Not All Data Center Technologies Cause Water Crises
Clean water is a basic necessity for society, while technological investment should contribute to improving public welfare rather than creating new competition that undermines local domestic needs. Nevertheless, one issue requires closer examination: are data centers actually a direct cause of water shortages, as suggested by media coverage of Batam, or do these problems reflect a combination of drought, infrastructure limitations, growing industrial demand, and weaknesses in water resource governance?
This question matters because debates over data center water consumption have emerged in various countries, including the United States. Concerns about water use by the AI industry are not entirely unfounded. Several studies and government reports have identified genuine risks. However, these risks cannot be generalized to all data center facilities. The scale of their impact depends heavily on cooling technology, water sources, facility capacity, climatic conditions, and the environmental carrying capacity of their operational locations.
Water and Digital Infrastructure: Real but Uneven Risks
Data centers are essential infrastructure for the modern digital economy. They store, process, and distribute information that supports a wide range of services, from financial transactions and cloud computing to digital communications and AI development. Growing computational demand, particularly for large-scale AI models, is driving the construction of data centers with increasingly high electricity and cooling requirements.
Servers generate substantial heat during computational operations. To maintain operational stability and prevent equipment damage, data centers require cooling systems. Some systems use water through evaporative processes, while others rely on closed-loop liquid circulation, air-based cooling, or combinations of different technologies.
This is where water consumption becomes an issue. Evaporative cooling systems can consume significant volumes of freshwater because some of the water evaporates and does not return to its original source. Other cooling technologies can reduce direct water consumption, although they may require greater energy input or additional infrastructure.
Research by Lei and colleagues (2025), published in Resources, Conservation and Recycling, indicates that water use across data center workloads can vary by more than 10,000 times. This variation is influenced by server efficiency, water consumption in electricity generation, equipment utilization rates, cooling systems, and climatic conditions. The finding is important because it demonstrates that not all data centers have the same water footprint or consumption patterns.
A study by Privette, Barros, and Cai (2026), published in AGU Advances, emphasizes that aggregate data center water use may appear relatively small compared with total national water consumption. However, local impacts can become significant when facilities are concentrated in regions already experiencing water stress. The researchers also identify limited transparency in corporate water-use data as a major obstacle to effective policymaking and public oversight.
In other words, the central issue is not simply how much water data centers consume, but where that water comes from, how its use is managed, and whether such consumption reduces water availability for local communities.
The United States: When AI Expansion Meets Water Resource Constraints
Debates over data center water consumption have also intensified in the United States, one of the world’s leading centers of AI industry growth. Several regions, including Virginia, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia, are facing questions about whether their water and electricity infrastructure can adequately support data center expansion.
In Virginia, home to one of the world’s largest concentrations of data centers, a study of groundwater conditions in the Eastern Coastal Plain warned that local aquifers are already under pressure and could face further depletion due to population growth and industrial demand. Virginia has hundreds of operational and planned data center facilities. However, the report did not conclude that data centers are the sole cause of groundwater depletion. Most facilities rely on public water systems supplied primarily by surface water, while comprehensive data on the industry’s groundwater withdrawals remain limited.
These findings demonstrate that the central problem does not always lie in proven current consumption, but also in the government’s capacity to measure future demand before approving new industrial developments.
The case of Georgia presents a different picture. In Fayetteville, concerns over water use by a data center campus owned by Quality Technology Services (QTS) emerged after water authorities discovered previously unrecorded water usage. An E&E News report in May 2026 stated that more than 29 million gallons of water had not been properly recorded in the billing system. The company subsequently explained that the water had been used for construction activities rather than operational cooling and stated that its facility employed a closed-loop cooling system.
This case does not prove that data centers directly caused water shortages among local residents. However, it highlights the importance of industrial water-use records, connection transparency, and public utility oversight.
Arizona, meanwhile, illustrates how data center water consumption may appear relatively small in a state’s overall water balance while remaining significant at the local level. A 2025 analysis by Circle of Blue estimated that data center water consumption in Arizona reached approximately 905 million gallons for the year. This represented less than 0.1 percent of total state water use, yet it could still add pressure in metropolitan areas already facing water constraints.
Together, these three cases reveal a common pattern: the risks associated with data center water consumption cannot be assessed solely through national consumption figures. Local conditions, water sources, technology, and regulatory capacity are far more decisive factors.
Therefore, concerns about water consumption by the AI industry in the United States have an empirical basis. However, this does not mean that every new data center automatically threatens community water supplies. Such risks must be established through actual consumption data and assessments of water availability at each location.
Batam: The Water Crisis Needs Further Examination
Turning to Batam, the situation must be understood in light of the island’s geographical conditions and existing water infrastructure. As an archipelagic region, Batam relies heavily on reservoirs as sources of raw water. Water availability is strongly influenced by rainfall, reservoir storage capacity, treatment capabilities, and distribution networks.
In a report published by Bisnis Indonesia on October 6, 2026, BP Batam explained that water production in the Nongsa area had declined from approximately 90 liters per second to 25 liters per second due to prolonged dry conditions and low rainfall. BP Batam also denied that operational data centers were drawing raw water from the Nongsa or Duriangkang reservoirs. According to the agency, operational facilities obtained their supplies from independent water management systems in the Kabil industrial area, including rainwater storage ponds.
Data reported by ANTARA on November 5, 2026, provide additional context. The President Director of PT Kabil Citranusa explained that water requirements vary across data centers depending on their capacity and technology. Some facilities require approximately 10 liters per second, while larger facilities may need up to 100 liters per second. He also noted that technological advances allow some data centers to reduce or even eliminate water use in their cooling systems.
Converted into daily volumes, a requirement of 10 liters per second is equivalent to approximately 864,000 liters per day, while 100 liters per second amounts to 8.64 million liters per day. These volumes demonstrate that a large-scale facility can have water requirements equivalent to the domestic consumption of tens of thousands of people.
However, these figures represent estimated requirements based on facility capacity and technology, not evidence that all data centers currently operating in Batam consume water at these levels. ANTARA also reported that the operational capacity of data centers in Batam remained at approximately 20 to 30 megawatts, while expansion to one gigawatt is targeted for 2030. In other words, future water demand may increase as the industry expands, but it would be inaccurate to treat the entire projected capacity as current consumption.
The distinction between planned capacity and actual consumption must be a central consideration in both media reporting and policymaking. Investment projections should not be treated as though all facilities are already operating at full capacity. Conversely, the government should not wait until all facilities become fully operational before preparing adequate water infrastructure.
SWRO: A Solution That Must Be Tested, Not Merely Announced
One of the measures introduced by BP Batam is to encourage data center developers to construct their own Sea Water Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) facilities, a technology that converts seawater into freshwater through desalination.
On September 30, 2026, The Jakarta Post reported that BP Batam had asked investors and data center developers to build their own SWRO facilities so that industrial demand would not place additional pressure on water sources used by local communities. On November 5, 2026, ANTARA reported the commencement of SWRO facility construction in the Kabil area to support data center requirements in Batam.
This measure indicates that the government is beginning to direct industrial water supply toward alternative sources. However, the success of this policy cannot be measured solely through construction announcements or planned facility capacity.
Desalination carries environmental and economic implications. SWRO processes require energy, investment, maintenance, and the management of highly concentrated saline waste known as brine. If this waste is not properly managed, marine ecosystems surrounding discharge locations may experience additional stress.
ANTARA reported that SWRO facilities in Batam must meet regulatory requirements, including approval for marine spatial utilization, an environmental impact assessment (AMDAL), and building approval. Developers have also stated that desalination waste will undergo special treatment before being discharged back into the sea.
These policies must be accompanied by independent monitoring of marine water quality, the environmental impacts of brine discharge, energy consumption, and the actual volume of freshwater produced. This would help ensure that solutions to freshwater shortages do not create new ecological problems in coastal areas.
The Bigger Issue: The Political Economy of Resource Distribution
Batam’s water crisis ultimately reveals a more fundamental challenge in the political economy of development. Digital investment is often promoted through capital values, computing capacity, project numbers, and strategic positioning within the global economy. However, such investment depends on basic infrastructure that is not always sufficiently available.
Water, electricity, telecommunications networks, land, and transportation are essential prerequisites for data center operations. If governments approve investment projects without considering infrastructure carrying capacity, the costs of development may ultimately be transferred to local communities through service disruptions, environmental pressures, and competition over resource allocation.
From the perspective of the political economy of infrastructure, the issue is not merely how to attract investment, but also how to distribute the benefits and burdens of development. Companies benefit from the facilities and connectivity provided by a region. Governments gain potential revenue and economic growth. Local communities, however, must also be assured that their basic needs will not be sacrificed.
This is where the concept of water governance becomes essential. Governments must maintain reliable data on raw water availability, production capacity, domestic demand, industrial consumption, and future demand projections. Every data center development permit should be based on a regional water balance assessment, not merely on an investor’s financial capacity.
Governments should also establish mandatory water-use disclosure requirements for large-scale facilities. Companies should report their water sources, withdrawal volumes, actual consumption, cooling technologies, and wastewater management practices. Such information would enable communities and local authorities to assess whether industrial growth remains within the environmental carrying capacity of the region.
The Digital Future Must Coexist with Basic Community Needs
Debates over data centers and water should not be framed as a binary choice between investment and public interests. Indonesia needs technological investment to strengthen its economic competitiveness, develop its AI ecosystem, and improve its position within regional digital networks. However, digital infrastructure development must take place with due consideration for resource availability and the needs of local communities.
Developers can adopt water-efficient cooling technologies, closed-loop circulation systems, recycled water, and alternative water sources. Governments can regulate development locations based on water and electricity availability, establish water-use standards, and require transparent environmental impact assessments. For archipelagic regions such as Batam, desalination technology and even the exploration of underwater data centers may offer long-term alternatives, provided that their economic feasibility and ecological impacts can be demonstrated.
Nevertheless, technology cannot replace good governance. Underwater data centers, for example, may reduce dependence on freshwater for cooling, but they still require assessments of marine ecosystems, maintenance requirements, connectivity, and subsea infrastructure security. Similarly, SWRO can provide an alternative water source, but it does not eliminate the need for environmental oversight.
