Billionaires trying to steal our water and pollute the air
In the flatlands north of Edmonton, Meta has staked $13 billion on a data centre that its backers call one of the largest private investments in Canadian history — a wager on Alberta's land, energy, and industrial legacy. The announcement arrives at a moment when the global race to build artificial intelligence infrastructure is pressing hard against the limits of power grids and water tables, forcing communities to weigh immediate economic gain against longer-term resource stewardship. What unfolds in Sturgeon County may become a template — or a cautionary tale — for how nations negotiate the true cost of the digital age.
- A $13 billion commitment from one of the world's most powerful technology companies has landed in a region already zoned for heavy industry, signalling that Alberta is positioning itself as a continental hub for AI infrastructure.
- The project is inseparable from a $4.6 billion natural gas power plant, meaning the data centre's appetite for electricity is reshaping Alberta's energy landscape before a single server rack is installed.
- Environmental advocates are sounding alarms — not just about this facility, but about a pattern they see emerging across Canada, where governments quietly absorb the resource costs of AI expansion while communities bear the consequences.
- Meta insists its cooling system will not draw from local aquifers, but critics note that promises made at announcement ceremonies are not the same as legislated protections, and the gap between the two is where trust erodes.
- Three hundred permanent jobs and $250 million in annual government revenue are real and tangible; what remains unresolved is whether the regulatory frameworks exist to hold a company of this scale accountable once construction is underway.
Meta is building a $13 billion data centre in Sturgeon County, just north of Edmonton — an investment Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Meta's data centre vice-president Gary Demasi described as among the largest private sector commitments in Canadian history. The facility will occupy land in Alberta's Industrial Heartland, a corridor zoned for heavy manufacturing for four decades.
The economic footprint is considerable: 3,000 construction jobs at peak, 300 permanent positions once operational, roughly $250 million in annual government revenue, and $60 million directed toward local roads and water infrastructure. A separately announced $4.6 billion natural gas power plant — backed by Pembina Pipeline, Kineticor, and Morgan Stanley infrastructure partners — will generate 970 megawatts to supply the facility, with a secondary effect of reducing Alberta electricity bills by approximately six percent on transmission costs.
The announcement has reopened a debate that follows large data centres wherever they are proposed. Meta says its cooling system is closed-loop and will not draw from local aquifers, limiting on-site water use to fire suppression and maintenance. But Greenpeace Canada's Keith Stewart called for a moratorium on mega data centres until governments establish legislated environmental and human rights protections tied to AI development. A local advocate who has fought a similar proposal near Olds raised a quieter concern: that communities are routinely kept in the dark until decisions are already made.
Smith pointed to the industrial designation of the site as a form of reassurance — land committed to heavy use for decades, originally planned for twelve refineries. Whether that framing satisfies those asking harder questions about water, power, and accountability will depend less on the announcement itself than on what happens after the groundbreaking.
Meta, the tech giant behind Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, is building a $13 billion data centre in Sturgeon County, just north of Edmonton. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Meta's vice-president of Data Centres, Gary Demasi, announced the project on Wednesday, framing it as one of the largest private sector investments in Canadian history. The facility will sit in Alberta's Industrial Heartland, a region zoned for heavy manufacturing for the past four decades.
The scale is substantial. During peak construction, the project will employ 3,000 workers. Once operational, it will sustain roughly 300 permanent jobs. The Alberta government projects the facility will generate approximately $250 million annually in royalties, taxes, levies, and fees. Meta is also committing $60 million to local infrastructure improvements—roads, water systems—to support the surrounding communities.
The project is tied to a broader energy play. A new $4.6 billion natural gas power plant, announced separately by Pembina Pipeline Corporation, Kineticor, and Morgan Stanley infrastructure partners, will generate 970 megawatts of electricity to feed the data centre. Smith highlighted a secondary benefit: Alberta ratepayers will see roughly a six-percent reduction in the transmission portion of their electricity bills as a result of this new generation capacity. The electricity will come from natural gas produced within Alberta itself.
But the announcement has surfaced familiar tensions. Data centres of this scale consume enormous amounts of power and water—enough electricity to run a small city, in some cases. Meta says its cooling system is closed-loop, meaning it won't draw water from the surrounding aquifer; on-site water use will be limited to domestic applications like fire suppression and equipment maintenance. Still, environmental advocates are skeptical. Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada, called for a moratorium on "megadata centres" until governments establish legislated protections for the environment and human rights in the context of artificial intelligence development. He characterized the pattern as billionaires seeking to "steal our water and pollute the air" while doubling electricity demand and eliminating jobs.
Bek MacIntosh, who has fought against a similar large data centre proposal near Olds, Alberta, raised a different concern: the unknown details and the tendency of governments to withhold information from their communities. When pressed on why Albertans should trust Meta, Smith pointed to the industrial zoning of the site. The area was designated for heavy industry decades ago, she noted, and was originally planned to host twelve refineries. A data centre, in that context, represents a different kind of industrial use for land already committed to that purpose.
The broader context matters. Artificial intelligence has sparked a global race to build data infrastructure. Canada has become a destination for these proposals, partly because of available land and electricity. But the environmental and resource costs are becoming harder to ignore. Communities near proposed sites are asking harder questions. Meta's $13 billion commitment to Alberta is real, and so are the jobs and tax revenue. What remains uncertain is whether the promises about environmental safeguards will hold up once construction begins.
Notable Quotes
One of the largest private sector investments in Canadian history— Alberta Premier Danielle Smith
Billionaires trying to steal our water and pollute the air so they can double our electricity while taking away our jobs— Keith Stewart, Greenpeace Canada
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does a data centre this size need so much electricity that it requires a brand-new power plant?
Data centres are essentially massive computing facilities. They run the servers that store and process all the data flowing through Meta's platforms—billions of photos, messages, videos. The servers generate heat, so they need constant cooling. That cooling, plus the computing itself, demands enormous amounts of power. A facility this size can consume as much electricity as a city of hundreds of thousands of people.
Meta says the water system is closed-loop. Does that actually solve the environmental concern?
It addresses one piece of it. If they're not drawing from the local aquifer, they're not depleting a shared resource. But closed-loop systems still require water to operate—they recycle it, but they need it. And there are other concerns: air quality from the power plant, the industrial footprint, the precedent it sets for more facilities like it.
The premier says this land was always meant for heavy industry. Is that a fair point?
It's a reasonable argument for siting. The land is zoned for it, and it's not as though they're building a data centre in a residential neighbourhood. But zoning for heavy industry doesn't automatically mean every heavy industrial project is wise. The question is whether the specific impacts of this facility—power demand, water use, air emissions—are acceptable to the people who live nearby, regardless of what the zoning says.
What does Greenpeace actually want to happen?
A moratorium. They want governments to pause approvals for mega data centres until there are real environmental and human rights laws in place—rules that protect water, air, and community interests before the projects are built, not after. Right now, they see companies making promises, but those promises aren't backed by legislation.
Is $13 billion a lot of money for Canada?
It's genuinely significant. It's one of the largest private investments the country has seen. That's real economic activity, real jobs. The question is whether the benefits are distributed fairly, and whether the costs—environmental and otherwise—are borne by the people who live there or spread across society.