Rep. Frank Pallone, the ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter to Elon Musk demanding answers about the environmental fallout from xAI’s massive data centers in Tennessee and Mississippi. The facilities have been running dozens of natural gas turbines without the federal clean-air permits that are typically required for operations of this scale.

At least 59 natural gas turbines have been installed for the Colossus 2 project alone, and their potential emissions reportedly exceed the thresholds that would normally trigger mandatory permitting. The turbines have allegedly been operating in this unpermitted state since at least 2025.

What Pallone wants

The letter, dated July 28-29, lays out a sweeping set of demands. Pallone is asking for detailed emissions data, permitting records, and analyses of the facilities’ power and water consumption. He’s also requesting arrangements for site visits so committee staff can assess the impacts directly.

This isn’t Pallone’s first attempt to get information. The inquiry follows previous committee meetings where xAI apparently provided what Pallone’s office considered insufficient responses.

The Colossus facilities, which represent xAI’s push to scale up AI training capabilities, sit near communities that were already dealing with serious environmental burdens before the data centers arrived. Colossus 1 and Colossus 2 are located near South Memphis’s Boxtown neighborhood and in parts of Mississippi, areas with historically elevated pollution rates and higher-than-average cancer cases.

Environmental justice at the center

Local opposition has been building for months. Tennessee state Rep. Justin Pearson has been a vocal critic, and the NAACP along with several environmental organizations have backed the push for accountability. Their core argument is straightforward: you don’t get to skip the permitting process just because you’re building something for artificial intelligence instead of, say, a petrochemical plant.

Pallone’s inquiry explicitly connects these dots, framing the situation not just as a permitting technicality but as a public health concern for vulnerable populations. The congressional scrutiny also builds on a broader national conversation about the enormous energy demands of AI infrastructure and who bears the cost of that consumption.