Water wars between Georgia, Alabama, and Florida could see a resurgence with the numerous plans to construct more data centers in Georgia to accommodate companies profiting from the AI boom. The centers are known for draining both power and water to run and keep equipment cool. That poses infrastructure and resource concerns among opponents and officials.
Two hearing dates on the latest data center proposals are approaching. The proposal for the data center across from Barnsley Gardens on Barnsley Gardens Road in Adairsville will be considered by the Bartow County Planning and Zoning Board April 28 at 6 p.m.
The Stilesboro project is an 8.8 million-square-foot data center campus, according to plans filed by engineering services firm Kimbley-Horn. A zoning meeting has been set to discuss that project on May 19th at 6 p.m.
Georgia already has almost 160 data centers owned by leading global companies. Another 18 are in development or proposed, including three in Bartow County.
Those in Bartow County include a data center approved off Bates Road, a proposed data center across from Barnsley Gardens in Adairsville, and a third proposed project announced this week on Stilesboro farmland near Taylorsville.
Data centers are known for their high-use demand for power and water. Large load growth for electricity stem from data centers. One facility has an estimated electrical demand to exceed 1,400 MW.
Water poses a bigger concern because Georgia’s waterways is shared by neighboring states Florida and Alabama. A data center can use up to five million gallons of water a day for cooling equipment. That could supply water to thousands of properties including residences farms, and businesses.
Older facilities that aren’t as efficient as the newer centers can use up to 30 percent of total energy demand for an area. Newer centers are more efficient but make up for efficiency in their size as they are much larger. The Taff Road project in Stilesboro is projected to be an 8.6 million square-foot complex.
While local residents are concerned about how such energy and water use could affect their supply, the bigger picture is whether Alabama and Florida have concerns. Additionally, part of the question is whether concerns will result in ongoing legal cases over water.
Charles Miller, policy director with the Alabama River Alliance, said state governments share blame in the tri-state water wars. While he believes Georgia has done an adequate job in determining water use, Miller said Alabama hasn’t been as prepared for the future when it comes to industry and data centers.
A third data center is located near Bessemer, he said. Miller said there is little that can be done to resolve water disputes once they start.
“The only way you can solve a water dispute is with litigation. That isn’t an effect way to resolve these kinds of things,” Miller said.
Miller said the effects of data centers using so much water likely won’t be felt in Alabama until there is a drought. That is too late to make changes, he said.
He said a good plan for either state is to stop trying to provide water to everything wanting to build but to allocate water resources according to the highest and best use, similar to how land management works. That approach considers the cost, impact, and long-term benefits.
The water war history goes back to the 1990s with one of the latest bouts occurring in July 2007 during a drought affecting the southeastern United States. That was when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers states there would be an increase in water releases from Lake Allatoona amounting to approximately 200 cubic feet per second. Then-Alabama Gov. Bob Riley made the request because of the drought.
The water flowed into the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) river system to alleviate the drought in Alabama. Riley felt Alabama would disproportionately bear the burden of the drought otherwise.
Implications for Florida:
While the 2007 decision primarily affected the ACT river system, it’s essential to recognize the broader context of regional water disputes. Florida has historically expressed concerns over water flow reductions from Georgia, particularly regarding the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river basin. For instance, in 2008, Florida opposed proposals to store more water in Georgia reservoirs, arguing that decreased flows into the Apalachicola River could harm oyster populations and federally protected species.
Ongoing Tri-State Water Disputes:
The long-standing “Tri-State Water Wars” involving Georgia, Alabama, and Florida center on the allocation and management of shared water resources in the ACF and ACT river basins. Each state has distinct interests:
• Georgia seeks to secure water supplies for its growing population. The center of the debate was the growing needs of Atlanta and surrounding metropolitan areas.
• Alabama aims to ensure adequate water flow for power generation and other uses.
• Florida focuses on preserving ecosystems and fisheries dependent on water flows.
Legal battles have ensued over the years, with varying outcomes. For example, in 2023, a federal judge sided with Georgia in a dispute over water use from Lake Allatoona, impacting allocations to Alabama.
The 2007 decision to increase water releases from Lake Allatoona provided temporary relief to Alabama during a critical drought period. However, it also underscored the complexities of regional water management and the necessity for collaborative solutions among Georgia, Alabama, and Florida to address ongoing and future water resource challenges.