1186
Data center "mistakenly" used 30 million gallons of water
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 May 2026
1186 points (99.2% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
16725 readers
102 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
“One water connection had been installed without the utility’s knowledge, and the other was not linked to the company’s account and therefore wasn’t being billed,” Politico reported. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/data-center-used-30-million-gallons-of-water-without-initially-paying/
Your linked article references the account that was known but not billed. Ars Technica references both that account and a second account that wasn't known and wasn't billed.
Even the first account was illegal in that water usage exceeded the original water limits agreement.
I can see how you could read it like that but it has been further clarified:
The same quote, without explicitly stating the meter was inspected, could be ambiguous. Further:
The letter was such a mess. You can't use private fire fighting lines for non fire fighting purposes. It makes no sense the conversation would just be "oh we didn't bill you", not "you need to stop."
The following section was incorrect, I was looking at the wrong line on the audit spreadsheet.
(Begin correction)
The board's meeting minutes are similarly goofy.
The person who wrote this has no clue what they are talking about. The cost per unit water doubled because half the water production was unbilled. Their "leakage index" was 7.01 in 2024, up from 3.46 in 2023.
(End correction)
YIKES
They haven't met since March.
Tl;dr: the utility clarified there was no unauthorized connection, and wow they are absurdly understaffed I'm not surprised this is such a mess
From your own quote,
"that her staff may have known about the hookups, but that she had not been able to locate the inspection report."
Again, there were 2 questionable hookups. Not one. Two. The first was known and not billed.
The second, by all current evidence, was not known about. "May have known." "Can't locate the inspection report."
Third, they went over their agreed amount of water usage.
You keep discussing the first hookup, which wasn't illegal and ignoring the second hookup which as of now, was illegal AND they illegally went over their water usage.
I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this. We are reading the quotes differently. I'll try one more time.
All from this article: https://thecitizen.com/2026/05/14/the-qts-water-story-is-real-its-just-not-about-qts/
And referencing this letter: https://protectpwc.org/2026/05/05/13786/
There are actually three meters:
The letter says the 8" domestic was installed without inspection, and that the fireline on highway 54 was not hooked up to the account and the fire line on Tyrone road was using more water than allowed and therefore a higher rate will be charged. That's 27.5 MG unbilled and 13.2 million at the 'wrong' rate.
This accounts for the 'illegal hookup". The "central claim" is that there was a meter that was not inspected. This person has indicated that the meter was inspected.
She did not know about the hook up and inspection. She assumed there was no inspection because she could not locate the report.
I was wrong about the leak audits, I was looking at the wrong line of the reports. I will correct my comments.