Skip to content
DataCentersExposed
U.S. data-center footprint

Alaska

DataCentersExposed tracks 6 AI data centers in Alaska — 2 operating and 1 in the pipeline — across 2 counties, drawing 3.1 GW of reported power demand from 0 tracked corporate operators.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Tracked
6
data centers
Operating
2
live today
Pipeline
1
proposed / building
Demand
3.1 GW
2 w/ capacity
Counties
2
touched
Operators
0
corporate parents
The story so far

Alaska at a glance

Geographically, the buildout clusters: Denali County leads Alaska with 1 facility and a composite risk score of 4/100. North Slope County follow. Our county risk score weights project exposure (40%), power demand (30%), water draw (15%), and land footprint (15%); the full breakdown is shown on each county page.

Alaska is not done growing. 1 facility is in the pipeline — proposed, permitted, or under construction — which is where residents still have a say at zoning hearings and in rate cases. Each pending project is a decision about land, water, electricity prices, and tax revenue that hasn't been finalized.

We also surface the accountability trail: 1 state bill mentioning data centers and 6 recent news items are tracked for Alaska below, pulled from LegiScan and GDELT and refreshed automatically. Legislation is linked to the counties and operators it names; news is classified by community sentiment.

Where it's concentrated

County risk leaderboard

Risk methodology
CountyFacilitiesPipelineRisk
Denali County14
North Slope County21
Still contested

Pipeline & proposals

6 of 6 shown

All tracked facilities

FacilityOperatorStatusCountyMW
Stak Energy Data CenterStakProposedNorth Slope3,000
Prudhoe Bay Data CenterFar North Digital, LLCOperatingNorth Slope120
ACS North Wire CenterMapped (unverified)
AlasConnect Data Center 1Mapped (unverified)
AlasConnect Data Center 5Mapped (unverified)
GDMS - GEP Program - AlaskaOperatingDENALI

Methodology & sources

Facility counts include operating, under-construction, proposed, and permitted sites. Capacity (MW) combines operator disclosures, interconnection-queue estimates, and research datasets; see each facility for provenance. County risk scores weight project exposure (40%), power demand (30%), water draw (15%), and land footprint (15%), renormalized over measured factors.

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