Data Centers vs. The Wild

Explore the state-by-state map

Switch between the overall Environmental Pressure Index and the individual data points behind it. Hover or tap a state for a quick snapshot.

LegendEnvironmental Pressure Index

LowerHigher

Top 5 states by Environmental Pressure Index

State rankings

Compare how data center development, listed species, forest cover and drought pressure shape each state’s overall score.

Rank	State	Data center projects	Endangered Species	Forest Cover (%)	DSCI Score	Environmental Pressure Index

Ground-Level Impact

The index is forward-looking. The examples below show what landscape, habitat and water pressures can look like once large infrastructure is on the ground.

Columbia River Gorge in Oregon, a wide river running between dry canyon hills

Illustration of a data center campus built along the bank of the Columbia River Gorge

Before

After

Columbia River Gorge, Oregon

Cooling servers with the river's water.

The Columbia River Gorge is a protected scenic corridor, but the data centers built along its banks run hot and need a lot of water to stay cool. Every year they pull millions of gallons from local streams and aquifers, in a region that already swings between snowmelt and drought. Reporting by Oregon Public Broadcasting found that one company's data centers now use close to a third of all the water the city of The Dalles consumes. That is the same water the fish, farms and forests of the Gorge depend on.

Blue Ridge countryside in Virginia with hay fields and a winding road

Illustration of a high-voltage transmission corridor cut through Blue Ridge forest

Before

After

Blue Ridge, Virginia

High-voltage corridors through the Blue Ridge.

The Blue Ridge is supposed to stay wild, but powering the data center boom means cutting high-voltage transmission corridors through its forests. A living canopy gets replaced by a cleared strip of bare ground and steel towers. A 2026 report from the National Parks Conservation Association warns that this fast buildout is breaking up wildlife habitat across the Mid-Atlantic and pushing industrial infrastructure close to protected land.

Sonoran Desert near Tucson, Arizona with saguaro cacti and low desert hills

Illustration of a data center facility on open Sonoran Desert land

Before

After

Sonoran Desert, Arizona

A water-hungry industry on drying desert land.

The Sonoran Desert around Tucson supports a remarkable range of wildlife, and it sits in a region facing severe drought as the Colorado River keeps shrinking. Now hyperscale data centers are moving into Arizona, competing for scarce water and open desert land. As Grist has reported, that rush is raising fears the industry could lock up supplies that homes, farms and wildlife will need down the line. In Tucson, residents pushed back hard enough against one proposed complex that the city council rejected it.

Image disclaimer: These before-and-after visuals are illustrative scenarios, not documented photography of actual data center damage at these locations. They are designed to show the types of landscape fragmentation, water stress and habitat disturbance that can be associated with large-scale data center infrastructure, based on the sources cited above.

Methodology

Outforia created this index to compare where data center activity may overlap with existing environmental pressure at state level. The ranking combines a state-level data center development count with three environmental indicators: threatened and endangered species, forest cover and drought pressure.

What went into the index

1. Data center developmentWe used Data Center Map to count data center projects in each state listed as planned, under construction or land-banked. This metric was used as the development pressure signal in the final score. A higher count indicates more proposed or active data center buildout and greater potential pressure on local environments.

2. Threatened and endangered speciesWe counted federally listed threatened and endangered species by state using U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ECOS state listing totals. This reflects state-level listed species presence and biodiversity burden, not project-specific harm or species directly affected by individual data centers.

3. Forest coverWe used the USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis report for forest-cover percentages. Forest cover is used as an exposure signal, not a measure of harm. A higher forest-cover percentage is not treated as bad on its own, but it can indicate more natural landscape that may be sensitive to large infrastructure expansion.

4. Drought pressureWe used the U.S. Drought Monitor’s Drought Severity and Coverage Index, which runs from 0 to 500. Higher values indicate more widespread or more severe drought conditions. Drought pressure is a point-in-time DSCI snapshot from June 9, 2026, and would shift if the index were rerun under different drought conditions.

How the score was calculated

Each input was converted to a comparable 0 to 100 scale by scaling it against the highest state value for that input. The highest state received 100, and other states were scored proportionally. The final uncapped score was then rescaled so the top-ranked state equals 100.

The three environmental indicators were weighted equally to keep the index transparent and avoid privileging one type of pressure over another. They were averaged to create an environmental vulnerability base score.

The data center score is used as a pressure multiplier because the index is designed to show where environmental vulnerability may become more exposed as new data center buildout increases. The multiplier raises scores where large development pipelines overlap with existing environmental pressures, but the environmental indicators still form the base of the ranking.

Environmental Pressure Index = environmental vulnerability base × data center development multiplier.

Important context: This index is designed to compare state-level environmental pressure signals in a simple, journalist-friendly way. It highlights where data center activity may overlap with existing pressures on wildlife, forests and water resources. Individual projects can vary widely by location, design, water use, mitigation and local permitting.

Sources and data dates

Unless noted otherwise, source data was compiled for this study on June 17, 2026.

Data center projects: Data Center Map 50-state audit file, June 17, 2026. Includes entries listed as planned, under construction or land-banked, grouped by state.
Threatened and endangered species: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ECOS state listing totals, compiled for this study on June 17, 2026.
Forest cover: USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis report, compiled for this study on June 17, 2026.
Drought pressure: U.S. Drought Monitor Drought Severity and Coverage Index data, using the DSCI snapshot from June 9, 2026.

The ranking excludes states with no planned, under construction or land-banked facilities in the Data Center Map input. They may still have existing operating facilities. These states are shaded gray on the map: Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.