Amazon Says It No Longer Uses NDAs With Government Agencies Amid Data Center Backlash

Amazon Web Services CEO Matt Garman said the company has stopped using nondisclosure agreements with government agencies in its dealings related to data center approval, a brief but notable admission buried within a longer blog post aimed at countering growing public suspicion of data centers and making the case that they benefit local communities. NDAs at the Center of the Backlash Nondisclosure agreements have become a significant flashpoint in the broader pushback against data center expansion. Environmental activist Erin Brockovich recently said transparency is the number one complaint she hears about these projects, describing a familiar pattern: developments announced only after permits are already secured, developers who don't respond to community inquiries, and local officials who sign NDAs before neighbors are even aware a project is being considered. That backlash has had real policy consequences. New York recently enacted a one-year moratorium on permits for large data centers, and according to Garman, more than 100 similar moratoriums are currently being considered across the United States. Garman warned that if these restrictions take hold broadly, the US risks undermining its competitive position in AI development, describing the potential consequences as lasting for generations and something the country can't afford. Addressing Four Common Criticisms In his post, Garman attempted to push back against what he characterized as four major misconceptions about data centers: excessive water consumption, rising electricity costs, significant pollution output, and a lack of community benefit. Water Usage Citing an Amazon report on its own water consumption, Garman said direct data center water use accounts for just 0.5% of total industrial water usage in the US, far less than industries like golf course maintenance or almond farming. Nvidia has made similar claims about its newer cooling systems, which it says largely eliminate water use within data centers themselves. However, these claims from both companies generally don't account for the broader water usage tied to electricity generation and semiconductor manufacturing. Independent scientists have noted that data centers' water and energy usage needs to be studied separately and more rigorously, since no federal or state requirements currently mandate how tech companies report this data. Electricity Rates On electricity costs, Garman argued that rates have only increased in some states with heavy data center concentration, while remaining flat or growing more slowly elsewhere. He attributed rising rates in affected areas primarily to aging electrical grids that weren't adequately invested in or expanded before data center demand arrived. That explanation conflicts with findings from an independent watchdog, which recently identified data centers as the primary driver behind a 76% year-over-year increase in electricity prices on one of the country's largest power grids. Pollution On pollution, an issue currently at the center of an NAACP lawsuit against Elon Musk's SpaceX/xAI over data center generators, Garman argued that critics often focus on the maximum pollution levels permitted under data center approvals, rather than actual emissions. He noted that one planned Amazon data center in Texas is permitted to emit up to 33 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, a figure higher than any other power plant in the country. Garman pushed back on using that maximum figure to characterize real-world impact, stating that data center generators are idle roughly 99.9% of the time, typically running only about 10 hours per year for required maintenance testing. Community Benefits Regarding community benefits, Garman pointed to Amazon's decision to discontinue NDA use with government agencies as evidence of improved transparency. He also noted that over the past three years, Amazon has contributed more than $1 billion to communities where the company maintains a significant data center presence. Will It Be Enough to Shift Public Opinion? Whether these changes will meaningfully reduce public skepticism remains uncertain. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has argued that broader AI backlash reflects a fundamental crisis of trust, rooted in public assumptions that governments and tech companies are constantly working against their interests. Writer Jasmine Sun made a similar observation, noting that when data center opponents are presented with industry arguments defending these projects, their typical response is simply disbelief.