Clayco founder Bob Clark sees unprecedented demand for artificial intelligence infrastructure, but opposition in St. Charles and rising investment risks highlight the challenges facing the industry’s expansion.
ST. LOUIS, MO – October 17, 2026 (STL.News) Artificial intelligence is fueling one of the largest infrastructure construction booms in American history, and St. Louis native Bob Clark, the billionaire founder of construction giant Clayco, believes the extraordinary spending on data centers is far from over.
Clark, whose company has become a major builder of facilities supporting artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and other advanced technologies, dismisses concerns that the industry is experiencing a speculative investment bubble similar to the dot-com collapse of the early 2000s.
His confidence comes as technology companies commit enormous amounts of capital to computing infrastructure, creating unprecedented opportunities for construction firms, electrical contractors, equipment manufacturers and real estate developers.
However, the expansion is also sparking growing resistance from communities concerned about electricity use, water resources, environmental impacts, and the economic benefits developers promise.
These competing forces are especially relevant in the St. Louis metropolitan area, where significant public opposition led to the withdrawal of a proposed $1 billion data center in St. Charles.
The controversy illustrates a central question surrounding America’s artificial intelligence revolution: Can the country sustain its rapid investment in AI infrastructure while addressing the financial, environmental, and community concerns accompanying its expansion?
Bob Clark’s Rise From St. Louis to Billionaire
Clark founded Clayco in 1984 and grew it into one of the nation’s leading construction and real estate development organizations.
The company spent its first 29 years headquartered in St. Louis before relocating its headquarters to Chicago. Despite that move, Clark’s professional history remains closely connected to the St. Louis region.
Clayco’s earlier projects included corporate offices, commercial developments, and major construction assignments. Among its most recognizable accomplishments is Busch Stadium, home of the St. Louis Cardinals, which opened in 2006.
Clark’s involvement in data center construction dates back to the 1980s, long before artificial intelligence became a major driver of technology investment.
According to a September 30, 2026, Forbes profile by Christopher Helman, Clark’s estimated net worth has quadrupled over the past three years, reaching about $7 billion.
That estimate placed him among America’s wealthiest individuals and reflected the extraordinary growth in demand for specialized construction services.
Forbes reported that Clayco completed 16 data centers in 2025 and had another 77 projects underway across 13 states at the time of its reporting.
The publication also reported that data center construction was expected to account for approximately 75% of Clayco’s projected nearly $12 billion in revenue during 2026.
Those figures underscore how profoundly artificial intelligence has changed the construction industry’s economics.
Why Clayco Believes the AI Boom Will Continue
Clark’s confidence rests partly on the financial strength of the companies financing today’s largest data center developments.
Unlike many speculative internet businesses during the late 1990s, today’s major technology companies often generate substantial operating cash flow from established products and services.
Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and other technology companies already operate large cloud computing businesses that serve corporations, government agencies, educational institutions, and individual consumers.
Artificial intelligence has increased demand for computing capacity, prompting those companies to expand existing infrastructure and build entirely new facilities.
Building advanced AI data centers requires much more than purchasing computer chips.
Projects can involve extensive electrical infrastructure, high-capacity cooling systems, fiber-optic networks, backup power generation, specialized security systems, and sophisticated building designs.
These requirements create opportunities for construction firms with the engineering expertise and financial resources to manage unusually complex projects.
In the Forbes interview, Clark said he saw no warning signs of an imminent collapse in demand.
His position reflects a distinction between speculative investment in unproven companies and construction contracts backed by some of the world’s largest corporations.
Nevertheless, strong customers do not eliminate every risk.
Technology companies can reduce capital spending, postpone projects, or renegotiate expansion schedules if market conditions change. Contractors can also face rising costs, permitting delays, and labor shortages.
The financial strength of a customer may improve the probability of payment, but it does not guarantee that every proposed data center will be completed or operated profitably.
Clayco’s Data Center Business Reaches Across America
Clayco’s involvement extends beyond individual buildings.
Modern AI infrastructure increasingly involves enormous campuses containing multiple data center facilities, electrical substations, utility connections, cooling equipment, and supporting infrastructure.
Some projects require billions of dollars in investment.
The scale creates substantial demand for skilled construction workers, electricians, engineers, equipment suppliers, and specialized subcontractors.
Clayco’s mission-critical construction website highlights its experience delivering large-scale data center facilities and related infrastructure.
The company reports billions of dollars in mission-critical construction activity delivered or underway, illustrating the size of its involvement in this rapidly expanding market.
Its website also identifies Clayco as one of the country’s leading data center contractors.
These projects are increasingly important to regional economic development because construction activity can support substantial employment during the building phase.
However, the long-term economic benefits require closer examination.
A large data center can generate significant construction employment without necessarily creating a comparable number of permanent positions after completion.
Unlike a manufacturing plant with thousands of production workers, a highly automated data center may operate with a relatively limited permanent workforce.
That distinction matters when local governments evaluate proposed tax incentives, infrastructure commitments and land-use approvals.
St. Charles Data Center Proposal Exposes Local Resistance
One of the clearest examples of the obstacles facing data center developers occurred in St. Charles, Missouri.
A development team associated with Clayco’s real estate subsidiary, CRG, pursued plans for a major data center project near Elm Point Road and Highway 370.
The proposed development, known as Project Cumulus, was estimated to represent approximately $1 billion in investment and involve roughly 1.5 million square feet of facilities.
Supporters saw the proposal as a chance to attract significant private investment and strengthen the region’s position in the technology infrastructure industry.
Opponents questioned whether the project would provide sufficient long-term benefits to justify its potential effects on nearby neighborhoods, public infrastructure, and natural resources.
Transparency became another major concern.
Residents raised objections to the limited disclosure of information about the project’s intended customer and the development process.
In August 2025, the developer withdrew its conditional-use application before the St. Charles City Council voted on it.
CRG President Christopher McKee acknowledged the need for improved public outreach in a statement explaining the withdrawal.
The company indicated at the time that it wanted to incorporate community feedback into its planning.
The withdrawal did not, by itself, establish a permanent prohibition on future data center proposals.
However, St. Charles subsequently moved toward more restrictive land-use policies.
City planning documents prepared for February 2026 describe the earlier withdrawal, an August 2025 moratorium on new data center applications and a proposed zoning amendment that would prohibit data centers as a primary use within city limits.
Those official records demonstrate that opposition to the project developed into a broader municipal policy debate.
The outcome also shows that access to financing and strong construction demand do not automatically translate into approval for individual developments.
Clark Acknowledges the Data Center Trust Problem
Interestingly, Clark has publicly acknowledged that the industry faces significant challenges in gaining public confidence.
In an August 4, 2026, commentary on Clayco’s website, Clark addressed growing distrust in data center development.
He argued that communities deserve transparent information about proposed projects, including their economic benefits and environmental consequences.
Clark also recognized that developers have sometimes communicated poorly with residents and that certain projects have been proposed too close to established neighborhoods.
He acknowledged concerns about utility infrastructure, water resources, and the perception that developers made key development decisions before the public had a chance to participate.
His central argument was that the industry must improve how it communicates with communities rather than dismissing every objection as unreasonable.
The position is significant because it recognizes that public resistance can become a major obstacle even when developers believe their projects offer economic advantages.
For communities such as St. Charles, the debate extends beyond whether artificial intelligence is an important technology.
Residents also want to know whether a proposed facility will increase electricity costs, affect water supplies, create noise or change the character of surrounding neighborhoods.
Clark’s commentary suggests that future data center development may increasingly depend on addressing those questions before seeking formal government approvals.
Electricity Demand Is Becoming a National Challenge
One of the largest questions surrounding AI infrastructure is whether America’s electricity system can accommodate the industry’s expansion.
Artificial intelligence requires enormous computing capacity, especially when companies train sophisticated models or run applications that serve millions of users.
The facilities supporting those operations consume electricity continuously.
They also require cooling systems to prevent sensitive computing equipment from overheating.
A December 2024 report from the U.S. Department of Energy, based on research by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, documented the industry’s growing energy needs.
According to the report, American data centers consumed approximately 176 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023, representing about 4.4% of total U.S. electricity consumption.
The report projected that data center electricity consumption could reach between 325 and 580 terawatt-hours annually by 2028.
That would represent approximately 6.7% to 12% of total U.S. electricity consumption, depending on the growth scenario.
These figures are projections, not confirmed 2028 outcomes, but they show why utility companies and policymakers are examining the industry’s long-term impact.
The challenge involves more than producing additional electricity.
Utilities may need to expand transmission lines, upgrade substations, construct additional generation facilities, and strengthen local distribution networks.
Such investments can require years of planning and regulatory approval.
The financial implications are especially important.
When regulators build new infrastructure primarily to serve a large industrial customer, they must decide how to allocate the costs.
If those expenses are spread across a utility’s broader customer base, households and small businesses could potentially face higher bills.
If the data center operator pays the incremental costs, the financial consequences for other customers may be substantially different.
These questions make utility agreements and state regulatory oversight important elements of the data center approval process.
Is Artificial Intelligence Becoming an Investment Bubble?
The debate surrounding an AI investment bubble is more complicated than whether artificial intelligence will remain important.
Few serious assessments of the technology depend on the assumption that AI will disappear.
Instead, the financial debate concerns whether the enormous amount of money being invested today will generate enough revenue and profit to justify the spending.
The distinction matters.
A technology can fundamentally change an industry while investors still lose substantial amounts of money financing its development.
The internet provides a useful historical example.
Internet adoption kept expanding after the dot-com crash, but many companies that attracted significant investment in the late 1990s failed or suffered severe financial losses.
Clark argues that today’s circumstances are different because major AI infrastructure customers are financially established corporations.
That is a meaningful difference.
However, investors must also consider how quickly computing technology changes.
AI chips can become less competitive as newer processors deliver greater performance or efficiency.
Companies building large facilities must therefore assess whether expensive equipment will generate sufficient returns before technological advances reduce its economic value.
Another concern is utilization.
A data center may be financially attractive when customers consistently purchase its computing capacity.
If demand falls short of expectations, the facility could become less profitable even as it continues to consume substantial electricity and require ongoing maintenance.
Financing costs add another layer of uncertainty.
Projects costing billions of dollars to build can be sensitive to changes in interest rates, borrowing conditions, and investor confidence.
A Reuters report published October 15 described increasing scrutiny of AI data center financing as higher borrowing costs and market volatility complicated some transactions.
The report indicated that investors were becoming more selective, particularly when evaluating projects without established customers or dependable long-term contracts.
Those developments do not prove that an AI bubble exists.
They do, however, demonstrate that rapid infrastructure expansion carries financial risks even when the underlying technology has substantial commercial potential.
The Difference Between AI Demand and AI Profitability
A central issue for investors is the difference between demand for computing capacity and the ability to earn attractive returns from providing that capacity.
Businesses may purchase AI services because they believe the technology can improve productivity, automate routine operations, or create new products.
But those benefits must eventually translate into revenue, cost savings or measurable improvements in profitability.
Technology companies are investing heavily in AI infrastructure partly because they anticipate substantial future demand.
That expectation may prove correct.
However, spending ahead of demand creates financial exposure.
If AI adoption slows, companies could end up running more computing capacity than customers will pay for at profitable rates.
Competition could also affect returns.
As additional computing facilities enter the market, pricing pressure may increase, particularly if capacity expands faster than demand.
The same competitive forces that make AI services more affordable for consumers and businesses could reduce infrastructure operators’ profit margins.
Construction companies face a different financial equation.
A contractor such as Clayco may generate revenue from designing and constructing a facility even if the ultimate owner later struggles to achieve its expected investment returns.
That does not eliminate construction risk, but it shows why a builder can be more optimistic about near-term demand than an investor financing the property’s long-term operation.
For that reason, strong construction activity should not automatically be interpreted as proof that every AI infrastructure investment will be profitable.
What the AI Construction Boom Means for St. Louis
The St. Louis metropolitan area has several characteristics that could make it relevant to the broader expansion of digital infrastructure.
The region has an established construction industry, experienced engineering firms, transportation connections, and a workforce serving manufacturing, technology, and commercial development.
Clayco’s history shows that companies from St. Louis can compete for some of the country’s largest construction assignments.
The company’s growth may also create opportunities for regional subcontractors, suppliers and professional service firms, depending on where contracts are awarded and how projects are organized.
However, attracting large data center investments requires more than available land.
Developers must evaluate electricity availability, transmission capacity, telecommunications infrastructure, water requirements, zoning restrictions, and access to construction labor.
Local governments must also consider whether a proposed development is compatible with surrounding land uses.
The St. Charles controversy illustrates how those considerations can become politically contentious.
A project representing substantial private investment may still face opposition if residents believe they don’t fully understand its costs and risks.
For Missouri communities evaluating future proposals, the most important questions may involve the project’s specific characteristics rather than the general promise of artificial intelligence.
A development with dependable utility agreements, limited residential impacts, and clearly documented economic benefits could be received differently than one surrounded by uncertainty.
That makes early public disclosure and credible independent analysis increasingly valuable.
Quantum Computing Represents Another Major Opportunity
Clark’s ambitions extend beyond conventional AI data centers.
The Forbes profile also examined his involvement in Quantum Shore, a major quantum computing development planned for a former industrial property on Chicago’s South Side.
The project involves a large campus intended to support advanced computing research and commercial development.
Forbes reported that the first phase could involve approximately $12 billion in investment, including a substantial state-supported component.
Quantum computing differs from conventional computing because it uses quantum mechanical properties to process certain types of calculations.
Researchers believe sufficiently advanced quantum systems could eventually help solve specialized problems involving chemistry, materials science, optimization, and other fields.
However, commercial quantum computing remains an emerging industry, and the timetable for achieving broad practical advantages is uncertain.
Clark’s involvement matters because his company is positioning itself across multiple categories of advanced computing infrastructure.
Rather than depending exclusively on current AI data center demand, Clayco is participating in projects that could support future generations of computing technology.
That diversification may create additional opportunities, though emerging technologies also carry financial and execution risks.
Will AI Infrastructure Spending Continue Growing?
The future of AI infrastructure investment will likely depend on several interconnected factors.
Continued improvements in AI capabilities could encourage businesses and consumers to use more computing services.
Greater adoption could increase demand for cloud infrastructure, specialized processors, and additional data center capacity.
At the same time, improvements in computing efficiency could let companies perform certain tasks with less energy or fewer resources.
Whether those efficiency gains reduce overall infrastructure demand will depend partly on how much additional AI usage they stimulate.
Financial conditions will also matter.
Lower financing costs could make large construction projects more attractive, while higher interest rates or tighter credit conditions could delay investment.
Government policy will influence the industry’s direction through energy regulation, environmental requirements, tax incentives, and land-use decisions.
Community acceptance may become equally important.
Developers that successfully demonstrate the benefits of their projects while addressing legitimate concerns could gain an advantage over competitors that face prolonged opposition.
Ultimately, the industry may keep expanding even if not every proposed development succeeds.
Some projects could be delayed, redesigned, or canceled while others proceed.
That outcome would not necessarily represent a collapse of artificial intelligence.
Instead, it could reflect a maturing market in which investors, developers, and communities become more selective about which projects make economic sense.
The Bottom Line: Clark’s Confidence Faces a Real-World Test
Bob Clark’s conviction that artificial intelligence infrastructure will keep expanding reflects decades of construction experience and a company positioned to benefit from massive technology investments.
Clayco’s growth shows the AI boom is already driving substantial economic activity beyond Silicon Valley.
Construction firms, equipment manufacturers, electrical contractors, and other businesses are participating in an infrastructure expansion that could influence the American economy for years.
But the withdrawal of the St. Charles data center proposal shows that financial resources and technological ambition alone don’t guarantee success.
Developers must also secure public confidence, show that they can manage infrastructure demands, and demonstrate that their projects offer acceptable benefits to host communities.
Investors face a separate challenge: determining whether artificial intelligence revenues will eventually justify the capital required to support it.
Both sides of the debate have legitimate arguments.
Artificial intelligence may represent a durable technological transformation while individual companies and infrastructure projects remain vulnerable to overinvestment.
For St. Louis, the issue is especially relevant because one of the industry’s most prominent builders began his career in the region, while a major proposed development encountered significant local resistance.
Clark may ultimately be correct that the United States is still in the early stages of building the infrastructure necessary for an AI-driven economy.
Whether that expansion produces sustainable profits, affordable electricity, and lasting economic benefits for communities remains an open question.
The central challenge is no longer simply whether America can build enough data centers. It is whether those facilities can deliver financial and economic returns that justify their extraordinary cost.
Sources: Christopher Helman, Forbes, September 30, 2026; Clayco corporate website and Bob Clark’s August 4, 2026, commentary; City of St. Charles planning documents for February 9, 2026; U.S. Department of Energy and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2024 Report on U.S. Data Center Energy Use; Reuters, October 15, 2026. Figures attributed to Forbes are reported estimates, not independently audited financial results. The February city documents establish that a zoning prohibition was proposed, not that its final adoption has been verified.
Read Business News at STL.News
Featured articles:
