WaterMark
Data Center Water Impact Assessment Tool

WaterMark / Jurisdictions / Washoe County, NV (Reno)

Washoe County, NV (Reno): Data Center Water Impact

Reference data for evaluating a data center proposal in Washoe County, NV (Reno). Every figure below is a stored value with its primary source attached. Facility-scale results are produced by the assessment tool.

Water supply

MetricValueSource / basis
Water utilityTruckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA)Utility of record
Supply sourceTruckee River + Donner LakeUtility of record
Treatment capacity105 MGDWater stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0, HUC-8 16050102.
Water rate$4.80 / 1,000 galTruckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) published rate schedule
Watershed stressHigh (3.2 / 5)Water stress: WRI Aqueduct 4.0, HUC-8 16050102.

Watershed consumptive use

Basin: Truckee River (HUC-8 16050102). Figures are consumptive use, not withdrawal, because evaporative data center loss is consumptive. USGS data year 2020.

CategoryConsumptive use (MGD)Share of basin
Residential 65 55.1%
Thermoelectric power 5 4.2%
Industrial 8 6.8%
Irrigation 25 21.2%
Mining 3 2.5%
Existing data centers 12 10.2%
Total118100.0%

Total is the sum of the categories listed above. Shares are each category divided by that total. Source: USGS Water Use 2020, Washoe County. Existing DC: Switch + Apple + Tesla cluster.

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.

MetricValueSource / basis
Grid regionWECC SouthwestNV Energy
Electric utilityNV EnergyUtility of record
Grid water intensity0.18 gal / kWhMacknick et al. 2012 × NV generation mix
Local peak demand1,700 MWNV Energy
Modeled rate impact6% to 13%See methodology

Where this water is consumed: WECC SW generation serving Washoe is largely outside the Truckee basin.

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 Washoe County, NV (Reno) 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.

Regulatory and siting status

Reno / Sparks. Truckee river-fed. Switch and Apple campuses. High-desert climate good for free cooling. Switch tariff helps.

Sources: Water: TMWA. Grid: NV Energy.

Comparative siting scores for this county, alongside every other county tracked, are on the US Siting Matrix.

CountyWater sourceWatershed stress
Clark County, NV (Las Vegas) Lake Mead / Colorado River Extremely High (4.5/5)
Storey County, NV (Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center) Groundwater (Tracy Segment) + imported Reno-Sparks treated effluent High (3.4/5)
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)
Mesa, AZ (Maricopa County) Salt River Project / CAP (Colorado River) + groundwater High (3.8/5)

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.