Data Center Watch: Stratos project edition
Massive complex on the banks of the Great Salt Lake sparks intense opposition
📸 Opening Shot 🎞️
🤖 Data Center Watch 👾
Yet another scene in the ongoing saga of the Big Data Center Buildup is playing out in Box Elder County, Utah, where the board of commissioners this week approved the proposed Stratos Project data center and energy generation complex, despite widespread and intense local opposition.
Enigmatic entities have forwarded so many proposals for ginormous new data centers in the West that I not only find myself overwhelmed, but I also suspect that many of them are just speculative pipe dreams that will never be built. Similarly, when I read about the inevitable backlash, I tend to think of it as an almost reflexive reaction — something folks have simply been conditioned to do when they hear the terms “AI,” “hyper scale,” and “data center” — that is not based in the actual effects these things will have.
This project — led by investor Kevin O’Leary of the tv-show Shark Tank — appears to be serious, as it comes with the backing of Utah’s Military Installation Development Authority, or MIDA, a state entity created to “further economic development across multiple jurisdictions.” Gov. Spencer Cox has said the state has an “obligation … to allow for these types of data centers to be built,” so it should slide through state permitting without a hitch.
Its potential impacts are not only real, but also scary: The project would ultimately cover about 40,000 acres just north of the Great Salt Lake, its on-site 9-gigawatt power plant would guzzle enormous amounts of natural gas and emit greenhouse gases, and the facility could even create its own extreme heat island. No wonder the pushback is so impassioned.
The scale of this thing is utterly mind-blowing, from its 62-square-mile footprint — equivalent to about 1,000 Walmart super centers — to the size of its gas-fired power plant. Nine gigawatts (or 9,000 megawatts) is enough to power multiple cities and millions of households; all of Utah’s coal, natural gas, and wind and solar facilities combined have a nameplate capacity of just 10.2 GW. While natural gas burns more cleanly than coal, it still emits significant levels of carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides, and Project Stratos could increase state’s greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 50%. Natural gas drilling, processing, and transportation bring their own environmental impacts and emit methane — a potent greenhouse gas — as well as other harmful pollutants. The facility would be served by the Ruby Pipeline, which carries gas extracted from Wyoming fields.
The natural gas component fits the pattern of the Big Data Center Buildup. Developers often say they are going to run their centers on solar, wind, geothermal, or even nuclear power. When it comes down to it, however, most of them end up relying on gas, at least initially. The developer of the proposed Prometheus Hyperscale data center along the Natrona-Converse county line in Wyoming initially touted all of the renewable energy opportunities in the area. Now they plan to run entirely on natural gas. Even the ones that do build or buy some solar or wind still tend to use gas-turbines or even diesel generators for backup.
Energy Transfer is looking to build a dedicated natural gas pipeline to serve the giant and controversial Project Jupiter complex in southern New Mexico, and the Bureau of Land Management just issued a right-of-way for the 400 million-cubic-feet-per-day project under its accelerated review process. The developers reacted to vigorous opposition by switching from the planned conventional gas turbines to solid oxide fuel cells. However, the cells are also fueled by natural gas — thus the pipeline —and do have emissions, albeit fewer than conventional turbines.
While many of the largest new data centers plan to build dedicated, on-site power generation, most of the planned facilities and those coming online now will get all or most of their electricity from the power grid. All of this new and projected new demand has utility executives salivating over the prospect of selling more product and raking in more profit. It has also spurred many utilities to cancel plans to shutter dirty coal plants or to make plans to build more natural gas facilities. So even if all of the proposed data centers aren’t realized, their mere possibility could lock in more fossil fuel burning and more pollution for years to come.
The Stratos Project’s potential water use is less clear, but certainly relevant given that it would draw from the same hydrologic system as the Great Salt Lake, which is shrinking. Data centers generate an enormous amount of heat, so they must be cooled, which can consume large quantities of water (and power). The developer says it plans to use a closed-loop cooling system, which must be filled once and so consumes relatively little water. These systems, however, remain relatively uncommon in these facilities. Natural gas turbines can also require large volumes of water for steam generation and cooling, though consumption levels depend on the type of turbine.
In March, the nearby Bar H Ranch proposed transferring its rights to 1,900 acre-feet annually of irrigation water diverted from the Salt Wells Springs Stream for industrial use at the Stratos Project, a.k.a. “Wonder Valley.” The application noted that the water “will be used primarily for power generation. A portion of the water will also be used in connection with a data center that will operate as a closed-loop system.” Thousands of people protested the application, based on its potential impacts on the lake and neighboring wells.
For context, 1,900 acre-feet (or 619 million gallons) would be enough to grow about 1,400 tons of alfalfa, or to irrigate some 500 acres of Utah alfalfa fields for a full growing season. That may not be enough water, however, to serve the natural gas power plant if it runs full-time. A combined cycle natural gas turbine uses about 200 gallons per MWhr of generation. If you assume a 60% capacity factor, then the 9 GW1 plant would produce about 130,000 MWhr per day, leading to an annual water use of about 9.5 billion gallons assuming it runs full-blast 24/7. This is in line with developers’ statements that they would eventually seek up to 13,000 acre-feet of water rights.
The firm withdrew the application this week, just two days after the protest period ended, saying it would submit a new application later (which would void all of the protests and force residents to re-submit their comments and pay the filing fee again)
“The people of Utah, especially those from Box Elder County, filed protests in record numbers because of their concerns about this project,” said Ben Abbott, BYU ecologist and executive director of Grow the Flow, a non-partisan organization dedicated to saving the Great Salt Lake. “For the developer to sidestep the public input process by withdrawing their application and resubmitting later is another breach of trust. I keep trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but this has all the hallmarks of an out-of-state mega-project with little to no concern for the local community.”
Meanwhile, O’Leary, the project’s pusher, is responding to the opposition by dangling the dim possibility of incorporating other power generation technologies into the mix, and by accusing the ranchers, doctors, and Utah citizens protesting the proposal of being paid, out-of-state agitators. As tired, worn-out, and false the claim is, it does provide an indication that the developers behind this project really don’t care about its potential impacts — or the land, people, or waters it may affect.
***
The Big Data Center Buildup is increasing demand for all sorts of energy, especially generation fueled by natural gas. This, along with increased liquefied natural gas exports, could drive up methane prices and finally pull the industry out of its 17-year-long slump — at least that’s what the industry is hoping for. And the Trump administration is doing its darndest to clear the way for more oil and gas drilling.
The BLM is currently seeking public input on its plan to sell a whopping 276 oil and gas leases on 357,337 acres in Wyoming. That’s a lot of land that could be targeted for drilling. The administration has leased public land, and issued drilling permits, at an almost unprecedented rate since taking office last January.
🌵 Public Lands 🌲 🏠 Random Real Estate Room 🤑
The effort to tackle the affordable housing crisis in Western amenities community has met up with the public lands, but not in the way you might think. Dozens of low-income housing advocacy groups have come together with environmental groups to form Shared Ground, a new coalition that aims not only to increase access to affordable housing, but also to protect public lands — while also opening the door to selling some of those lands if strict criteria are followed.
The mission of the coalition is summed up in a recent document, noting:
Protecting public lands and addressing housing affordability are not mutually exclusive but complementary priorities that, when aligned, allow us to strengthen communities and achieve durable, equitable outcomes.
The document criticizes Sen. Mike Lee’s push to sell public land to real estate developers, noting:
“… <such> proposals lack enforceable requirements to ensure that disposed lands would be used for affordable housing and instead risk enabling low-density sprawl and expensive residential development in places without the infrastructure to support growth … <and> will have little impact on local affordability issues, while enriching private developers and destroying wildlife habitat. Finally, once sold, public lands are removed from public ownership permanently, resulting in the loss of recreational access, ecological functions, cultural resources, and the long-term economic stability and benefits to public health these lands provide to surrounding communities.
Furthermore, the coalition acknowledges that the affordable housing crisis is “fundamentally a policy and investment challenge—not the result of a simple shortage of land.”
Nevertheless, Shared Ground does leave the door open to selling public land for housing, as long as it meets the following criteria (this is from the coalition’s statement):
Demonstrated Public Interest and Community Benefit: Any proposal for the use or disposal of public lands for housing must carry binding, legally enforceable requirements that the land primarily serves affordable housing rather than market-rate and never fuels speculative development. Benefits must flow primarily to local, existing communities—not private developers—and projects should be limited to parcels near existing infrastructure and services.
Careful Inventory and Prioritization: Any such proposal must also require careful
inventory of the public lands under consideration for use or disposal and prioritize already-developed sites over undeveloped land.
Conservation, Cultural, Recreational, and Tribal Safeguards: Public Lands with
significant conservation, wildlife, cultural, historic, Tribal, or recreational value must be excluded from any conveyance or development proposal. All proposals must include early, meaningful consultation with Tribal Nations, and transparent engagement with local communities, with clear public accountability throughout the process.
🌨️🦦🚣🏽 Predict the Peak! 🌊
While I’m fairly certain the streams all hit peak runoff back in April, I’m not calling the contest yet. April and early May storms and more “normal” temperatures have kept a bit more of the snowpack around than expected, and forecasted heat in coming days will probably melt off what remains pretty quickly, possibly leading to a surge in streamflows. But by the end of next week, I’m predicting all but the highest monitoring stations will be snow-free, meaning spring runoff pretty much will be done and gone.
📸 Parting Shot 🎞️
The figures for the size of the power plant vary from place to place. The developer’s “fact sheet” lists 9 GW of Utah power generation, while the water right application said it was for 7.5 GW. Rob Davies’ analysis of the heat output of the facility assumes that the data center’s load will be 9 GW, which would require a 16 GW power facility operating at 55% efficiency.
7 GW, 9 GW, whatever, these AI models and chips need to get a LOT more efficient. It's just too much!. I know horizontal drilling opened up a lot of reserves, but do we need to burn it all at once?
I like the look at huge heat release in a small area. That's something to think about with geothermal generation. Because the heat obtained by these advanced/enhanced geo systems is low quality, 400F or so, gross efficiency is 15% or 6 GW rejected to the air for every GW generated.
Also, it amuses/annoys me when, "Oh fine, we've got a few thousand acre feet here or there to evaporate in cooling towers " at the same time we're being told to spread gravel on every square inch around our towns to save every pint.
This is the clearest description of the box elder County data center I have read. I’m pleased, by the way, to see my son Ben quoted in your analysis.