Skip to content
DataCentersExposed
County data-center profile

Culpeper County, Virginia

DataCentersExposed tracks 11 AI data centers in Culpeper County, Virginia — 1 operating and 10 in the pipeline, drawing 1.2 GW of reported power demand, led by Tract. Its transparent data-center risk score is 0/100.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

Facilities
11
Operating
1
Pipeline
10

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Risk breakdown
25Low
  • Project exposure · 12
  • Power demand · 42
  • Water draw · n/a
  • Land footprint · n/a
Overview

What's happening in Culpeper County

Facilities here with disclosed capacity draw 1.2 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.

Tract has the largest presence in Culpeper 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.

11 facilities

Every tracked facility

FacilityOperatorStatusMW
Culpeper Tech Park — Tract Master Plan
Culpeper
TractProposed800
Culpeper Data Center
Culpeper
Proposed215
Marvell Developments
Stevensburg
Amazon.com, Inc.Proposed135
Cielo Digital Infrastructure
Culpeper
Cielo Digital InfrastructureProposed
CloudHQ
Culpeper
CloudHQ, LLCProposed
Copper Ridge
Culpeper
Proposed
Culpeper Technology Campus
Culpeper
Proposed
DataBank
Culpeper
Proposed
Keyser Farm
Culpeper
Proposed
XX Tech Park
Culpeper
Proposed
Equinix CU2
Culpeper
Equinix, Inc.Operating11
Accountability

County commissioners

How the Culpeper 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.