Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Water use, cooling technology and community concerns dominate Sedgwick County discussion on data centers
Summary
Speakers debated water use and cooling technology for data centers, with state officials pointing to closed‑loop and air‑cooled systems and residents citing documents that describe evaporative systems and large river withdrawals; commissioners asked for water‑balance studies and hydrogeologic review in ordinance drafts.
Water use and cooling technology were among the most contested topics at the Sedgwick County roundtable. State and industry speakers said newer designs reduce water demand, while several residents and local leaders cited examples of existing proposals that use evaporative cooling and large water withdrawals.
Paul Hughes (Kansas Department of Commerce) told commissioners that many modern hyperscale data centers pursue closed‑loop or air‑cooled systems, and he said SB 98 conditions access to state incentives on the submission of a water conservation plan. Hughes said million‑gallon‑per‑day figures often refer to older evaporative systems and asked counties to require water‑balance reports and cost‑benefit analyses before committing incentives. As he summarized, projects that expect a welcome by a community “can't be a high water user in Kansas.”
By contrast, public commenters raised documents they said show evaporative cooling remains in use. Mike Betts said he found filings mentioning millions of gallons per day and said two projects could remove about 3.3 billion gallons per year from the Neosho River, pressing the county to treat water assumptions skeptically and to require robust hydrogeologic review.
Commissioners and technical advisers discussed regulatory checks and enforcement: conditional use permits (CUPs) can include conditions such as annual water reporting, third‑party review funded by developers, KDHE permits for stormwater and air quality, and decommissioning bonds. Dr. Chris Olson recommended water‑balance reports be required with any application, and other advisers suggested the county require that applicants demonstrate KDHE and other state approvals before local permits are finalized.
Why it matters: water availability and cooling technology affect long‑term environmental impacts and community acceptance. Commissioners said a policy that requires technical studies and public disclosure would help avoid speculative commitments and protect both water resources and taxpayers.
Next steps: commissioners asked staff to include water‑study requirements (water balance, hydrogeologic studies as applicable), to require KDHE permits and to consider reporting and enforcement language (annual reporting, third‑party review funds, and decommissioning bonds) in draft ordinance language.
