
California AI Data Center Seeks 287 Million Gallons of Colorado River Water Annually After Previous Pledge
A proposed AI data center in Southern California is facing a lawsuit and strong opposition after reneging on its promise to avoid Colorado River water. Developer Sebastian Rucci is seeking 287 million gallons annually by acquiring agricultural land and redirecting its existing water allocations. Critics warn of the dangerous precedent this could set for water rights in a drought-stricken region.
A proposed 330-megawatt artificial intelligence data center in Southern California is facing significant backlash and legal action over its water consumption plans, specifically its pivot from an initial commitment to avoid Colorado River water. The developer, Sebastian Rucci, has initiated a lawsuit to secure approximately 287 million gallons of water annually for the facility's cooling needs, following unsuccessful attempts to utilize recycled wastewater.
Rucci asserts that the data center's water requirements would not increase the burden on the Colorado River. His strategy involves purchasing active agricultural properties, ceasing farming operations, and reallocating their existing water rights to the data center. He argues this approach would have the same water impact as a 160-acre farm, requiring "not a single additional drop" from the river.
However, this proposal has ignited strong opposition from both water management experts and local residents, particularly in the Imperial Valley. The Colorado River, a vital water source for 40 million people, is already severely affected by drought, while Imperial Valley's agricultural sector heavily relies on 80% of the region's river allocation. Critics question the long-term economic and environmental implications of diverting water from agriculture to the AI industry and express concern that the lawsuit could establish a precedent for privatizing water rights in a drought-vulnerable area. Despite the developer's claims of significant economic benefits, including job creation and a $2.8 billion economic impact, community groups remain wary of the project's broader consequences.