Eh, they're an evil company and all that, but the force majeure seems like a non-issue:

Instead, the notice would allow the company to delay payments should the facility miss its 2028 target to come online.

It just means if the development misses the contractual deadline, they don't have to pay until it comes on line. Seems reasonable to be honest, why should you be held to your end of the contract if the other party doesn't meet theirs?

The real problem here is a combination of: the environmental and ecological impacts of the data center, the impacts on the local communities, the ethics (or lackthereof) of AI and lack of regulatory oversight, and the surveillance state that they're using it to build.

Focusing your critique on the force majeure just kind of misses the point