Skip to content
DataCentersExposed
County data-center profile

Kent County, Michigan

DataCentersExposed tracks 5 AI data centers in Kent County, Michigan — 0 operating and 4 in the pipeline, drawing 320 MW of reported power demand, led by Microsoft Corporation.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

Facilities
5
Operating
0
Pipeline
4

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Overview

What's happening in Kent County

Facilities here with disclosed capacity draw 320 MW from the local grid. Data-center load on this scale is the single biggest driver of recent capacity-market price increases — costs that flow through to every ratepayer in the service territory, not just the operators.

Microsoft Corporation has the largest presence in Kent County. We resolve project codenames and shell LLCs back to the corporate parent wherever the public record allows, so the table below names who is actually behind each site.

Below: every tracked facility in the county, the active state legislation that names it or its county, and local news. Commissioner vote records arrive in a later release; the placeholders show where that accountability data will land.

Modeled scenario · not announced

2035 Buildout Outlook

via PNNL IM3 (CC BY 4.0)

Under the model's moderate-growth scenario (5%/yr annual load growth), PNNL's IM3 model sites about 1 standardized 36 MW campus in Kent County by 2035 — roughly 36 MW of new electricity demand and ~35 M gal/yr of cooling water. Under the higher-growth scenario (15%/yr) that climbs to 6 campuses (216 MW). For scale, we currently track 5 real data centers in Kent County (320 MW of reported power).

Modeled new campuses by demand-growth scenario
  • Moderate growth1
    36 MW · ~35 M gal/yr cooling water
  • High growth3
    108 MW · ~104 M gal/yr cooling water
  • Higher growth6
    216 MW · ~209 M gal/yr cooling water

The model assigns ~100% of these campuses' cooling to evaporative water cooling in Kent County (the rest to mechanical/air cooling), a split it derives from local water stress and wet-bulb temperature.

These are modeled candidate sites, not announced or permitted facilities. PNNL's IM3 model places identical 36 MW unit-campuses at feasible locations under each scenario — it shows where demand could concentrate, never a specific parcel. Figures use a market-gravity weight of 50. How the model works.

5 facilities

Every tracked facility

FacilityOperatorStatusMW
Microsoft Caledonia Data Center
Caledonia
Microsoft CorporationProposed
Microsoft Grand Rapids Data Center
Grand Rapids
Microsoft CorporationProposed
Microsoft Lowell Township Data Center
Lowell
Microsoft CorporationProposed
Switch Pyramid Data Center
Gaines Township
Switch, Inc.Under construction320
Lowell Covenant Business Park Data Center
Lowell
Franklin Partners/MicrosoftBlocked
Accountability

County commissioners

How the Kent County board votes on each data-center matter — the rezonings, the abatements, the water permits — is built from public-meeting minutes and roll-call records. Know of a vote we should be tracking? Tell us.

Methodology & sources

The risk score weights project exposure (40%), power demand (30%), water draw (15%), and land footprint (15%). Water and land are not yet measured for our facilities, so those arcs render as "not yet measured" and the weights are renormalized over the factors we can source today — when the data lands, the score updates.

Every row carries a confidence level (high / medium / low) and a source URL. Spot an error? Tell us.