The article cites "Sierra Club data," which apparently arises because at the Sierra Club, they seem to have discovered that dangerous natural gas is not clean energy.
As a default, our "but her emails" and "Joe Biden is too old" media refers to the Sierra Club as an "environmental organization." (They do the same for the ignorance promoters at Greenpeace.)
The Sierra Club was founded by John Muir to resist the industrialization of wilderness, specifically the damming of the Hetch Hetchy Valley, which is now underwater because of a dam that today provides so called "renewable energy" (and water to San Francisco).
John Muir lost his battle.
This is similar to the Republican Party which was founded in the mid 19th century to fight - or at least limit - the embrace and expansion of racism. Now the Republican Party functions effectively as an arm of the Ku Klux Klan; there are no forms of bigotry the Republican Party fails to embrace.
The membership of the modern day Sierra Club has never seen a wilderness it didn't want to convert into an industrial park for wind and solar energy, a failed reactionary scheme that has done nothing to address the extreme global heating now being observed.
On the other hand, the Sierra Club actively opposes the only form of immediately scalable energy with a low environmental impact, nuclear energy.
Two peas in a pod in my view, organizations that have abandoned their founding principles to embrace the opposite principles.
If the membership of the Sierra Club wants to understand why dangerous natural gas plants are being planned, rather than count how many there are being planned, the use of a mirror would help elucidate the matter.
The problem is not so much data centers, including those running this website, and the Sierra Club's websites. The problem is selective attention piled on top of ignorance.
= new reply since forum marked as read