WaterMark
National county-level matrix scoring US locations for new data center siting. Composite score and seven sub-scores per county, with sourced inputs and a click-through to the full water assessment calculator.
← Back to Assessment Tool

US Siting Matrix

A national table of county-level scores for data center site suitability. Composite score is a weighted combination of seven sub-scores covering water, power, regulation, climate, and incentives. v3.2 launch covers ~30 hand-curated counties spanning the major US data center clusters and emerging markets. Full scoring methodology →

How to read this. Higher composite scores indicate locations more suitable for new data center load under default weights. Defaults: water availability 25%, watershed stress 20%, grid water intensity 20%, regulatory friction 15%, power availability and cost 10%, climate efficiency 5%, incentives 5%. Each sub-score runs 0–100, higher = better for siting (more headroom, less stress, less friction). The composite is not an endorsement — it's one model with one weighting. Click any row for sub-score citations. The "Run full WaterMark analysis →" link opens the calculator pre-populated for jurisdictions where detailed water and grid data is available.

State Heatmap — average county composite

≥65 45–64 <45 no data (v3.2)

Each tile represents one US state, sized equally regardless of geographic area (a "tile grid map," common in data journalism). Color reflects the average composite score of WaterMark-tracked counties in that state. Click a state to filter the matrix below to its counties. Tile-grid layout removes geographic distortion that would otherwise overweight large empty states (Wyoming, Nevada) and underweight dense small states (RI, NJ, DC).

Top 10 — highest composite under default weights

    Bottom 10 — lowest composite

      Filter: Showing all 35 counties
      # County / State Grid Composite ▾ Water Stress Grid H₂O Reg. Power Climate Inc. Flags

      All scores are 0–100 (higher = better for siting). Scores are estimates based on USGS Water Use 2020, EIA Form 923, NOAA NCEI climate normals, ISO/RTO interconnection queue reports, and manual ingestion of state ordinances and incentive programs. Full per-county source disclosure in the row drawer. Composite scores are not endorsements. Adjust weights for your project context — a hyperscale operator and an edge developer will weight differently.

      Coverage in v3.4 is 30 hand-curated counties matching the calculator's location database. Every row links into the full assessment tool with the location pre-loaded. v3.5 will expand to all CONUS counties using automated USGS / EIA / NOAA / ISO ingestion. Send corrections to ravi@standardwater.co.