission or other grid capacity will be created to support it without simply transferring the costs and risks to existing customers.

2. Extraordinary Water Demand Requires a Sustainable Water Plan

Water deserves the same treatment.

Cooling can create substantial water demands depending upon the technology employed. Multiple approaches already exist for reducing data-center water consumption, including improved cooling efficiency, direct liquid cooling, reclaimed water, closed-loop systems and other technologies.

A major development requiring enormous quantities of water should demonstrate how that demand will be sustainably supplied and mitigated before construction begins.

That could include reclaimed wastewater, closed-loop cooling, rainwater collection, dry cooling or appropriately engineered groundwater systems.

One possibility worth studying is a paired groundwater well system.

Where geology and environmental conditions allow it, groundwater could potentially be extracted through one well field, passed through isolated heat exchangers and returned through appropriately designed injection wells.

Rather than treating groundwater as disposable cooling water, such a system could potentially use it primarily as a heat-transfer medium.

But we're not hydrologists—and legislation shouldn't pretend politicians are hydrologists either.

Groundwater movement, thermal effects, water chemistry, aquifer capacity and contamination risks are complicated subjects. Qualified engineers, hydrologists and environmental scientists should determine whether such a system is appropriate for any particular location.

The law shouldn't prescribe one cooling technology.

It should prescribe the outcome:

Don't deplete or contaminate the community's water supply to support private development.

Ohio legislators are already debating these issues. House Bill 784 would require data centers to report monthly and annual water consumption and restrict the use of nondisclosure agreements to conceal certain water-consumption information from political subdivisions. Senate Bill 378, the proposed Responsible Water Use by Data Centers Act, addresses withdrawal and consumptive water use by data centers.

That's a good conversation to be having.

We believe the principle can go further.

3. If You Need the Infrastructure, Help Pay for the Infrastructure

A massive development can require substations, transmission upgrades, water and sewer improvements, roads and other infrastructure.

Those costs shouldn't automatically be distributed among people who didn't create the demand.

If infrastructure is primarily necessary because of a particular development, the developer should bear the appropriate share of its cost.

That doesn't mean infrastructure can't ultimately benefit the surrounding community.

Ideally, it should.

If a project results in stronger electrical infrastructure, expanded water-treatment capability, better roads or additional generation capacity, those improvements may continue benefiting the region for decades.

That's the kind of economic development Ohio should pursue.

Large-scale development should leave communities with more capacity and stronger infrastructure—not simply larger bills.

4. Protect the People Who Already Live There

Data centers and other industrial developments can produce continuous noise from cooling equipment, transformers, generators and other mechanical systems.

Simply placing them in rural areas isn't enough.

Rural residents matter too.

Major facilities should have sufficient setbacks from existing homes and communities, with enforceable noise standards.

Those standards should consider not only conventional measurements of overall sound but also persistent low-frequency noise where appropriate. Research published in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology has found that relying only on conventional A-weighted measurements can inadequately characterize low-frequency environmental noise.

Developers should be responsible for purchasing enough property to adequately mitigate their own impact.

Where appropriate, campuses could incorporate engineered earth berms, acoustic barriers and substantial belts of native trees and vegetation.

Trees alone aren't a complete acoustic solution. Combined with proper setbacks, terrain, berms, equipment enclosures and other engineering controls, however, substantial vegetated buffers can provide additional separation, visual screening and habitat.

The principle remains the same:

The burden belongs on the development creating the impact—not the family that was already living next door.

5. The Public Deserves a Seat at the Table

Perhaps the biggest source of public frustration isn't development itself.

It's the feeling that the deal has already been made before residents ever hear about it.

When governments contemplate extraordinary tax incentives, infrastructure commitments, resource agreements or other concessions for exceptionally large developments, meaningful information should be available before final commitments are made.

Residents deserve an opportunity to ask:

  • How much electricity will this consume?

  • How much water?

  • Who pays for the necessary infrastructure?

  • What public incentives are being offered?

  • Could existing utility customers bear additional costs?

  • What environmental impacts are expected?

  • What noise will neighboring properties experience?

  • What happens if the project closes or is abandoned?

Those aren't anti-business questions.

They're responsible ones.

Ohio's General Assembly is already considering legislation requiring greater disclosure of data-center water consumption. House Bill 646 has also advanced through the legislature and includes creation of a Data Center Study Commission examining the effects of these facilities.

That tells us something important:

Transparency and long-term planning are already part of the conversation.

Let's make them part of the standard.

6. Make the Standard Bigger Than Data Centers

This may be the most important part of the proposal.

Don't write a law against data centers.

Write a law for responsible development.

Create objective thresholds based on factors such as electrical demand, water consumption, acreage, infrastructure requirements and environmental impact.

Projects exceeding those thresholds could undergo an enhanced Large-Scale Development Responsibility Review.

The review could require qualifying projects to demonstrate:

  • Adequate additional energy and grid capacity

  • Sustainable water sourcing and mitigation

  • Responsibility for attributable infrastructure costs

  • Appropriate siting and setbacks

  • Noise and environmental mitigation

  • Public disclosure of extraordinary incentives and resource commitments

  • Financial assurance for decommissioning or abandoned infrastructure where appropriate

The exact thresholds should be established with input from engineers, utilities, environmental scientists, local governments, economic-development professionals, industry, organized labor and—most importantly—the communities expected to live with these projects.

That keeps Ohio's policy technologically neutral.

The next transformative industry should be welcome here too.

It should simply play by the same rules.

7. Ohio Doesn't Have to Do This Alone

Large-scale infrastructure doesn't stop at state lines.

Neither does the electrical grid.

Ohio could work with neighboring states to establish compatible principles for extraordinarily resource-intensive developments throughout the Midwest.

States could still compete for investment based on workforce, available land, permitting efficiency, taxes, logistics and infrastructure.

But there is little benefit in competing over which state's residents are willing to absorb the greatest external costs.

A regional approach could instead send a very different message:

The Midwest wants your investment.

The Midwest wants your jobs.

The Midwest wants to help build the future.

These are the standards for building it responsibly.

Ohio Doesn't Have to Choose Between Progress and Its People

There's an increasingly polarized argument surrounding data centers.

One side says we need the investment, technology and infrastructure.

The other points toward electricity costs, water consumption, noise, tax incentives and effects on surrounding communities.

Both can have a point.

Ohio doesn't need to choose between becoming a technology leader and protecting the people who already live here.

We can do both.

In fact, doing both may ultimately make Ohio more competitive.

Imagine purpose-built technology and industrial campuses designed from the beginning around new energy generation, sustainable cooling, adequate transmission, water reclamation, environmental buffers and properly funded infrastructure.

Those projects don't merely consume capacity.

They create it.

And building all of that infrastructure means something else too:

Work.

Electricians.

Operating engineers.

Ironworkers.

Pipefitters.

Laborers.

Carpenters.

Linemen.

Drivers.

Engineers.

Equipment operators.

And countless other skilled workers.

Responsible development doesn't have to mean less development.

It can mean better development.

This Isn't the Finished Answer

KLF is an independent brand rooted in punk and working-class culture.

We're not an engineering firm.

We're not a utility.

We're not environmental scientists.

And we're definitely not legislators.

We're working people asking a pretty straightforward question:

Can we build the future without making ordinary people pay disproportionately for it?

We believe the answer is yes.

Some of the ideas presented here will undoubtedly need refinement.

Engineers may identify better solutions.

Environmental scientists may identify problems we've overlooked.

Utilities may have alternatives.

Developers may have technologies we haven't considered.

Residents living beside proposed developments will have perspectives that can't be found in a technical report.

Good.

Bring them to the table.

Challenge the parts that don't work.

Improve the parts that do.

Replace bad ideas with better ones.

This proposal isn't intended to be the final word.

It's intended to start a better conversation.

But let's stop pretending our only choices are unrestricted development or no development at all.

There's plenty of room between them.

KLF supports bringing technology, investment, infrastructure and jobs to Ohio and throughout the Midwest.

We simply believe the people who already live and work here deserve protection as that growth happens.

The concept can be summarized in one sentence:

If your project creates the demand, your project creates the capacity.

Build it. Grow it. Power the future.

Just don't send working people the bill.

Sources & Further Reading

U.S. Department of Energy — Data Center Electricity Demand
DOE's analysis reports that data centers consumed approximately 4.4% of total U.S. electricity in 2023 and projects approximately 6.7%–12% by 2028.

U.S. Department of Energy — Electricity Demand Growth Resources
DOE resources discuss growing electricity demand associated with data centers, AI, manufacturing and electrification, as well as the generation and grid challenges associated with that growth.

Ohio General Assembly — House Bill 784
Proposed legislation requiring data centers to report monthly and annual water consumption and prohibiting certain water-consumption information from being included in nondisclosure agreements with political subdivisions.

Ohio General Assembly — Senate Bill 378
Proposed Responsible Water Use by Data Centers Act, addressing withdrawal and consumptive water use by data centers.

Ohio General Assembly — House Bill 646
Data-center legislation that includes creation of a Data Center Study Commission and other provisions addressing data-center development and infrastructure.

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology — Low-Frequency Environmental Noise
Leaffer et al., Long-term measurement study of urban environmental low frequency noise, examining low-frequency environmental noise and the limitations of relying exclusively on conventional A-weighted measurements.

Sharing & Attribution

KLF encourages policymakers, journalists, community organizations, industry representatives, tradespeople and members of the public to quote, discuss and share this proposal with attribution and a link to the original KLF publication.

Organizations interested in substantially adapting or developing the proposal are invited to contact KLF.

KLF — Kunts Live Forever

Independent. Working-class. Built in spite.

Back to blog