Image:Human Revival
Residents in Pennsylvania’s coal towns are confronting a new wave of industrial pressure, this time from data centers that promise economic revival but risk repeating past environmental burdens on families already scarred by legacy pollution. As Big Tech eyes former mining lands for energy-hungry server farms, communities are pushing back—echoing decades of fights against unchecked corporate footprints—while federal and state actions on “forever chemicals” signal mixed signals on public safeguards.
Coal Towns Draw a Line Against Project Hazelnut
In Hazle Township, a packed supervisors’ meeting on June 8 turned into a stand for local control. About a hundred residents, many in “Project Hazelnut” yellow T-shirts, faced officials under a “We the People” banner. Inside Climate News captured the scene: developers seek a massive complex of 15 data center buildings and a substation on nearly 1,300 acres of coal-rich plateau. The board advanced a 180-day pause on new applications to update zoning and impose data center-specific restrictions.
These fights carry human weight. Data centers demand vast electricity and water, often straining infrastructure in regions still managing coal’s health legacy—respiratory issues, contaminated lands. Residents see echoes of past extraction industries that delivered short-term jobs alongside long-term costs to air, water, and community vitality. This resistance aligns with broader concerns over surveillance infrastructure and resource diversion away from human-centered priorities, favoring instead the digital sprawl that powers constant monitoring rather than revival.
EPA Shifts from Biden-Era PFAS Rules to Voluntary Guidance
Image: Hanwha Data Centers
At the federal level, the Trump administration moved to discard a Biden-era assessment on PFAS in sewage sludge fertilizer, viewed previously as a path to stricter rules. E&E News reported the EPA instead issued voluntary recommendations for wastewater operators, states, and the public.
EPA assistant administrator for water Jess Kramer stated in a release: “This draft guidance will provide Americans with commonsense recommendations that can protect public health, while also supporting wastewater systems and beneficial use of biosolids when appropriate.”
Critics of heavy regulation see this as pragmatic relief for farmers and systems burdened by prior mandates. Yet in MAHA terms, it underscores the need for food-first, toxin-minimizing approaches over patchwork federal oversight that often burdens the public while legacy chemicals persist in soil and water supplies.
North Carolina Allocates Funds for PFAS Research but Shields Results
North Carolina’s proposed budget sets aside $22 million for PFAS studies at the UNC-Chapel Hill Collaboratory, bypassing standard regulatory channels. NC Newsline detailed how the plan places staff under legislative control, exempting them from public records requests, drawing accusations of delay tactics on these persistent compounds linked to cancer and other harms.
PFAS—per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances—resist breakdown and accumulate, raising alarms for drinking water, farmland, and family exposure in a state with documented contamination history. Directing funds through legislative channels while limiting transparency fuels distrust, especially when communities demand open accountability on chemicals infiltrating daily life.
EU Pesticide Reassessment Reveals Brain Development Concerns
Across the Atlantic, new analysis challenges the safety profile of fluazinam, a PFAS-containing fungicide approved by the EU in 2008 for potatoes and apples. The Guardian reported that a 2005 Huntingdon Life Sciences study, originally finding no significant neurotoxic effects in rat offspring, produced different results upon re-examination. Campaigners now call for withdrawal.
The substance saw 340 tonnes sold in Germany in 2024 alone. This case exposes gaps in regulatory science relied upon for market approvals, where manufacturer-funded data influences decisions affecting food chains and developing brains. It reinforces the push for independent scrutiny and natural alternatives to synthetic pesticides that linger in ecosystems.
These stories converge on a central tension: industrial and chemical legacies continue shaping health outcomes, even as new tech projects and policy tweaks emerge. Pennsylvania locals invoking “We the People” against data centers signal a demand for zoning that prioritizes residents over corporate scale. Federal PFAS guidance, North Carolina’s confidential study, and EU pesticide questions all highlight ongoing struggles to manage persistent toxins without compromising transparency or public health.
Data centers in coal country risk amplifying energy demands and infrastructure strain in places already navigating recovery. Voluntary chemical guidance and shielded research fall short of the decisive action needed for true human revival—reducing exposures, restoring soil and water integrity, and reclaiming control from distant authorities and profit-driven expansion. Families deserve protections rooted in evidence, not convenience or confidentiality.
