By Miranda Gardiner, The iMasons Climate Accord
This chapter is an excerpt from Greener Data: Volume Three, launched on Earth Day 2026. Featuring perspectives from 75+ sustainability leaders across the digital infrastructure ecosystem, the full book is available now on Amazon.
Five years ago, my climate conversations were framed around preventing a 2°C future. That threshold felt both urgent and with sufficient distance in the future to negotiate tactics, budgets, technologies, and other actions to ensure we stayed below it.
Today, that number has dropped to 1.5 degrees. The science is clearer, the timeline shorter, the future much closer, and the stakes far more personal. In short, we’re going the wrong way.
Climate change is no longer an abstract environmental concern; it is a public health emergency, an infrastructure risk, a national security issue, and a profound test of justice. A peer-reviewed 2021 study in Nature Communications estimates that 267 million people live on land less than 2 meters (approximately 6.6 feet) above sea level, primarily in coastal tropical regions.1 This means more of our global population live in areas extremely vulnerable to rising waters. Additionally, fires burn longer, storms travel farther inland, and drought conditions are intensified. The built environment, and the digital infrastructure embedded within it, sits at the center of this transformation of our natural environment.
I have spent my career in sustainability, and recently have come to a conviction: sustainability professionals and data center operators ultimately share the same driver to make people’s lives better. Data centers power healthcare systems, emergency response networks, education platforms, financial services, and the artificial intelligence reshaping productivity and discovery. On the “other” side, sustainability seeks to preserve the ecological systems that make human life possible. One advances our society; the other safeguards our foundation and existence. They are not opposites. They are interdependent. Yet today, they often feel at odds.
In January 2025, this tension became visceral for me. I was in a virtual meeting with then CEO of iMasons, Santiago Suinaga, when my family asked me to look outside at the smoke filling the blue sky over the Santa Monica Hills. It was the first day of fires that would ultimately burn tens of thousands of acres across Southern California and destroy more than 16,000 structures. It was the beginning of the Palisades Fire that, alone, scorched more than 23,000 acres before it was extinguished in February. As ash drifted across my neighborhood, as the smell crept into our home and our clothes, as the blue skies became black and bright red, I felt a collision in real time. Inside, a conversation about exponential digital growth. Outside, the accelerating reality of a destabilizing climate.
My defining conflict of our era. Between growth and planetary limits. Between innovation and responsibility. Between the speed of demand and the pace of decarbonization.
Fast forward to this January 2026, I experienced a different kind of conflict. I was in Dallas for a conference when colleagues realized the George W. Bush Presidential Center was across the street so we decided to buy a ticket and take a visit. I did not always agree with the policies of the president and, honestly, I cannot even recall if I voted in that election. Walking through the exhibits was unexpectedly moving. There were displays honoring service, leadership, and stewardship. Initiatives like education reform and global health efforts were chronicled alongside the response to 9/11. Portraits of veterans painted by President Bush himself reflected a personal commitment to devotion of sacrifice for country. Ocean conservation that designated more than 195,000 square miles of the Pacific Ocean as marine national monuments — more than any other U.S. president in history. What struck me was not partisan alignment, but the gravity of the responsibility carried by those entrusted with leadership. A reminder that decisions made ripple across generations.
I was reminded of a close friend who passed away several years ago. She was a devoted Christian, while my own spiritual path is different. We disagreed on theology but shared an unwavering belief in sustainability and the possibility of a brighter future. Our friendship required holding tension without abandoning respect. It required acknowledging that we could disagree deeply and still move forward in the service of something larger than ourselves. We had faith that together, we were better and that together, we were capable of greatness.
Why do, or could, these stories matter in a discussion about green data centers? Because conflict, when navigated with integrity, sharpens conviction. It forces clarity. It compels us to reconcile values rather than retreat into silos. It reminded me that even when I disagree on politics or religion, that I can find middle ground — or even paths to success, thanks to shared values and respect. And right now, one of the deepest conflicts in my professional life is how we sustain our current way of life while building a sustainable future.
The data center industry stands at the epicenter of this dilemma. Between 2026 and 2030, nearly 100 gigawatts of new data center capacity are projected to be added globally, potentially bringing total capacity close to 200 gigawatts. More than $3 trillion may be invested in data center infrastructure by 2030, with AI-specific investments projected even higher.2 AI workloads, which represented roughly a quarter of data center computing in 2025, continue to accelerate demand for power and space.3 U.S. data center electricity demand alone is forecast to triple by 2030.4 This expansion is not hypothetical; it is underway.
At the same time, global companies are committing to net-zero targets. Regulatory frameworks are tightening. Supply chains are under both strain and scrutiny. Communities are demanding transparency about water use, grid impacts, noise, land consumption and much more. We are building more in the next 3 years than we have in the past 30 years, so can we build fast and sustainably? The tension is unmistakable: growth and decarbonization appear to be on a collision course.
But collision doesn’t have to mean catastrophe. It can mean transformation.
One contentious arena today is greenhouse gas accounting. If we take our industry as the example, colocation providers, hyperscalers, equipment owners, and end users share infrastructure, yet emissions frameworks do not always clearly allocate responsibility. Scope 2 versus Scope 3 (indirect emissions from purchased energy versus all other indirect emissions) debates can dominate entire strategy sessions. Categories 8 and 13 (upstream versus downstream leased assets) are parsed line by line in meetings and reports. We debate interpretations of disclosure guidance, target-setting criteria, third party verification and reporting mechanisms, and various certification programs. Meanwhile, the atmosphere accumulates carbon regardless of how elegantly we categorize it.
Yes, accurate accounting is essential. It, alongside transparency, builds trust. But accounting is not the end goal. Emissions reduction is and that requires compromise. It demands it.
We must resist the paralysis of perfectionism. In sustainability reporting, we often debate what is necessary versus what is sufficient. Perfect Scope 3 data may remain elusive for years. That cannot justify inaction. High-quality estimates transparently disclosed are preferable to silence. Directional correctness, paired with continuous improvement, builds momentum. Waiting for flawless data in a rapidly warming world is itself a decision. A stalemate. A bottleneck. Perhaps not a decision at all but avoidance because we know the hard work has barely begun.
Energy. The topic du jour. As grids decarbonize, embodied carbon in servers, cooling equipment, structural materials, and cabling becomes increasingly material. Frequent hardware refresh cycles drive upstream mining, manufacturing, and transport emissions. The extraction of critical minerals carries both environmental and social consequences. Extending hardware lifespans, demanding Environmental Product Declarations, and integrating carbon metrics into IT procurement are emerging necessities. Longevity can be seen as a barrier to innovation but may also be one of our most powerful climate strategies.
Conflict arises because alignment and discipline of writing climate commitments into binding agreements is an act of accountability. It transforms aspiration into obligation.
Currently, the digital economy rewards speed. Developers operate on compressed timelines to meet demand. It’s a good thing sustainability professionals are up for the challenge, armed and ready with sustainability strategies to match that velocity with carbon metrics to inform site selection from day one. Modular low-carbon design templates ready before ground is broken. Reporting frameworks standardized before leases are signed.
Don’t leave us on the bench. Put us in coach, we’re ready to play.
Add all of this on top of the physical and community constraints. Aging utility infrastructure struggles to accommodate new loads and interconnection queues stretch years into the future, especially in our largest markets. Skilled labor shortages increase construction costs. These challenges stem from systems designed for a different era. Systems that need both digital infrastructure and climate change to share the data on reshaping hydrology, changing heat profiles, and updated risk maps to make informed decisions with profound social implications.
Trust is not built through technical excellence alone; it is built through relationships. Our neighbors are no longer passive hosts. They expect transparency, partnership, and tangible benefits. Public reporting of water and energy use, workforce development programs, and alignment with local grid decarbonization efforts are essential to maintaining social license to operate.
If sustainability and digital infrastructure share the same ultimate purpose in improving human lives, then the path forward demands innovation and compromise. Compromise may mean higher upfront capital expenditures and investment in, say, low-carbon materials. It may mean slower deployment in grid-constrained regions. It may mean extending hardware refresh cycles even when marketing departments prefer novelty. It may mean disclosing data that reveals imperfection.
Accountability without sacrifice is just branding. Growth without accountability is merely extraction. We owe it to ourselves, our industry, and our planet to innovate, and that requires us to also falter along the way. We owe it to ourselves to compromise and change direction, and be better, together.
We are living in an era of consumption that has outpaced the planet’s regenerative capacity. This is not isolated to one industry or one nation; it is global. The data center sector is not uniquely culpable, but it is uniquely influential. We are the most innovative and influential industry. We power the analytics that model climate risk, the AI systems optimizing energy grids, and the research accelerating medical breakthroughs. We can either exacerbate extraction or enable efficiency at unprecedented scale. That duality is not hypocrisy; it is responsibility.
Leadership in this transformative era requires courage, as our opening keynote, Michael Paranal, of the 2025 iMasons Climate Accord Summit reminded us. Courage to standardize when fragmentation feels safer. Courage to embed climate clauses into binding contracts. Courage to extend asset life when investors celebrate rapid turnover. Courage to admit uncertainty while still moving forward. Inclusive leadership will matter profoundly, as diverse perspectives strengthen problem-solving and credibility. Transformation is cultural as much as technical. It is courage.
Conflict, when embraced constructively, drives innovation. It forces us to interrogate our assumptions, refine models, and build stronger coalitions. The future of green data centers will not be determined solely by who is technically right in an accounting debate. It will be determined by who earns trust through transparency, consistency, and demonstrable emissions reductions.
The industry that powers the digital age now can power the climate transition. We redesigned buildings to reduce viral transmission during a pandemic. We deployed infrastructure at extraordinary speed to meet surging demand, showcasing our ability of systemic change. The question is whether we are willing to hold each other accountable to do it again. Across contracts, supply chains, boardrooms, and communities in alignment for growth within planetary boundaries. In short, to save the world.
The timeline has shortened. The opportunity remains immense. If we accept that conflict is not a threat but a catalyst, and that compromise is not loss but investment in shared stability, then we can reconcile growth with stewardship.
But conflict untethered from accountability breeds division. Sustainability professionals and data center leaders do not stand on opposite sides of history. We stand at the same crossroads where we can decide to move forward to be better. Not in isolation, not in abstraction, but together.
RESOURCES
1. Hooijer, A., and R. Vernimmen. “Global LiDAR Land Elevation Data Reveal Greatest Sea-Level Rise Vulnerability in the Tropics.” Nature Communications, vol. 12, 2021, article 3592. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8242013/.
2. JLL. “Global Data Center Outlook.” https://www.jll.com/en-us/insights/market-outlook/data-center-outlook
3. “The Cost of Compute: A $7 Trillion Race to Scale Data Centers.” McKinsey & Company, https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-telecommunications/our-insights/the-cost-of-compute-a-7-trillion-dollar-race-to-scale-data-centers4. International Energy Agency. “Energy Demand from AI.” Energy and AI, International Energy Agency, https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-and-ai/energy-demand-from-ai
Author: Courtney Burrows
Courtney Burrows is the Executive Editor of Greener Data and Executive Vice President of Marketing and Sustainability at JSA, where she leads content strategy across PR, marketing, and media initiatives for the global digital infrastructure industry. With more than 20 years of experience — and over a decade dedicated to data centers — she curates expert insights focused on data center sustainability, innovation, and the evolving demands of an AI-driven world.
