Data centres are quickly becoming one of Alberta’s most controversial forms of development.
The provincial government considers them an important economic opportunity. Technology companies need enormous amounts of computing capacity to support artificial intelligence, cloud storage, banking, healthcare, government services and the countless digital systems Canadians now use every day.
At the same time, residents in Rocky View County and other Alberta communities are asking difficult and entirely reasonable questions.
How much electricity will these facilities consume? Where will their water come from? Will nearby residents hear cooling equipment, turbines and backup generators operating around the clock? How many permanent jobs will actually be created? Who will pay for new roads, power lines and emergency services?
There is also a broader question receiving too little attention: Who will control the personal, corporate and government information stored inside these facilities?
The debate should not be reduced to being either “for” or “against” data centres. Canada needs them. That does not mean every proposed project belongs in every proposed location—or that communities should accept whatever conditions a developer offers.
Data centres are essential infrastructure
Almost everything we do digitally depends upon a physical computer operating somewhere.
Emails, photographs, websites, financial transactions, medical records, municipal files, emergency communications and streaming services all require servers housed in data centres.
Artificial intelligence is accelerating that demand. AI systems require far more computing power than conventional internet searches or document storage. The International Energy Agency estimates that global data-centre electricity consumption could roughly double between 2025 and 2030, reaching approximately 950 terawatt-hours annually.
Canadians may never see the servers processing their information, but the buildings, electricity, cooling equipment and communications connections supporting those servers are very real.
Refusing to build data centres in Canada would not stop Canadians from using AI, online banking or cloud services. It would simply make us more dependent upon computing infrastructure located and controlled elsewhere.
That would mean surrendering much of the investment, employment, technical knowledge and influence associated with the digital economy. It could also leave Canadian businesses, researchers and governments unable to obtain the computing capacity they need.
The responsible position is therefore not to oppose all data centres. It is to decide which facilities Canada needs, where they should be located and what standards they must meet.
Data sovereignty must be part of the debate
Canada’s need for domestic data centres is not only an economic issue. It is also a matter of privacy, security and national sovereignty.
Personal health records, banking information, corporate research, government communications and critical-infrastructure data are increasingly stored in cloud systems operating from large data centres.
A foreign-owned data centre or cloud provider does not ordinarily “own” the information its customers place on its servers. Ownership of the building, ownership of the computer equipment and ownership of the stored information are separate legal matters.
However, the nationality of the company controlling the system—and the laws governing that company—can affect who may demand access to the information.
Canadian information stored with a foreign-controlled company may be exposed to foreign court orders, intelligence laws or national-security demands. That risk may exist even when the physical servers are located in Canada. In some circumstances, a foreign government could seek information without the Canadian customer being notified.
The federal government has acknowledged that Canada cannot guarantee complete sovereignty over information stored in foreign-controlled public cloud systems. Sensitive Canadian information could potentially be subject to another country’s laws.
That matters when the information includes medical histories, tax records, defence material, legal files, trade secrets, confidential business plans or details about Canada’s energy, communications and transportation systems.
However, “located in Canada” does not automatically mean “controlled by Canada.”
A data centre built on Canadian soil can still be owned by a foreign corporation. Meaningful data sovereignty requires Canadian legal jurisdiction, strong privacy rules, transparent ownership, effective encryption and clear control over the encryption keys.
Contracts must identify where information is stored, whether it can be transferred outside Canada, which employees can access it and how the provider will respond to foreign legal demands.
Canada should welcome responsible international investment, but foreign investment should not be confused with Canadian control. For the most sensitive government and critical-infrastructure information, Canada should favour Canadian-controlled facilities—or systems specifically designed so that a foreign parent company cannot access the information.
Data centres are becoming part of our critical national infrastructure. Decisions about them should be treated with the same seriousness as decisions involving telecommunications, electricity and national transportation systems.
Why developers are coming to Alberta
Alberta offers several advantages to data-centre developers.
The province has available land, a relatively cool climate, technical expertise, natural-gas resources and the potential to construct new electricity generation. Alberta also offers a competitive tax environment and a provincial government actively seeking technology investment.
The potential investment is enormous. Meta, the company behind Facebook and Instagram, has announced plans for an approximately $13-billion data centre in Sturgeon County. The proposed development would be supported by new electricity generation rather than relying entirely upon the existing provincial grid.
Projects of that size can generate thousands of construction jobs, create opportunities for Alberta contractors and significantly increase a municipality’s industrial tax base. They may also attract research, software and technology businesses that want to locate near major computing infrastructure.
Those are legitimate benefits.
But investment announcements must be examined carefully. A multibillion-dollar construction budget does not necessarily mean thousands of permanent local jobs.
Data centres are extremely expensive because of the servers, cooling systems, electrical equipment and security infrastructure they contain. Once operational, however, they can employ comparatively few people for the amount of land and electricity they consume.
Municipalities should require developers to disclose construction employment, permanent employment, expected municipal taxes and anticipated local purchasing separately. Communities deserve firm numbers, not a single large investment figure intended to generate headlines.
Alberta’s electricity system has limits
Electricity is the most serious practical concern.
The Alberta Electric System Operator has warned that connecting data centres and other very large loads creates complex technical and operational challenges. Large facilities without dedicated generation can place considerable strain on electricity supply.
Data-centre projects representing more than 8,600 megawatts of potential demand had submitted connection applications to the system operator in 2024. By comparison, Alberta’s average internal electricity load in 2025 was approximately 10,300 megawatts.
Not all of those proposed projects will be built, but the comparison shows the extraordinary scale of industry interest.
Albertans should not be expected to face higher electricity bills or reduced grid reliability so that multinational technology companies can obtain inexpensive power.
If a development requires new generation, transmission lines, substations or other upgrades, the developer should pay the full cost. Those expenses should not be quietly transferred to residential consumers or other Alberta businesses.
Requiring facilities to provide their own electricity can reduce pressure on the provincial grid, but it does not eliminate every concern.
Many proposed facilities would use natural-gas generation. A project combining a data centre with hundreds of megawatts of on-site generation begins to resemble both a technology development and a major power plant. Its emissions, air-quality effects and continuous noise must be assessed accordingly.
Developers should also be required to demonstrate what will happen if their private generation fails. A project cannot claim to be independent from the provincial system and then expect the public grid to provide enormous amounts of emergency power whenever it is needed.
Water use cannot be an afterthought
Powerful computer servers produce significant heat and must be continuously cooled.
Some traditional cooling systems consume large amounts of water. That is particularly concerning in southern Alberta, where municipalities, agriculture, industry and a growing population already depend upon a limited resource.
Not all data centres use the same cooling technology. Closed-loop systems recirculate water and can substantially reduce ongoing withdrawals. Air-cooled systems may use less water but can consume more electricity or produce additional noise.
Those differences matter.
Rather than relying upon general industry assurances, municipalities should require every developer to disclose its expected water consumption under normal and extreme summer conditions. Proponents should identify the source of the water, the cooling system being used and what will happen during drought restrictions.
Drinking-quality municipal water should not automatically be supplied to an industrial cooling operation when recycled water or other alternatives are available.
Rural residents have legitimate concerns
People living near proposed data-centre sites are sometimes dismissed as opposing progress. That is unfair.
Cooling fans, transformers, turbines and backup generators may operate 24 hours a day. Noise that appears acceptable during a daytime inspection can become intrusive on a quiet rural night.
Residents may also face industrial lighting, increased traffic, diesel-fuel storage, new transmission corridors, loss of farmland and changes to rural views and property values.
A single facility may be manageable. Several facilities concentrated in one district can create cumulative effects that are much greater than those of any one project considered in isolation.
Developers should therefore provide independent noise studies, air-quality assessments, emergency-response plans and realistic visual renderings. Municipalities must establish enforceable operating limits, meaningful setbacks from homes and a clear process for investigating complaints.
Residents should not be required to prove harm after a facility begins operating. The developer should be required to demonstrate beforehand that the project will not create unreasonable harm.
Rocky View County was right to pause
The issue is especially relevant to Chestermere because Rocky View County has attracted considerable interest from data-centre developers.
On July 21, Rocky View County Council changed a data-centre campus from a permitted to a discretionary use within the applicable land-use district. That gives council greater authority to approve or refuse individual development permits.
Council also directed administration to temporarily stop bringing forward new data-centre redesignation applications until the county completes an emerging-sector strategy and regulatory framework.
That pause is not an unreasonable rejection of technology or investment. It is responsible planning.
The data-centre industry is changing rapidly, and the size of proposed facilities has grown dramatically. Municipal rules written for smaller buildings may be inadequate for campuses requiring power generation comparable to a major industrial operation.
A development that may be appropriate within an established industrial area could be entirely unsuitable beside homes, productive farmland or environmentally sensitive land.
Rocky View County needs time to identify suitable locations, establish enforceable standards and determine the cumulative amount of development the region can responsibly support.
Set conditions before granting approval
Alberta should welcome data centres that provide clear benefits without transferring their costs and risks to the public.
Before receiving approval, developers should be required to demonstrate:
A secure electricity supply that will not compromise grid reliability or increase costs for existing consumers.
Full developer responsibility for required generation, transmission, road and utility infrastructure.
Water-efficient cooling with publicly disclosed consumption estimates.
Independent assessments of noise, air quality and emissions.
Appropriate setbacks from homes and sensitive land uses.
Detailed emergency plans covering fire, fuel storage and power-system failures.
Clear estimates of permanent jobs, municipal taxes and local economic benefits.
Transparent ownership and identification of the laws governing stored information.
Strong privacy, cybersecurity, encryption and Canadian data-sovereignty protections.
Financial security for decommissioning, equipment removal and site reclamation.
Meaningful public consultation before the major decisions have already been made.
Communities should also receive lasting benefits beyond temporary construction work. These could include infrastructure contributions, local training programs, waste-heat recovery, community-benefit agreements or guaranteed long-term municipal revenue.
Canada needs data centres—but it needs the right ones
The answer to whether Canada needs data centres is yes.
Our economy, public services, communications and national security increasingly depend upon digital infrastructure. Canada cannot remain competitive—or fully protect its most sensitive information—if it depends entirely upon foreign-controlled computing systems.
But the answer to whether we need every proposed data centre is clearly no.
A project should not receive automatic approval simply because its developers promise billions of dollars or attach the words “artificial intelligence” to the application.
Alberta’s opportunity is not merely to provide inexpensive land and energy for foreign technology companies. It is to help build secure Canadian digital infrastructure that creates economic value here while keeping Canadians’ most sensitive personal, corporate and government information under meaningful Canadian protection.
The strongest projects will pay their own infrastructure costs, protect water supplies, control noise and emissions, respect neighbouring residents and provide measurable local benefits.
The weakest will consume enormous resources, create relatively few permanent jobs and leave communities carrying costs that were missing from the promotional announcements.
Public opposition should not automatically end the conversation. Nor should promises of investment silence legitimate public concerns.
Canada needs data centres. But we should build them deliberately, locate them responsibly and regulate them firmly.
If these facilities are to hold our digital future—and many of our most important secrets—the public has every right to insist that they serve Canada’s interests as well as those of the companies operating them.