Signature dataset · 6 project records

“Closed loop” is not a complete water answer.

This dataset keeps cooling method, recirculation, evaporation, source water and measurement type separate. Sparse evidence remains sparse.

Schema: 0.1Last changed 3 November 2026Download JSON

A verdict applies only to the wording shown.

Company claims are shown as stated; they are not findings.

Project	Cooling architecture	Water source	What is quantified	Evidence state	Primary source
Microsoft QuincyQuincy, Washington	Evaporative cooling with a city-operated, closed-loop blowdown treatment and recirculation systemGovernment-documented operation	Recycled cooling water; canal water for make-up; about 5% potable groundwater make-up annuallyGovernment-documented mix	EPA estimate: 138M gal/year potable-water savings; 260M gal/year canal make-upEstimated savings + reported flow; not total consumption	Water & cooling · Microsoft Quincy Sources re-read on 12 September 2026 (software-assisted second check, not an outside audit) Supported as of EPA observations spanning operation from 2021, 2022 connection status and early-2023 context Said in US EPA case study · government record → Checked 12 September 2026 · Next check: Recheck current operating status against a later agency or utility record EPA documents an operating water-reuse system serving Microsoft's Quincy campus. What the evidence supports EPA documents operation beginning June 30, 2021 and describes a city-operated treatment and recirculation system serving Microsoft's campus. EPA estimates 138 million gallons per year of potable-water savings, reports about 260 million gallons per year of canal-water makeup and says potable groundwater supplies about 5% of annual makeup. These are different measures and are not additive total consumption or a current meter audit. Biggest limitation Current measured withdrawal, consumption and discharge; Still unknown Current measured withdrawal, consumption and discharge; a reconciled explanation of Microsoft's separate 380-million-gallon estimate; and operating changes after EPA's dated observations. Confidence: high — government case study · 1 source US EPA case study → Gov. record Open full claim → History (1) →	US EPA case studygovernment case study · published 2023
Microsoft Mount PleasantMount Pleasant, Wisconsin	Company says site will pilot closed-loop chip-level liquid cooling with no water evaporation for coolingCompany-announced design	Initial system fill; other site water uses not quantified in reviewed disclosureCompany design description	Microsoft identified a 2026 pilot; the same disclosure says new sites begin online in late 2027Milestones announced; no operating result verified	Water & cooling · Microsoft Mount Pleasant Company claim Said by Microsoft · company statement in Microsoft design disclosure · 9 December 2024 → Checked 16 September 2026 · Next check: Mount Pleasant pilot operating evidence or a site-specific water-use disclosure Microsoft says its Mount Pleasant pilot will use closed-loop chip-level cooling without evaporating water for cooling. What the evidence supports Microsoft says Mount Pleasant will pilot the closed-loop design in 2026 and says sites using the new design will begin coming online in late 2027. This is a design claim, not an operating measurement. Biggest limitation Operating configuration, initial-fill volume, other site water uses, and measured withdrawal, consumption,… Still unknown Operating configuration, initial-fill volume, other site water uses, and measured withdrawal, consumption, and discharge. Confidence: medium — company announcement · 1 source Microsoft design disclosure → Company Open full claim → History (1) →	Microsoft design disclosurecompany announcement · published 2024-12-09
Google The DallesThe Dalles, Oregon	Not established in the reviewed primary sourceNot verifiable	Site-specific cooling source not established; separate aquifer storage project transferred to cityCooling source not verifiable	Google says the city received 100M+ gallons/year of additional stored-water capacityCompany-reported community capacity; not data-center consumption	Water & cooling · Google The Dalles Company claim Said by Google · company statement in Google project announcement · 22 October 2025 → Checked 16 September 2026 · Next check: A utility, permit, or operating disclosure that separates data-center water use from the city aquifer project Google says The Dalles aquifer project added more than 100 million gallons a year of stored-water capacity for the community. What the evidence supports Google says it transferred the aquifer storage and recovery system and associated groundwater rights to the city, providing the community with more than 100 million additional gallons annually. The figure is not data-center consumption. Biggest limitation Site-specific cooling design, cooling-water source, and measured data-center withdrawal, consumption, and discharge. Confidence: medium — company announcement · 1 source Google project announcement → Company Open full claim → History (1) →	Google project announcementcompany announcement · published 2025-10-22
AWS New CarlisleSt. Joseph County, Indiana	AWS says the site uses outside air for cooling about 98% of the yearCompany operating/design claim; site is part of a multi-site cluster	Not disclosed in the reviewed sourceNot verifiable	Approximately 18M gal/year at full buildoutCompany projection; not permitted or measured consumption	Water & cooling · AWS New Carlisle Unknown A question DataCenterData examined; no one is quoted. Checked 11 September 2026 · Next check: no trigger recorded Source-water mix, permitted quantity, and current metered withdrawal/consumption at AWS New Carlisle. What the evidence supports The reviewed AWS-authored account does not establish source-water mix, a permit quantity, or current metered withdrawal/consumption. The 18-million-gallon figure is a company full-buildout projection tracked on claim:aws-new-carlisle:water. Biggest limitation Source water, permitted quantity, current metered withdrawal/consumption, and completion. Confidence: medium — AWS-authored opinion hosted by the South Bend Regional Chamber · 1 source AWS economic-development account → Chamber Open full claim →	AWS economic-development accountAWS-authored opinion hosted by the South Bend Regional Chamber · published 2026-07-09
Google Fort WayneFort Wayne, Indiana	Not disclosed in the reviewed utility orderNot verifiable	Not disclosed in the reviewed utility orderNot verifiable	No water metric in the reviewed order; it confirms the site was energized in November 2024Water quantity not verifiable	Water & cooling · Google Fort Wayne Unknown A question DataCenterData examined; no one is quoted. Checked 16 September 2026 · Next check: A water permit, utility disclosure, or site-specific cooling statement The reviewed utility order establishes Google Fort Wayne's cooling design and water use. What the evidence supports The order establishes that the site was energized in November 2024 and that Google had begun operation, but it does not establish cooling architecture or a water metric. Biggest limitation Cooling architecture, source water, and permitted or measured withdrawal, consumption, and discharge. Confidence: low — utility commission final order · 1 source Indiana IURC order 46276 → Gov. record Open full claim → History (1) →	Indiana IURC order 46276utility commission final order · published 2026-04-29
Meta JeffersonvilleJeffersonville, Indiana	Not established in the reviewed project announcementNot verifiable	Not established in the reviewed project announcementNot verifiable	No permitted or measured water quantity established in the reviewed sourceNot verifiable	Water & cooling · Meta Jeffersonville Unknown A question DataCenterData examined; no one is quoted. Checked 16 September 2026 · Next check: A water permit, utility disclosure, or site-specific cooling statement Meta's Jeffersonville announcement establishes the campus's cooling design and water use. What the evidence supports The announcement describes campus size, investment, jobs, renewable-energy support, and a LEED goal, but does not state cooling architecture or a water quantity. Biggest limitation Cooling architecture, source water, and permitted or measured withdrawal, consumption, and discharge. Confidence: low — company announcement · 1 source Meta project announcement → Company Open full claim → History (2) →	Meta project announcementcompany announcement · published 2024-01

This is a research sample, not a comprehensive inventory. Site-level cooling evidence is often absent from announcements and utility orders.

Field definitions

Cooling architecture

The heat-removal system we can support from the cited source: air-side economization, adiabatic/evaporative cooling, mechanical chilling, direct-to-chip liquid cooling or a combination.

Closed-loop

Always qualified. A server loop, facility water loop and municipal wastewater loop are different boundaries. A loop can recirculate and still require make-up water.

Water source

Potable groundwater, untreated surface water, reclaimed municipal water and recycled industrial water are recorded separately.

Quantity type

Permitted withdrawal, purchased volume, metered use, consumption, discharge, make-up flow and estimated savings are not interchangeable.

What to ask for, by nameAsk for three numbers “closed loop” does not provide: the permitted withdrawal, the metered purchase or use, and the source of make-up water.

Why Quincy is usefulEPA reports an operating circular system, four-to-five cooling cycles, evaporative losses, 260 million gallons of annual canal make-up, approximately 5% potable make-up and an estimated 138 million gallons of potable savings. One source supports several distinct fields without pretending they are total consumption.