WaterMark / Jurisdictions / Mesa, AZ (Maricopa County)
Mesa, AZ (Maricopa County): Data Center Water Impact
Reference data for evaluating a data center proposal in Mesa, AZ (Maricopa County). Every figure below is a stored value with its primary source attached. Facility-scale results are produced by the assessment tool.
Water supply
| Metric | Value | Source / basis |
|---|---|---|
| Water utility | City of Mesa Water Resources | Utility of record |
| Supply source | Salt River Project / CAP (Colorado River) + groundwater | Utility of record |
| Treatment capacity | 204.5 MGD | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Middle Gila basin HUC-8 15060106, High category. Utility capacity: City of Mesa / Signal Butte WTP (204.5 MGD). |
| Water rate | $4.83 / 1,000 gal | City of Mesa Water Resources published rate schedule |
| Watershed stress | High (3.8 / 5) | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Middle Gila basin HUC-8 15060106, High category. Utility capacity: City of Mesa / Signal Butte WTP (204.5 MGD). |
Watershed consumptive use
Basin: Middle Gila (HUC-8 15060106). Figures are consumptive use, not withdrawal, because evaporative data center loss is consumptive. USGS data year 2015.
| Category | Consumptive use (MGD) | Share of basin |
|---|---|---|
| Residential | 782.1 | 38.3% |
| Thermoelectric power | 24.1 | 1.2% |
| Industrial | 1.8 | 0.1% |
| Irrigation | 1232.8 | 60.3% |
| Mining | 3.5 | 0.2% |
| Existing data centers | 0 | 0.0% |
| Total | 2044.3 | 100.0% |
Total is the sum of the categories listed above. Shares are each category divided by that total. Source: USGS Estimated Use of Water 2015, county-level data release (Dieter et al. 2018), Maricopa County, AZ. Values are 2015 freshwater withdrawals (Mgal/d); county-level (Mesa is a portion).
Grid generation water (Scope 2)
Generating the electricity a data center consumes evaporates water at the power plant. That volume is real, it is attributable, and it is excluded from most corporate "water positive" accounting. On a thermal grid it is frequently comparable to the facility's own cooling water.
| Metric | Value | Source / basis |
|---|---|---|
| Grid region | WECC Southwest | WECC |
| Electric utility | SRP / APS | Utility of record |
| Grid water intensity | 0.33 gal / kWh | Macknick et al. 2012 consumption factors, weighted by AZ generation mix incl. Palo Verde nuclear (EIA) |
| Local peak demand | 8,200 MW | WECC |
| Modeled rate impact | 6% to 14% | See methodology |
Where this water is consumed: WECC-SW plants (Palo Verde nuclear, gas) draw cooling water from the broader region; Scope 2 water for Mesa data centers is partly local to central AZ.
Run this county at your facility size. The assessment tool computes direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 2) water for a specific load, cooling system, and mitigation stack, with the same citations attached.
Reducing the footprint here
A high stress reading is a design constraint, not a verdict. Closed-loop and dry or hybrid cooling, adiabatic assist, immersion, and reclaimed or non-potable sourcing each move the direct number, and siting against a cleaner grid mix moves the indirect number. The solutions catalog lists each option with its water reduction, its energy and cost tradeoff, and its source.
Related counties
| County | Water source | Watershed stress |
|---|---|---|
| Pima County, AZ (Tucson) | Colorado River / Central AZ Project + Aquifer | Extremely High (4.2/5) |
| Chandler, AZ | Salt River Project / CAP / Reclaimed | High (3.9/5) |
| Pinal County, AZ (Casa Grande / Eloy) | Groundwater + Central Arizona Project (Colorado River) — Pinal AMA | Extremely High (4.6/5) |
| Clark County, NV (Las Vegas) | Lake Mead / Colorado River | Extremely High (4.5/5) |
| Washoe County, NV (Reno) | Truckee River + Donner Lake | High (3.2/5) |
How these numbers are derived
Assumptions, formulas, and the full source list are in the methodology. WaterMark is published by Standard Water Corp and is not affiliated with any data center developer, utility, or government agency.