LIV Posted May 11, 2026 Reprinted call to action

Data Center Dance — the same old Hustle, or Pay It Forward?

The Hustle, a dance for Boomers, needs a big update. Major-party primary runoffs start May 18. LIV is backing Susanna Ledesma-Woody for Travis County Commissioner, Pct. 4 — a longtime Del Valle community volunteer — and then turning to help independents petition onto the November ballot. Tonight, the all-volunteer group is calling a working meeting.

8:00 PMPetition strategy for independent candidates
8:30 PMRachel Hanes (Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance) walks through her 62-page data-center report
“In 2023, the Texas Comptroller estimated this exemption would cost $130 million in FY 2025. Instead, it cost $1.016 billion — one of the most expensive subsidy programs for any industry in any state. Data-center subsidies are now predicted to cost Texas at least $9 billion 2025–2030, and at least $1.3–$1.75 billion annually. This projection is likely to be an underestimate.” GEAA Report, p. 23 · excerpt highlighted by LIV

LIV is all-volunteer; dues start at $10/year. “The door is open for all those weary of the same old hustle who prefer to pay it forward.” — Reprinted from LIV’s May 11 message, livtx.org.

Policy Brief · April 2026

The data-center buildout, and what it costs Texas.

A plain-language summary of the 62-page report from the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance on how AI and crypto-mining facilities are reshaping the state’s grid, water supply, public budgets, and the air around them.

By the numbers

Texas is now #2 in the U.S. for data centers — and growing fast.

The San Antonio–Austin corridor saw a four-fold increase in construction between 2023 and 2025 and is ranked first among global emerging markets. Over 400 facilities are operating across 25 Texas markets, with hyperscale AI campuses and crypto mines driving the next wave.

494,091ac-ft
Projected Texas data-center water use by 2030 — ~3% of total state water use.
70%
Forecast statewide electricity-demand increase by 2031, driven largely by data centers.
$9billion
Projected state tax-exemption cost 2025–2030 (not counting local abatements).
225
ERCOT large-load interconnection requests in 2025 alone — vs. 152 in the prior two years combined.
1,300
Additional U.S. premature deaths/year by 2030 from data-center air pollution.
100
Permanent jobs at OpenAI’s Stargate campus in Abilene — despite 1,500 construction workers.

The thesis

AI and data centers aren’t going away — but Texas’s regulatory framework was built for a slower, smaller-load industrial economy. Without guardrails on transparency, cost allocation, water and energy use, and local control, the buildout will raise costs for ordinary Texans, deplete water supplies, and harm public health — disproportionately in rural, unincorporated, and drought-stressed communities.

What’s at stake

Four pressures, one regulatory gap.

Energy

An overwhelmed grid

Data centers already use enough power to supply over half of Texas homes. ERCOT was designed to handle 40–50 interconnection requests; it received 225 in 2025.

  • 73% of 2025 requests were data centers, 10% crypto
  • Tech firms now building private gas plants on-site
  • Crypto alone costs Texans ~$1.8B/year in extra bills
💧
Water

A planning blind spot

Texas’s State Water Plan won’t reflect data-center use until at least 2032, worsening an already-projected 5M acre-feet shortfall by 2070. Two San Antonio facilities used 463M gallons during the 2023–24 drought.

  • 75–83% of demand is indirect — power generation
  • Wastewater can carry PFAS, biocides, heavy metals
  • Companies often request more than they need
🏭
Public health

Air, noise, heat

Fossil-fueled generation creates particulate matter and NO₂. Cooling systems and generators emit constant low-frequency noise. Data centers create local heat islands averaging +3.6°F, sometimes up to +16°F.

  • ~600,000 added asthma cases/year by 2030
  • $20B+ in annual U.S. public-health costs
  • Many facilities exceed 80 dB — EPA caps safe at 70
🏢
Public money

Tax cost vs. local benefit

The state’s data-center sales-tax exemption cost $1.016B in FY2025 — nearly 8× the original projection. Counties have no zoning authority, leaving rural areas exposed.

  • Often only tens of permanent jobs per facility
  • Rockdale crypto mine: promised 350, delivered 14
  • NDAs routinely shield project details from the public
Electricity is economic. Water is existential. — Texas Senate staffer, quoted in the GEAA report
Why the rules can’t keep up

The regulatory gaps.

The state has no mandatory reporting for water or energy use by data centers. Counties have no zoning authority. Cities can be stripped of jurisdiction through de-annexation. Non-disclosure agreements bar elected officials from telling constituents what’s coming.

No state water-use disclosure No state energy-use disclosure No county zoning authority No data-center water rate class No cumulative-impact review No public NDA limits No mandatory decommissioning bonds Cooling tech not regulated
The proposed fix

Two tracks of guardrails.

The GEAA report’s recommendations split into policies the state and locals should adopt — and technologies operators should adopt regardless of what the legislature does.

🏛 Regulatory

State, county, municipal & utility action
  • Mandate water & energy reporting to TWDB, PUC, and ERCOT — publicly accessible.
  • Create a new rate class for data centers, for both electricity and water.
  • Require upfront infrastructure investment; prohibit cost shifts to residential customers.
  • Include data-center demand in the State Water Plan now, not 2032.
  • Expand groundwater conservation district authority statewide.
  • Eliminate or sharply limit tax exemptions; tie any remaining to strict job and water/energy terms.
  • Ban new crypto mines or restrict their fossil-fuel generators and drought-stage operations.
  • Give counties land-use, moratorium, and noise-regulation authority.
  • Strictly limit NDAs with government bodies; require public hearings.
  • Cap noise pollution at EPA limits — 60 dB for long-term exposure.
  • Require renewables + batteries; phase out diesel backup.
  • Encourage community benefit agreements with metering, fines, and decommissioning bonds.

🧬 Technological

For operators, regardless of policy action
  • Liquid immersion cooling — up to 50% energy and 91% water savings vs. air cooling.
  • Rainwater harvesting on the large flat roofs typical of data centers.
  • Atmospheric water harvesting — pulls vapor from the air; works well in humid climates.
  • Recycled produced water from oilfields — Texas could have 168B gal/yr available.
  • Recycled municipal wastewater — already used by Amazon and Google in many facilities.
  • Brackish groundwater with desalination — 31 production zones designated in Texas.
  • On-site solar plus battery storage — quickest to deploy, lowest water use.
  • Brownfield & abandoned-site reuse — existing infrastructure, easier permitting.
  • Underground siting where geology allows (not karst regions like the Edwards Aquifer).
  • Treat discharge to drinking-water quality before release to local systems.
Where things stand

What Texas has already done.

SB 1929 · 2023
Requires bitcoin miners >75 MW to register with the PUC — filings have not been made public.
SB 6 · 2025
Shifts grid-connection costs to large loads, requires backup-generation disclosure, and adds curtailment protocols. Rulemaking ongoing.
FY 2026 budget
Directs PUC and TWDB to survey data centers and crypto mines on water use — voluntary, and only for operating facilities.
90th Legislature · 2027
Both chambers have pledged interim studies on electricity, water, transmission, tax incentives, and ratepayer protections.
Source   “Data Centers in Texas: A Review and Call for Innovation and Regulation”
Rachel Hanes, Policy Director, Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance — April 2026 (62 pp.)
Case in point

What this looks like east of Austin.

The clearest test of the report’s warnings is happening about 25 miles east of downtown, in a stretch of unincorporated Bastrop County around Cedar Creek. Hyperscalers are buying land, a 1,170 MW gas peaker plant is seeking school-district tax breaks, and county commissioners — without zoning authority — have already urged TCEQ to approve the air permits. Three concurrent projects, on or next to the same site, mirror nearly every concern flagged in the GEAA report.

Bastrop County · Cedar Creek
The Cedar Creek cluster
A 1,170 MW gas peaker sited beside ~1,500 acres of planned hyperscale data centers
Active · May 2026
Amazon (AWS)1,229 acres
EdgeConneX117 + 180 ac
MPH Peakers (gas)1,170 MW
Existing gas plant598 MW
EdgeConneX plan$1.4B / 2.8M sqft
Peaker cost · jobs$371M / 7 perm

How it matches the report

  • Fossil-fuel pivot, driven by data centers. Gas generation passed wind in the Texas grid’s interconnection queue for the first time since January 2016, largely because hyperscalers want firm, dispatchable power. The Cedar Creek peaker is the local version of that statewide shift.
  • Tax incentives for an industry that doesn’t need them. Hull Street Energy is seeking JETI abatements from Bastrop ISD — the Chapter 313 successor the GEAA report calls on the legislature to eliminate or sharply pare back. Amazon-scale buyers, meanwhile, are routinely eligible for the state’s broader data-center sales-tax exemption.
  • Few permanent jobs for major capital. The peaker will create 7 permanent positions on a $371M investment; data-center campuses typically generate low-three-digit permanent headcounts even at $1B+ scale. The “lowest jobs-per-square-foot of any major industry” pattern flagged in the report.
  • Counties can’t zone. Bastrop County commissioners’ only formal move was a non-binding resolution urging TCEQ to grant the air permits — precisely the limit on county authority the report identifies as a legislative gap.
  • Land assembled through shell entities, with NDAs and “due diligence” labels. Amazon’s 1,229-acre buy was assembled across dozens of parcels by “Amazon Data Services Inc.” on land previously slated for the Creekside master-planned community; the company has labeled the purchase as “due diligence.” The transparency gap the report describes, in miniature.
  • Cumulative impacts no one is modeling. Three adjacent projects pulling power and (eventually) cooling water at the same time — the kind of cumulative load that doesn’t appear in the State Water Plan and isn’t reflected in ERCOT’s historical demand forecasts.
Bastrop County · FM 1209
The supply-chain file: SpaceX
A 1.1 M-sqft solar-cell factory pitched explicitly to power orbital AI data centers
Active · May 2026
New solar-cell factory1.1M sqft
Existing Starlink plant550K sqft
Combined buildout~1.6M sqft
Musk acreage in county~700 acres
May 26 hearing$3.8M sales-tax refund
Terafab (Grimes Co.)up to $119B

What it adds to the report’s themes

  • Orbital data centers go from rhetoric to construction line item. The GEAA report quotes AI leaders worrying that “data centers will eventually require more energy and land than are available on Earth.” SpaceX is now building the solar-manufacturing capacity specifically to put compute in low-Earth orbit — the first concrete supply-chain commitment to that thesis.
  • Chip fabs are part of the water story too. The report notes that semiconductor manufacturing for data centers is expected to double its water demand industry-wide by 2035. Musk’s proposed Terafab, separately under consideration in Grimes County at $55–$119B, is exactly the supply-chain facility that compounds the load on Texas aquifers and the grid.
  • Another flavor of tax incentive. Beyond JETI school-district abatements and the state data-center sales-tax exemption, SpaceX is seeking a “triple jumbo” enterprise-zone designation worth up to $3.8M in state sales-tax refunds. Bastrop ISD, the county, and the state are stacking incentives on adjacent facilities — against the same revenue base.
  • Transparency below even the NDA floor. Key project details surface through a director of solar production’s social-media posts and public-records requests, not formal disclosures. Officials confirm filings only when asked. The report flags NDAs; this is a step beyond.
  • A cumulative environmental record already on file. SpaceX has racked up TCEQ fines over water and wastewater impacts to the Colorado River, and a separate “aluminum melting and holding” air permit is pending at the same address — precisely the kind of cumulative-permit pressure the report says no Texas agency currently models.

Wider Austin-area context

The Austin Business Journal has identified more than 30 data-center projects in the greater Austin area in recent years, with a combined $50 billion+ in capital investment — likely an undercount, since corporate buyers regularly use shell entities and label early-stage acquisitions as “due diligence.” Bastrop County is the current epicenter, but Hays, Williamson, and Travis counties are seeing similar pressure. Add the supply-chain footprint — solar-cell fabs, chip plants — and the local resource calculus shifts further.

Sources   Austin Business Journal · May 2026: Amazon Bastrop land purchase (1,229 ac, confirmed May 13); Hull Street Energy / MPH Bastrop Peakers JETI application (filed May 14); EdgeConneX Cedar Creek campus; SpaceX solar-cell factory & enterprise-zone application; Terafab proposal (Grimes County).
Methodology: This page condenses a 62-page policy report published by the Greater Edwards Aquifer Alliance (GEAA), a nonprofit serving 21 Central Texas counties. Statistics, projections, and recommendations are summarized from that report and its cited sources, including ERCOT, the Texas Comptroller, the U.S. Department of Energy, the Texas Water Development Board, and academic and trade publications. AustinMayor.com is an independent civic-reference site and is not affiliated with GEAA. Framing is descriptive; this page takes no position on whether recommendations should be enacted.