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

Montana

DataCentersExposed tracks 13 AI data centers in Montana — 1 operating and 5 in the pipeline — across 6 counties, drawing 2.6 GW of reported power demand from 1 tracked corporate operator.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Tracked
13
data centers
Operating
1
live today
Pipeline
5
proposed / building
Demand
2.6 GW
5 w/ capacity
Counties
6
touched
Operators
1
corporate parents
The story so far

Montana at a glance

The largest footprint in Montana belongs to Cogent Communications, behind 1 tracked facility. Many of these sites are filed under shell or project names rather than the parent's — our operator column resolves them back to the real corporate parent wherever the chain is documented.

Geographically, the buildout clusters: Yellowstone County leads Montana with 3 facilities and a composite risk score of 4/100. Custer County and Cascade 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.

Montana is not done growing. 5 facilities are 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: 4 state bills mentioning data centers and 6 recent news items are tracked for Montana 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.

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 Montana 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 7 campuses (252 MW). For scale, we currently track 13 real data centers in Montana (2.6 GW 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 growth7
    252 MW · ~244 M gal/yr cooling water

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

Who's building

Top operators in Montana

Where it's concentrated

County risk leaderboard

Risk methodology
Still contested

Pipeline & proposals

13 of 13 shown

All tracked facilities

FacilityOperatorStatusCountyMW
Quantica Big SkyQuantica InfrastructureProposedYellowstone County1,000
Quantica LLC Big Sky CampusMeta, Google, AmazonProposedYellowstone1,000
TAC Data Centers: Project CardinalProposedCascade500
KrambuProposedMissoula10
Richland County Data CenterProposedRichland
Butte Data CenterSabey Data CentersWithdrawnSilver Bow50
ACT ColstripMapped (unverified)
Cogent BillingsCogent CommunicationsMapped (unverified)
Montana OpticomMapped (unverified)
Parsec Data ManagementOperatingYellowstone
State of Montana Data CenterMapped (unverified)Custer
iConnect Billings Fiber HotelMapped (unverified)
iConnect MissoulaMapped (unverified)

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.