WaterMark / Jurisdictions / Shelby County, TN (Memphis)
Shelby County, TN (Memphis): Data Center Water Impact
Reference data for evaluating a data center proposal in Shelby County, TN (Memphis). 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 | Memphis Light, Gas & Water (MLGW) | Utility of record |
| Supply source | Memphis Sand aquifer (groundwater) | Utility of record |
| Treatment capacity | 200 MGD | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Lower Mississippi-Memphis basin HUC-8 08010100, Low-Medium category. Utility/source: USGS — Memphis public supply is groundwater from the Memphis aquifer (Memphis Sand). |
| Water rate | $8.06 / 1,000 gal | Memphis Light, Gas & Water (MLGW) published rate schedule |
| Watershed stress | Low-Medium (1.6 / 5) | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Lower Mississippi-Memphis basin HUC-8 08010100, Low-Medium category. Utility/source: USGS — Memphis public supply is groundwater from the Memphis aquifer (Memphis Sand). |
Watershed consumptive use
Basin: Lower Mississippi-Memphis (HUC-8 08010100). 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 | 147.13 | 29.1% |
| Thermoelectric power | 317.68 | 62.9% |
| Industrial | 34.91 | 6.9% |
| Irrigation | 2.46 | 0.5% |
| Mining | 1.3 | 0.3% |
| Existing data centers | 1.3 | 0.3% |
| Total | 504.8 | 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), Shelby County, TN. Values are 2015 freshwater withdrawals (Mgal/d): PS 146.93 + DO 0.20 = residential 147.13; PT 317.68; IN 34.91; IR 2.46; MI 1.30.
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 | TVA (SERC) | Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) |
| Electric utility | Memphis Light, Gas & Water / TVA | Utility of record |
| Grid water intensity | 0.44 gal / kWh | Macknick et al. 2012 consumption factors, weighted by TVA generation mix (nuclear/coal/gas thermal-dominant) per EIA; same 0.44 basis as the Davidson County, TN (TVA) entry. |
| Local peak demand | 150 MW | Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) |
| Modeled rate impact | 8% to 18% | See methodology |
Where this water is consumed: existingDataCenters reflects xAI "Colossus" supercomputer in southwest Memphis, served by MLGW from the Memphis Sand aquifer: MLGW agreed to supply ~1.3 MGD of municipal drinking water (peak cooling demand projected at ~5 MGD) until a water-reuse plant is built, drawing on the same confined aquifer that is the sole drinking-water source for Memphis. TVA thermoelectric generation (Allen combined-cycle, regional coal/nuclear) also withdraws within/near the Memphis reach, so Scope 2 water is partly in-watershed.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Davidson County, TN (Nashville) | Cumberland River | Low-Medium (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.