Skip to content
DataCentersExposed
County data-center profile

Clark County, Nevada

DataCentersExposed tracks 20 AI data centers in Clark County, Nevada — 7 operating and 5 in the pipeline, drawing 1.6 GW of reported power demand, led by Switch, Inc.. Its transparent data-center risk score is 0/100.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

Facilities
20
Operating
7
Pipeline
5

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Risk breakdown
39Moderate
  • Project exposure · 36
  • Power demand · 43
  • Water draw · n/a
  • Land footprint · n/a
Overview

What's happening in Clark County

Facilities here with disclosed capacity draw 1.6 GW 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.

Switch, Inc. has the largest presence in Clark 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 7 standardized 36 MW campuses in Clark County by 2035 — roughly 252 MW of new electricity demand and ~244 M gal/yr of cooling water. Under the higher-growth scenario (15%/yr) that climbs to 41 campuses (1.5 GW). For scale, we currently track 20 real data centers in Clark County (1.6 GW of reported power).

Modeled new campuses by demand-growth scenario
  • Low growth5
    180 MW · ~174 M gal/yr cooling water
  • Moderate growth7
    252 MW · ~244 M gal/yr cooling water
  • High growth20
    720 MW · ~696 M gal/yr cooling water
  • Higher growth41
    1.5 GW · ~1.4 billion gal/yr cooling water

The model assigns ~100% of these campuses' cooling to evaporative water cooling in Clark 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.

20 facilities

Every tracked facility

FacilityOperatorStatusMW
Google Henderson (proposed)Alphabet Inc.Proposed600
Townsite Solar 2 LLC
Boulder City
Townsite Solar 2 LLCProposed170
Jet.AI
Moapa
Proposed50
Novva Data Center (site 2)
Las Vegas
Proposed
Switch Data Center
Las Vegas
Proposed
Switch Las Vegas 7
Enterprise
Switch, Inc.Operating495
Apple Las VegasApple Inc.Mapped (unverified)220
Novva Data Center
Las Vegas
Operating100
Flexential Las Vegas - North
North Las Vegas
Flexential Corp.Operating9
DataBank Las Vegas LAS1
Las Vegas
DataBank Holdings, Ltd.Operating3.35
Fiberhub LAS1
Las Vegas
Operating
Flexential Las Vegas - Downtown
Las Vegas
Flexential Corp.Operating
Google
Henderson
Alphabet Inc.Mapped (unverified)
Jasmine Development LLC
HENDERSON
Operating
SwitchMapped (unverified)
Switch Las Vegas 14Switch, Inc.Mapped (unverified)
Switch Las Vegas 4
Las Vegas
Switch, Inc.Mapped (unverified)
Switch Las Vegas 9Switch, Inc.Mapped (unverified)
Switch12Mapped (unverified)
Verizon North Las VegasVerizon Communications Inc.Mapped (unverified)
Accountability

County commissioners

How the Clark 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.