WaterMark / Jurisdictions / Washington County, OR (Hillsboro)
Washington County, OR (Hillsboro): Data Center Water Impact
Reference data for evaluating a data center proposal in Washington County, OR (Hillsboro). 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 | Hillsboro Water Department / Joint Water Commission | Utility of record |
| Supply source | Tualatin River (Barney Reservoir / Trask transbasin) | Utility of record |
| Treatment capacity | 41.7 MGD | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Tualatin basin HUC-8 17090010, Medium-High category. Utility capacity: Hillsboro Water Department testimony to Oregon Legislature, 2026 (41.7 MGD treatment capacity). |
| Water rate | $6.72 / 1,000 gal | Hillsboro Water Department / Joint Water Commission published rate schedule |
| Watershed stress | Medium-High (2.6 / 5) | Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0 (Kuzma et al. 2023), Tualatin basin HUC-8 17090010, Medium-High category. Utility capacity: Hillsboro Water Department testimony to Oregon Legislature, 2026 (41.7 MGD treatment capacity). |
Watershed consumptive use
Basin: Tualatin (HUC-8 17090010). 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 | 55.1 | 27.0% |
| Thermoelectric power | 0 | 0.0% |
| Industrial | 0.1 | 0.0% |
| Irrigation | 148.2 | 72.8% |
| Mining | 0.3 | 0.1% |
| Existing data centers | 0 | 0.0% |
| Total | 203.7 | 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), Washington County, OR. Values are 2015 freshwater withdrawals (Mgal/d).
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 / BPA (NW) | BPA |
| Electric utility | Portland General Electric | Utility of record |
| Grid water intensity | 0.1 gal / kWh | Macknick et al. 2012 consumption factors, weighted by BPA/PNW hydro-dominant mix (EIA) |
| Local peak demand | 4,500 MW | BPA |
| Modeled rate impact | 10% to 22% | See methodology |
Where this water is consumed: PGE/BPA generation serving Hillsboro is hydro-dominant on the Columbia/Willamette system, outside the Tualatin basin. Scope 2 water (mostly reservoir-related, low per Macknick convention) is consumed outside the local HUC.
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.
Open Washington County, OR (Hillsboro) in the assessment tool
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Umatilla County, OR (Hermiston / Boardman) | Columbia River + Umatilla | Low (1.8/5) |
| Morrow County, OR (Boardman) | Columbia River | Low (1.6/5) |
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.