AI Datacenters

Community research on the AI datacenter ecosystem — facilities, operators, capacity, power sources, water draw, suppliers, and energy deals. Add a facility you know about, verify what others submit.

Verified facilities

267

Capacity

57,283 MW

+43,910 MW planned

Top-3 operator share

44%

of tracked MW

Supplier links

148

96 companies

Anomalies that warrant review

descriptive flags · not editorial claims

Patterns warrant review, not accusations. These flags surface entries that deviate from peers or expose data gaps. They are descriptive, not editorial. Investigative judgments belong in published findings with sourcing and right of reply.

Permits granted unusually fast

Issued <14 days after application — verify regulatory process.

→ permit timing review

(awaiting Phase 6 seed)

Operators with 3+ ownership layers

Chain depth ≥3 — shell stacking signal.

→ ownership review

(awaiting Phase 6 seed)

Subsidies > $1M per claimed job

Disclosed subsidy ÷ claimed jobs exceeds $1M.

→ benefit-cost review

Facilities with no sources

Verified entries that lack any cited URL.

→ review provenance

No power source disclosed

No primary energy source recorded — can't assess emissions.

→ data gap

Stuck since announcement

Announced 5+ years ago, not yet operational, not cancelled.

→ verify status

Countries with high operator concentration

HHI ≥ 2500 — single operator dominates national MW.

→ market structure review

Operators ≥30pp behind clean-energy commitment

Public commitment vs. actual carbon-free MW share.

→ claim verification

Amazon Web Services
Meta
QTS Data Centers
Oracle
Vantage Data Centers

Single-supplier dependency (3+ categories)

One vendor serves 3+ functional categories at the same site.

→ supply concentration review

Greenwash gap

commitment vs. actual carbon-free MW

Operator	Commitment	By	Actual carbon-free	Gap	Status
Amazon Web Services	100%	2025	18.8%	+81.2pp	wide gap	src ↗
Meta	100%	2020	15.5%	+84.5pp	wide gap	src ↗
Microsoft	100%	2025	74%	+26pp	behind	src ↗
QTS Data Centers	100%	2025	5.1%	+94.9pp	wide gap	src ↗
Oracle	100%	2025	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Google	100%	2030	81.9%	+18.1pp	close	src ↗
TeraWulf	91%	2024	100%	-9pp	on track	src ↗
Switch	100%	2016	88.1%	+11.9pp	close	src ↗
Vantage Data Centers	100%	2030	25%	+75pp	wide gap	src ↗
YTL Corporation	100%	2050	100%	0pp	on track	src ↗
Aligned Data Centers	100%	2024	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Stack Infrastructure	100%	2030	11.8%	+88.2pp	wide gap	src ↗
Naver	100%	2040	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Data4	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
atNorth	100%	2020	100%	0pp	on track	src ↗
Digital Realty	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
SoftBank	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Verne	100%	2020	100%	0pp	on track	src ↗
OVHcloud	100%	2025	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Equinix	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
CyrusOne	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
NTT Global Data Centers	100%	2040	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Hydro66	100%	2015	100%	0pp	on track	src ↗
Telefónica Tech	100%	2030	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗
Scaleway	100%	2017	0%	+100pp	wide gap	src ↗

Gap = commitment % − actual carbon-free MW % (solar/wind/hydro/geothermal/nuclear). Public commitments per operator press; actual derived from facility power-source field. Operator press claims and sourced facility data — community findings flow can dispute either side.

Concentration & dependency

Operator concentration by country

click a row to see operators + HHI explained

Country	Operators	Top-3 %	HHI	Status
IL	1	100%	10000	highly concentrated
AU	4	100%	10000	highly concentrated
BE	1	100%	10000	highly concentrated
MX	4	100%	10000	highly concentrated
KR	3	100%	10000	highly concentrated
JP	7	100%	10000	highly concentrated
ES	3	100%	10000	highly concentrated
AE	3	100%	10000	highly concentrated
IN	6	100%	6450	highly concentrated
FR	8	97.5%	6255	highly concentrated
SA	3	100%	6165	highly concentrated
MY	3	100%	5918	highly concentrated