Commonalities across the site’s sourced data, and the directional predictions they support. Two lanes: Observed (primary-sourced facts) and Derived (arithmetic on those facts). Every derived figure shows its formula, the exact source numbers, and a defensibility tier — grounded (a ratio of two sourced figures) or directional (a trend to read as “at the recent observed pace”). Nothing is estimated to fill a gap.
“Paper gigawatts” multiple — requested queue vs the whole metered grid
requested_queue ÷ metered_system_peak = 438,000 ÷ 91,075 MW. The requested queue exceeds ERCOT's entire current peak by this multiple — full realization would require the grid to grow several-fold.
Firm-capacity headroom before any new large load lands
firm_dispatchable − metered_peak = 87,108 − 91,075 MW. A thin cushion on the dispatchable fleet alone; intermittent nameplate is excluded. Point-in-time, not a forecast.
approved_to_energize sits at 9,042 MW at the latest snapshot with a value, while requested has climbed toward 438,000 MW — each incremental GW requested converts to a smaller share of real approval. Extrapolating headline queue growth to future load is unreliable.
Sum of per-facility disclosed/attributed power (gross MW, falling back to IT MW) by operator. Disclosure-biased: only 587 of 27,404 tracked facilities state any power figure, and rows mix operational, announced, and third-party-estimated capacity — read as a coverage-weighted ranking, not an operational-MW census.
Operator
Facilities
Attributed capacity
Crusoe
3
12.5 GW
Amazon
11
10.5 GW
Softbank/Open AI (unconfirmed)
1
9.2 GW
TransGas Development, LLC
2
4.8 GW
Homer City Redevelopment (with Kiewit as contractor/partner)
1
4.5 GW
Google
23
4.4 GW
Aligned Data Centers
3
3.8 GW
Meta
17
3.6 GW
Balico LLC
1
3.5 GW
Vermaland LLC
1
3.0 GW
Stak
1
3.0 GW
IREN
2
2.8 GW
Microsoft
14
2.5 GW
VALCO HANOVER COUNTY
1
2.4 GW
PowerHouse Data Centers
2
2.2 GW
Tract
2
2.1 GW
Poolside/CoreWeave
1
2.0 GW
Granite Renewables
1
2.0 GW
Eneus Energy
1
2.0 GW
xAI
2
1.9 GW
Counties by tracked capacity
Where disclosed capacity concentrates — a directional “next-hotspot” read, same disclosure caveat as above.
County
Attributed capacity
Laramie, WY, United States
10.2 GW
Pike, OH, United States
9.2 GW
Box Elder, UT, United States
9.0 GW
Lea County, NM, United States
7.0 GW
Pecos, TX, United States
7.0 GW
Mingo, WV, United States
4.8 GW
Indiana, PA, United States
4.5 GW
Beaver, PA, United States
4.2 GW
Hanover, VA, United States
4.2 GW
Will, IL, United States
4.0 GW
Pittsylvania, VA, United States
3.8 GW
Maricopa, AZ, United States
3.8 GW
Lackawanna, PA, United States
3.6 GW
North Slope, AK, United States
3.1 GW
Lake, IN, United States
3.1 GW
These are analytical readings, not investment advice or a delivery forecast. ERCOT is the deepest-covered region today; the same funnel math generalizes to PJM/MISO/CAISO and other ISOs as their queues are ingested (each with its own source). Derived figures update every build as the underlying sourced data refreshes.