Presenter warns Austin could face water, power and community impacts from gigawatt-scale data centers

Bobby Levinsky, a senior staff attorney with Sabre Springs Alliance, told the Joint Sustainability Committee on June 24 that Texas is becoming an "epicenter for data centers" and that Austin should prepare for significant impacts on water, energy and local communities. Levinsky said many proposed projects are reaching gigawatt scale and "they're going to be using more power and more water," a trend he linked to a potential increase in consumer energy rates.

Levinsky described his advocacy work in nearby communities, including litigation he filed against Guadalupe County over two large data centers, and said operators often prioritize rapid deployment over long-term local planning. "We stopped one data center through zoning... and on Monday of this week I filed a lawsuit," he said, framing the presentation around observed local effects in Central Texas.

The presentation flagged several specific concerns for Austin: increased transmission and generation costs that can be passed to ratepayers, strains on Lake Travis-dependent water supplies, and clustering of heavy infrastructure that can concentrate pollution and heat. Levinsky said backup power requirements under SB 6 mean large centers ‘‘often [use] diesel generators’’ and that generator and plant emissions factor into local fine-particulate (PM2.5) concerns.

He also criticized recent state-level deregulation and gaps in planning, citing SB 2038 as curtailing local authority and urging steps such as stronger service-extension policies, clearer city approval for large service requests, and better state regulation via the TCEQ. Levinsky noted that some communities have pursued zoning changes or moratoria to slow projects and that the Austin Environmental Commission has drafted recommendations the City Council is expected to consider in August.

On public records, Levinsky said his request to the City of Austin for a dataset of sites in the queue was delayed and that the only third-party objection he knew of came from Tesla; he said an attorney general ruling required release but that the city remained behind in fulfilling production. "I've made a public information request to the city of Austin for that very question, and that information has been being withheld," he said.

Committee members asked technical questions about air emissions and water reuse. Levinsky warned that reclaimed water is not a one-for-one solution because some cooling and industrial uses remove water from reuse cycles, and that non-water cooling options increase capital and operating costs and thus may be avoided by cost-focused operators. The committee agreed to revisit the topic next month as staff and commissioners pursue follow-up information from Austin Energy and other sources.