What the new reassurance actually covers
Writing in Meta's newsroom, Tom Shaw describes an air-cooled facility and a sealed liquid-cooling design. He explicitly limits his account to sites he visited. That is an explanation from the operator's publication, not an independent meter audit. (Sources 1)
His August explanation ties its low-water comparison to closed-loop cooling with dry coolers. The equipment description matters; ‘data center’ alone does not tell you the water demand. (Sources 2)
A small statewide share can hide a larger local one
Virginia's December 2024 audit estimated 2023 data-center water use at 2.1 billion gallons, just over a third reclaimed rather than newly withdrawn. It put the industry's share below 0.5% of statewide withdrawals. At six reviewed utilities, however, data centers represented 0.2%–21% of customer use after reclaimed water was excluded. Those percentages have different denominators; they are not competing measurements of the same thing. They show why a state's total cannot answer one town's question. (Sources 3)
Ask for the whole water account
Before judging a project, ask the operator and utility for annual and peak-day whole-facility use, its water source, reclaimed supply, return flows and drought operating terms. For an unopened facility, separate forecasts from actual readings. Compare other customers in the same water system and period, not a national golf-course average. An efficient design deserves credit. Its local water account still deserves a look.
What this record cannot settle
This checks the scope of water reassurance, not every Meta facility, its Louisiana electricity agreement or today's local supply. The older Virginia audit is not a 2026 meter reading; shortage causation is not established here.