David Plymyer’s recent guest commentary on the Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project (MPRP) asks us to accept an unsightly, unnecessary and unjust energy infrastructure project in the name of regional reliability. He characterizes rural Marylanders’ opposition as a knee-jerk aesthetic aversion to power lines, suggesting the damage to land and environment is “negligible.” That claim could not be more misleading.

The MPRP is not just about keeping the lights on. It’s about whether Marylanders must sacrifice our farms, forests and conserved lands to subsidize explosive, unregulated data center growth in Northern Virginia and the unchecked energy appetites of the artificial intelligence (AI) industry. This project would build massive 13-story transmission towers across Carroll, Frederick and Baltimore counties, cutting through working farms, forest ecosystems and conservation lands with irreversible impact.

Plymyer cites the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s (CBF) estimate that 514 acres of protected land would be affected, and suggests that’s a drop in the bucket — just 0.027% of all protected land in Maryland. But this “percent of total” framing obscures the reality: Those 514 acres are not marginal, undeveloped corners. They’re carefully chosen easements, forest reserves and parkland that are ecologically strategic and hard-won. Marylanders invested time, money and decades of advocacy to protect these lands, only to see them threatened by industrial infrastructure that serves largely out-of-state interests.

More importantly, the 514 acres are only part of the story.

CBF’s full analysis of the MPRP route shows that it would also destroy: 483 acres of Tier II high-quality watershed, vital for maintaining clean water and habitat integrity; 377 acres of forest cover, essential for sequestering carbon and moderating climate impacts; 125 acres of riparian buffers, which filter runoff and protect stream banks from erosion; and 47 acres of wetlands, crucial for biodiversity, flood prevention, and water quality.

Add to that the Maryland Farm Bureau’s estimate that more than 1,300 acres of farmland could be disrupted. These aren’t abstract numbers — they represent our local economy, food supply and legacy of agricultural stewardship.

Plymyer also argues that Marylanders benefit from data centers, so we should accept the infrastructure required to power them. But the data centers driving this demand aren’t located in Maryland — they’re largely in Northern Virginia. They benefit from lower taxes and looser regulations, yet Maryland communities are being asked to bear the cost in the form of transmission lines, land seizures and energy sprawl.

This is not energy justice. It’s corporate welfare — quietly rubber-stamped under the guise of regional planning.

Gov. Wes Moore has rightly said that Maryland should lead in AI innovation, but we can’t allow that ambition to steamroll our climate goals and rural communities. A truly forward-looking energy policy would invest in: distributed renewable energy, like community solar and on-site storage; strategic siting of data centers near existing substations and load centers; and efficiency improvements and demand management that reduce the need for new transmission in the first place.

It’s also worth addressing Plymyer’s dismissal of “strident” rural resistance. This is not NIMBYism. This is a well-informed, bipartisan movement of Marylanders who have long been stewards of this land—conserving forests, rotating crops, protecting watersheds. These citizens aren’t fighting progress; they’re demanding responsible progress that protects the public interest, not just private profit.

It’s deeply troubling that this project is being framed as a binary choice: Accept the MPRP or face blackouts.

That is a false dilemma. PJM and the Public Service Enterprise Group have not proven that this route — or even this project — is the only solution. Nor have they transparently explored alternatives that would minimize environmental and community impact.

That’s why it’s so critical that the Maryland Public Service Commission conduct a truly independent review of the MPRP — not just weighing reliability needs, but prioritizing climate resilience, farmland protection and fair distribution of burdens and benefits. Our regulatory system must serve people, not just markets.

Maryland has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to demonstrate how a state can modernize its energy infrastructure without undermining its climate and conservation goals. We cannot afford to be short-sighted.

To sacrifice farmland, forests and protected open space for the benefit of unaccountable tech giants and unchecked AI growth is not just bad policy — it’s a betrayal of the public trust.

Let’s build the grid of the future. But let’s do it in a way that doesn’t destroy the very resources we’re trying to preserve.

Karyn Strickler is an environmental advocate whose family farm in Westminster is in the path of the proposed Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project.