Texas index · last changed 12 September 2026

Texas research coverage.

See the available records, draft source-family audit and remaining research gaps. A state page is not a complete inventory of its data centers.

0 recordsTX

Research coverage

Research draft available; independent coverage review pending

Research draft available. Candidate findings and statewide coverage await independent review.

Draft source attempts: 2026-09-12 through 2026-09-12. These are draft audit dates, not a new independent check.

0 reviewed project/campus records; 0 reviewed facility/building records; 0 uncounted records. Inventories are non-additive.

Draft source-family roster and gaps
  • economic development incentives — searched

    Source references: TX-S0001, TX-S0028

    • The JETI current-agreements page was never opened, so the exclusion of data centers from that programme is unconfirmed.
    • Texas Economic Development Corporation and Texas Enterprise Fund award records were not searched.
    • No Comptroller record ties any registration number to a street address, city or county, so most registrations could not be located.
  • utility commission large load — searched_partial

    Source references: TX-S0016, TX-S0017, TX-S0018

    • Every puc.texas.gov host failed TLS certificate verification from this environment, with both WebFetch and curl, so no PUCT docket, order, tariff or electric service agreement was read. This is the largest access gap in the Texas packet.
    • ERCOT's own large load interconnection service pages and generation interconnection queue files were not opened.
    • No utility_request_mw statement is recorded for any Texas candidate, because no readable source attributed queue or interconnection MW to a named site.
  • environmental construction permits — searched

    Source references: TX-S0011, TX-S0012, TX-S0013, TX-S0014, TX-S0015

    • TCEQ standard permit registrations for electric generating units (for example the Crusoe Abilene registration reported in press as 177263) were not retrieved, so no permitted generation nameplate MW is recorded for any Texas candidate.
    • TCEQ water rights, wastewater and stormwater construction general permit notices were not searched.
    • A pending air permit application naming a Dove Creek/Westline TX Holdings data center campus in Tom Green County appeared in search results but its permit number and notice were not located.
    • Title V operating permits and issued (rather than pending) NSR permits were not searched.
  • municipal planning assessor gis — searched_partial

    Source references: TX-S0019, TX-S0020, TX-S0021, TX-S0022, TX-S0023

    • Only Milam County's agendas were swept. Taylor, Ellis, Bexar, Collin, Tarrant, Dallas, Bell, Hill, Navarro, Mitchell, Dickens, Wilbarger, Armstrong, Reeves, Pecos, Hays, Milam and El Paso county and city portals were otherwise untouched.
    • No county appraisal district parcel record was opened, so no Texas candidate carries a parcel identifier.
    • sanmarcostx.gov did not respond, so the Francis Harris Lane council minutes and zoning case number were never read.
    • No GIS layer or zoning case database was queried for any Texas jurisdiction.
  • tax abatement development agreements — searched

    Source references: TX-S0002, TX-S0003, TX-S0004, TX-S0005, TX-S0006, TX-S0007, TX-S0008

    • The registry's per-record City and County contact fields are the appraisal district office address, not the site; county here rests on the reporting appraisal district or on a lead taxing unit that is itself a county.
    • Chapter 380 and 381 city and county development agreements, PILOT agreements and school district agreements were not searched; the Milam County Riot Rockdale PILOT reported in press was never obtained as a document.
    • The registry lists no parcel account for any of the data center rows examined ('Property Account: Unknown').
    • Industrial district agreements, common in Texas extraterritorial jurisdictions, were not searched.
  • operator disclosures — searched_partial

    Source references: TX-S0025, TX-S0026

    • Microsoft, Meta, Amazon Web Services, Oracle and Apple location pages were not opened.
    • No colocation operator site pages (Aligned, CyrusOne, Vantage, STACK, Compass, DataBank, QTS, Equinix, Digital Realty, Stream, Flexential, TierPoint, Prime, Skybox) were opened.
    • Only one SEC filing was retrieved; Core Scientific, Galaxy, Riot, Hut 8, IREN, Soluna, Fermi and Applied Digital filings naming Texas sites were not.
  • open datasets directories — searched

    Source references: TX-S0024

    • Data Center Map, Baxtel, datacenters.com, Cloudscene and PeeringDB were not consulted.
    • About 90 Compute Atlas Texas records, mostly Dallas-Fort Worth, Austin, Houston and San Antonio colocation halls and crypto-mining sites, were read in summary but not worked up into candidates.
  • historical closures withdrawals names — searched_partial

    Source references: TX-S0009, TX-S0010

    • The San Marcos denial rests entirely on an unopened search result; no council minute, ordinance or case number was obtained.
    • The Hill County commissioners court moratorium order and its rescission order were not obtained; only a news account was read.
    • No archived or superseded operator page, no acquisition filing and no demolition record was searched for Texas.
    • Compute Atlas carries no cancelled Texas record, so the dataset contributed nothing to this family.
  • news and other discovery — searched_partial

    Source references: TX-S0027, TX-S0029

    • No systematic Texas news sweep was run; only two stories were followed.
    • The Spectrum News San Marcos story was never opened, so its vote count and acreage remain uncorroborated.

No reviewed records published. This does not mean there are no data centers in this state.