GW late last month sold the Virginia Science and Technology Campus for $427 million to Amazon Data Services, which plans to use the land for a data or information technology center. University President Ellen Granberg’s statement to the community outlined GW’s rationale for selling the campus to strengthen the University’s fiscal health and noted that the funds will largely go toward advancing her Foundational Excellence Initiative, as well as providing a one-time bonus for faculty and staff. But the message did not mention who officials sold the land to, or for how much. While GW stresses the favorable terms of the agreement, I find the implications of such an exchange to be entirely unjustifiable for many reasons — most notably the harmful environmental impacts GW is helping advance, which officials failed to take accountability for when announcing the deal. 

A new data center in Virginia — often recognized as “the data center capital of the world” — will harm the environment and Loudoun County community members, contrasting efforts of many in the community to implement on-campus, eco-friendly policies for the student body and sponsor environmental research. Moreover, bargaining with the Amazon corporation in itself sets a bad precedent for GW, considering the multiple allegations of labor rights abuses workers have made against the company. 

In recent years, GW has significantly ramped up its on-campus sustainability initiatives and earned a STARS platinum rating — the highest sustainability rating granted by the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education. GW has helped community members implement a great deal of sustainability initiatives, like the Mount Vernon Campus vegetable garden, which provides fresh vegetables and herbs for the community through farm-friendly practices. The Reuse Market, as the name implies, recycles and mends worn materials to make lamps, rugs, fans, storage caddies, desk organizers and other dormitory items. The Loop circulates free used clothing, shoes and accessories, and as recently as 2026, GW launched a new reusable takeout containers program for food locales housed in the University Student Center. GW has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent in the past two decades, and the Alliance for a Sustainable Future continues to further research in eco-friendly innovations. GW seems to have fully immersed itself in sustainability practices as officials successfully reached their 2025 fossil fuels divestment goals. But their recent sale to Amazon contradicts current efforts. GW can’t claim it’s eco-friendly or mindful of the environment while actively contributing to data center development. 

Despite these impressive measures, the negative impacts selling land to Amazon for a data center will have on the environment and Loudoun County community goes against these efforts. These sites are known to use upward of five million gallons of water per day, straining necessary water resources in nearby townships. They are also known to drastically increase the presence of air pollutants, leading to higher rates of asthma, lung cancer and other health impacts that cost the general public millions of dollars. This impacts everyone in the country, not just Virginia residents. Residents across Northern Virginia — the location of the VSTC — have consistently protested against data centers being built near their homes, citing health concerns and noise pollution. Data centers jack up water and electricity bills for locals as well, due to their high demand for public utilities. 

Loudoun County residents will be directly impacted by GW’s decision. To simply ignore the concerns of local Loudoun County, whose leaders say they consistently engaged with the University until they stopped returning their calls, is a violation of what should be GW’s primary concern — to protect the welfare of all in its community. After all, the purpose of sustainability is to preserve a healthy environment for everyone. 

Of course, the United States should invest in data center development so as not to fall behind in the technological revolution. But there is an obvious need for restrictions in building data centers near residential communities without addressing the obvious health and monetary costs they pose to locals. The people who will be most affected by Amazon’s data center are our friends and neighbors, and GW cannot turn its back on them. The right to a clean environment for people should be protected by institutions and leaders at all costs, and the need for technological development should not supersede the health and safety of everyday Americans who were denied their rightful say in how their land should be used. 

Not only is the decision devastating for local communities, but dealing with the Amazon corporation — which employees allege has suppressed unionization attempts and maintained poor working conditions — is a morally questionable choice to begin with. None of these blatant violations of workers’ rights should go unnoticed, especially as GW workers — both hospital staff and graduate assistants — advance their own unionization efforts. If the University is to demonstrate its commitment to labor rights, companies like Amazon — which is currently facing antitrust lawsuits brought by the Federal Trade Commission for inflating prices, degrading product quality and stifling competition — should be excluded from doing business with GW. As students prepare to enter the workforce, GW should be setting an example for them in what they can and should expect from their future employers.

The Amazon corporation, being as large as it is, relies on the constant support of buyers and sellers who use the platform daily. I would imagine many GW students — whether through online purchase or shopping at Whole Foods — engage with Amazon and its products. While these everyday consumers should not be blamed for the decisions of Amazon’s board of directors, it does not excuse GW — a multi-million dollar institution — from working with Amazon against the goals of sustainability and humane labor rights. It is hard to imagine that this was GW’s only option for selling the land, considering the high retail value of the VSTC location. 

Moving forward, GW must prioritize the financial, environmental and moral future of the University and the student body above all else — most importantly in its actions, not just its words. GW is an institution whose students, faculty and staff care and depend on a just and sustainable future, and the University cannot hypocritically abandon these goals to gain financially from 21st-century robber barons.