Utah County, Utah
DataCentersExposed tracks 8 AI data centers in Utah County, Utah — 1 operating and 4 in the pipeline, drawing 885 MW of reported power demand, led by Meta Platforms, Inc.. Its transparent data-center risk score is 0/100.
Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard
Reporting by Eric Keller · Updated May 29, 2026
- Project exposure · 16
- Power demand · 32
- Water draw · n/a
- Land footprint · n/a
What's happening in Utah County
Facilities here with disclosed capacity draw 885 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.
Meta Platforms, Inc. has the largest presence in Utah 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.
2035 Buildout Outlook
Under the model's moderate-growth scenario (5%/yr annual load growth), PNNL's IM3 model sites about 2 standardized 36 MW campuses in Utah County by 2035 — roughly 72 MW of new electricity demand and ~70 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 8 real data centers in Utah County (885 MW of reported power).
- Low growth272 MW · ~70 M gal/yr cooling water
- Moderate growth272 MW · ~70 M gal/yr cooling water
- High growth5180 MW · ~174 M gal/yr cooling water
- Higher growth6216 MW · ~209 M gal/yr cooling water
The model assigns ~100% of these campuses' cooling to evaporative water cooling in Utah 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.
Every tracked facility
| Facility | Operator | Status | MW |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tract Pole Canyon / Pony Express Eagle Mountain | Tract | Proposed | 400 |
| Summit Ridge Data Center Santaquin | Data4 | Proposed | 20 |
| Utah County Data Center | — | Proposed | — |
| QTS Eagle Mountain Eagle Mountain | QTS Realty Trust, LLC | Under construction | — |
| Meta Eagle Mountain Eagle Mountain | Meta Platforms, Inc. | Mapped (unverified) | 460 |
| Provo Data Center Provo | — | Blocked | 5 |
| Flexential Salt Lake City - Lindon Lindon | Flexential Corp. | — | |
| Meta Eagle Mountain Data Center | Meta Platforms, Inc. | Mapped (unverified) | — |
County commissioners
How the Utah 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.