Skip to content
DataCentersExposed
U.S. data-center footprint

Washington

DataCentersExposed tracks 32 AI data centers in Washington — 10 operating and 2 in the pipeline — across 8 counties, drawing 1.7 GW of reported power demand from 15 tracked corporate operators. Washington's data-center tax break cost state and local governments $100.1M in forgone revenue in FY2024.

Sources: Methodology, Coverage scorecard

DataCentersExposed tracks 32 data centers in Washington — 10 operating and 2 proposed. The 8 Washington facilities with disclosed electrical capacity account for 1.7 GW of demand on the grid — power that competes with homes and businesses for the same generation and transmission.

Reporting by · Updated May 29, 2026

Tracked
32
data centers
Operating
10
live today
Pipeline
2
proposed / building
Demand
1.7 GW
8 w/ capacity
Counties
8
touched
Operators
15
corporate parents
The story so far

Washington at a glance

The largest footprint in Washington belongs to Sabey Data Centers, behind 12 tracked facilities. Microsoft Corporation, Centeris, and Vantage Data Centers Holdings, LLC round out the most active operators in the state. Many of these sites are filed under shell or project names rather than the parent's — our operator column resolves them back to the real corporate parent wherever the chain is documented.

Geographically, the buildout clusters: Grant County leads Washington with 12 facilities and a composite risk score of 39/100. Chelan County and King County follow. Our county risk score weights project exposure (40%), power demand (30%), water draw (15%), and land footprint (15%); the full breakdown is shown on each county page.

Washington is not done growing. 2 facilities are in the pipeline — proposed, permitted, or under construction — which is where residents still have a say at zoning hearings and in rate cases. Each pending project is a decision about land, water, electricity prices, and tax revenue that hasn't been finalized.

We also surface the accountability trail: 3 state bills mentioning data centers and 6 recent news items are tracked for Washington below, pulled from LegiScan and GDELT and refreshed automatically. Legislation is linked to the counties and operators it names; news is classified by community sentiment.

Data-center policy watch: Washington enacted SB 5982 (2026), tying large new data-center loads to the state's utility clean-energy deadlines.

Who's building

Top operators in Washington

What the tax break costs

The taxpayer price tag

via Washington State Department of Revenue
$100.1Min forgone state + local revenue, FY2024
Taxpayer savings ($ in millions): FY 2024 State Taxes $77.540, Local Taxes $22.590 ... Taxpayer Count: 22

Program-wide cost of Washington's data-center tax incentive(s), reported by the state — not attributable to a single facility. “Proj” = the state's own forward estimate; all other figures are realized/audited. Each links to its primary source.

Where it's concentrated

County risk leaderboard

Risk methodology
Still contested

Pipeline & proposals

48 of 32 shown

All tracked facilities

FacilityOperatorStatusCountyMW
Google East WenatcheeAlphabet Inc.ProposedDouglas480
Spokane Data CenterProposedSpokane
Microsoft QuincyMicrosoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Grant600
AWS QuincyAmazon.com, Inc.Mapped (unverified)Grant540
ActapioMapped (unverified)Douglas
CSSNW BellinghamOperatingWhatcom
CTI BiopharmaMapped (unverified)King
CenterisCenterisMapped (unverified)Pierce
Centeris SH1 ColocationCenterisMapped (unverified)Pierce
Centeris SH2 Build-to-SuitCenterisMapped (unverified)Pierce
Centersquare Lynnwood SE1CenterSquare (formerly Cyxtera)Mapped (unverified)Snohomish
CyrusOne QuincyCyrusOne LLCMapped (unverified)Grant
Digital Fortress LynnwoodOperatingSnohomish
Eat12Mapped (unverified)Chelan
Eat13Mapped (unverified)Chelan
Eat14Mapped (unverified)Chelan
Equinix SE3 Data CenterEquinix, Inc.OperatingKing
H5 Data CenterPrime Data CentersOperatingGrant
Intergate ColumbiaSabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)Douglas
Intergate Columbia ASabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)Douglas
Intergate Columbia BSabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)Douglas
Intergate Columbia DSabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)Douglas
Intergate Quincy Data CenterSabey Data CentersOperatingGrant
Intergate Seattle East Building 1Sabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)King
Intergate Seattle East Building 2Sabey Data CentersOperatingKing
Intergate Seattle East Building 3Sabey Data CentersOperatingKing
Intergate Seattle East Building 4Digital Realty Trust, Inc.Mapped (unverified)King
Intergate Seattle East Building 5Sabey Data CentersOperatingKing
Intergate Seattle West Building ASabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)King
Intergate Seattle West Building BSabey Data CentersMapped (unverified)King
Intergate Seattle West Building CSabey Data CentersOperatingKing
Iron MountainIron Mountain IncorporatedMapped (unverified)Spokane
KOMO Plaza EastOperatingKing
KOMO Plaza WestMapped (unverified)King
MicrosoftMicrosoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Grant
MicrosoftMicrosoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Grant
Microsoft EAT02Microsoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Douglas
Microsoft EAT03Microsoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Douglas
Microsoft EAT04Microsoft CorporationMapped (unverified)Douglas
NTT Data QuincyNTT Global Data CentersMapped (unverified)Grant
Norma Beach Cable Landing StationMapped (unverified)Snohomish
The Seattle TimesH5 Data CentersOperatingKing
TierPointTierPoint, LLCMapped (unverified)Spokane
Vantage WA11Vantage Data Centers Holdings, LLCMapped (unverified)Grant
Vantage WA12Vantage Data Centers Holdings, LLCMapped (unverified)Grant
Vantage WA13Vantage Data Centers Holdings, LLCMapped (unverified)Grant
Westin BuildingDigital Realty Trust, Inc.OperatingKing
Yahoo Data CenterPrime Data CentersOperatingGrant

Methodology & sources

Facility counts include operating, under-construction, proposed, and permitted sites. Capacity (MW) combines operator disclosures, interconnection-queue estimates, and research datasets; see each facility for provenance. County risk scores weight project exposure (40%), power demand (30%), water draw (15%), and land footprint (15%), renormalized over measured factors.

Every row carries a confidence level (high / medium / low) and a source URL. Spot an error? Tell us.