Texas

Name: Texas data centers
Creator: Datacenter Source
License: https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1-0/

Datacenter Source tracks 195 data centers in Texas, including 14 AI campuses. Facilities that disclose power add up to 1.82 GW online and 8.14 GW in the pipeline. These are floors, not market size: 12% of facilities have a power figure. Largest operators by tracked MW: Oracle, Vantage Data Centers and Meta. 12.49 GW has been announced; 1.82 GW is documented as operational.

Get changes to Texas

Or subscribe in a feed reader: RSS / Atom

Cite this

Text

Datacenter Source. “Texas data centers.” /states/TX. Data as of 2026-10-12. Accessed 2026-10-12.

BibTeX

@misc{datacentersource_state_TX_2026,
  title = {{Texas data centers}},
  author = {{Datacenter Source}},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{/states/TX}},
  note = {Data as of 2026-10-12; accessed 2026-10-12. Compiled from cited sources, including OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) and Epoch AI (CC BY 4.0)},
}

Please also cite the original source of any specific figure (linked beside it).

What changed View on map →

Texas facilities:Download CSV JSON API docs

Floors, not market size. MW totals only add up facilities that disclose a figure (12% of 195 here); most sites don't, so the real totals are higher. “—” means not disclosed or not yet collected, never zero. CoverageData as of Oct 12, 2026

Facilities

195

21 campuses

Power online (floor)

1.82 GW

9 sites reporting

11%89%

Under construction (floor)

8.14 GW

planned MW at active sites

12%88%

Planned

—

0 planned sites (MW not disclosed)

AI campuses

1.82 GW online · 7.14 GW pipeline

AI compute

1.52M

H100-equivalents (est.)

Capital (reported + est.)

$60.1B

$2.99B assessed

Online = operating sites; pipeline = remaining planned MW at sites under construction or planned. Percentages under each total show how much of it is backed by each evidence level. Average industrial electricity price: 7.07¢/kWh (EIA).

Confirmed filing, deed, permit or grid recordAnnounced company or press claimEst. satellite, model or map inferenceHow levels are assigned

AI data center capacity over time

Facility power at satellite-tracked AI campuses (Epoch AI timelines), quarterly

Observed (satellite-tracked) Projected

Construction pipeline by expected completion

MW from phases with a projected completion date

2026

2027

2028

2029

Power reality

Announced capacity vs. what grid records, construction and operation document. Facility-level sums; sources differ in coverage.

How to read this

Each bar sums one kind of evidence across facilities. Announced is the largest MW a company, utility, government or press source reported. Interconnection requests are MW in active large-load queue requests. Of the grid operators we ingest, only NYISO publishes these project by project. Contracted / approved means an executed interconnection agreement or a reported utility or power contract. Under construction and Operational come from construction records, imagery or operator reports.

The gap between announced and documented MW is capacity that has been claimed but not yet backed by a grid, construction or operating record. It is not proof a project won't happen. On-site generation is listed separately and never added to grid capacity. Method

Time to power puts each site's pending MW (announced minus operational) into a bucket by the midpoint of its evidence-based window. The window starts at the furthest documented stage and adds editorial ranges for what remains (e.g. announced: 2–5 yrs; land acquired: 2–4.5 yrs; planning / zoning: 1.75–4 yrs). Insufficient evidence means no dated stage evidence, not a delay. Windows are ranges, not forecasts. All ranges and rules

Announced12.49 GW
Interconnection requests—
Contracted / approved800 MW
Under construction5.88 GW
Operational1.82 GW

Plus 366 MW of documented on-site / dedicated generation.

4.36 GW announced at 8 sites has no grid, construction or operating record yet.

Pending MW by time to power

< 1 year5.98 GW · 5
1–2 years3.01 GW · 6
2–4 years2.16 GW · 6
4+ years— · 0
Insufficient evidence— · 1

Bucketed by the midpoint of each site's evidence-based window. Windows are ranges, not forecasts.

Largest gaps: announced vs documented

OpenAI Stargate Milam1.2 GW / 0
Meta El Paso Data Center1 GW / 0
Hut 8 Beacon Point1 GW / 0
Coreweave Helios1.63 GW / 800 MW
Rowan Temple300 MW / 0
SkyBox Lancaster300 MW / 0
Stream Wilmer240 MW / 0
STACK Lancaster216 MW / 0
SkyBox Plano100 MW / 0

Verified operating: 15Under construction: 6Announced only: 9Unverified: 165

Interconnection queues

Active requests to connect to the grid (ERCOT, MISO, SPP). Requests are applications, not commitments.

How to read this

A queue request asks a grid operator (ISO/RTO) to connect a new generator or large load to the transmission system. It then moves through studies (feasibility, system impact, facilities) before an interconnection agreement, construction and service. Filing is an application, not a commitment to build. Generation totals here are active requests only.

Why most aren't built: in the queue files we ingest, MISO: 74% of 87 requests withdrawn, 1% in service. These are shares of each published file, not completion rates. SPP, ERCOT are left out because their files don't include withdrawn requests. Queue sources

Data-center load requests are shown only where an ISO publishes them project by project (NYISO). Elsewhere, large loads go through utilities, and the ISO figures above (e.g. ERCOT's large-load tracking) are quoted from the operator's own documents.

Generation seeking interconnection440.47 GW · 1,677 requests

Storage 158.52 GWSolar 142.65 GWGas 81.62 GWWind 48.2 GW

ERCOT · Large loads seeking interconnection

410 GW

~87% data centers · as of 2026-03-26

“ERCOT is tracking approximately 410 GW of Large Loads seeking interconnection of which ~87% are data centers.”

ERCOT, 2026-04-09

Coverage

How much of this scope our sources describe. Low coverage means data isn't disclosed or not yet collected, not that there's nothing there.

Data as of Oct 12, 2026

Facilities with a power figure12% (24 of 195)

29%17%54%

Facilities with confirmed evidence8% (15 of 195)

Only estimated evidence (mapping or models)89% (174 of 195)

Confirmed evidence = at least one fact about the facility itself from a filing, deed, permit, interconnection record, or government or utility record. Regional context (state prices, nearby plants, utility territory maps) doesn't count. Most facilities come from OpenStreetMap, which records that a building exists but rarely its power, owner or status.

Coverage by Markets
Markets	Facilities	With power	Confirmed
Dallas–Fort Worth	79	11%	15%
San Antonio	65	5%	0%
Austin & Central Texas	19	16%	5%
Houston	8	13%	0%
West Texas (Abilene)	3	100%	0%