Batch Zero Index: Texas Data Center Site Readiness
KD Capital and the Abbott administration have set three checks for projects seeking state cooperation. Is the project real? Has community impact been addressed? Can the team execute? We applied all three checks to announced Texas projects in our live database.
No site names are published here. The purpose is to show the distribution — what the batch looks like before capital commits, while there's still time to change the answer.
What this Texas site-readiness analysis covers
Batch Zero Index is a study of Texas data center site readiness. It is not a training program or a national list of cleared greenfield land. It compares announced Texas projects in our data using community-readiness signals, Site Viability and ERCOT grid context. Public charts omit project names. Use them to ask early questions before advancing a shortlist or committing funds.
The study is limited by available project records and how precisely each site is located. Check the evidence dates shown on the page. It uses current API data when available; the static fallback is not a new census of all Texas proposals. A favorable tier does not prove spare power, water rights, permit eligibility or local support. Ask site-specific questions, then check the facts with the responsible experts and authorities.
What does Batch Zero Index measure?
It compares the community-readiness and Site Viability signals for Texas data center projects represented in the data, alongside ERCOT context. The dimensions answer different screening questions; they are not interchangeable measures of project feasibility.
Does a Ready tier mean a project is approved or buildable?
No. A screening tier summarizes modeled evidence under the page's stated thresholds. It is not a utility capacity commitment, interconnection approval, permit decision, water-rights confirmation, or a statement of community support.
Why are project names not shown in the public charts?
The public page presents an anonymized distribution so readers can understand the batch without treating a chart as a project-specific public verdict. Project-level diligence requires the underlying location, evidence dates, source context, and limitations.
How should I use the index for a new site?
Use it to identify the kinds of questions worth asking, then obtain a current screen for the actual parcel or coordinate. Regional and cohort context cannot establish site-level power, engineering feasibility, permitting, or local approval.
Research behind the site screens · Site-specific diligence and limitations
The Three-Part Standard
Is it real?
Every site in this dataset holds an ERCOT interconnection queue position. Grid risk baseline: 35/100 — consistent across ERCOT. LBNL historical data shows ~48% of ERCOT-region queue positions are withdrawn before reaching commercial operation.
Base-rate queue risk: ~48%Community impact addressed?
A 0–100 read on how cleanly a site clears local approval, built from public-record planning, zoning, and regulatory activity and benchmarked against peer jurisdictions. Know which sites move — and which spend two years before the local board.
61% below thresholdCan it execute?
Composite site score across water & climate exposure, grid & power exposure, regulatory exposure, and aquifer depth. Higher is cleaner. Sites in the bottom band of the batch carry an elevated-concern score.
Top-band viability flaggedThe Field — All 31 Sites
Each dot = one announced Texas AI data center. No names published. CRS (x-axis) is the community readiness signal — lower is better. Site Viability Score (y-axis) is the composite site score — higher is better (cleaner site). Threshold lines mark the inflection points.
Key Findings
Community Intelligence Distribution
How CRS scores distribute across all 31 announced Texas sites.
All 31 sites. Every score. Anonymized.
Access the complete site-by-site table: CRS, Site Viability Score, and tier verdict for every announced Texas project in our database.
Methodology Note
CRS (Community Readiness Score) is a 0–100 read on how cleanly a site clears local approval, built from public-record planning, zoning, and regulatory activity and benchmarked against peer jurisdictions. It draws on US Census demographic data, national interconnection queue outcomes, and our community and legislation tracker, which accounts for documented local actions near a site. Lower is cleaner. The underlying model parameters are proprietary.
Site Viability Score is a 0–100 composite that blends water supply risk, grid and power exposure, and regulatory and community factors into a single read on how cleanly a site profiles overall. Higher is cleaner. Sites flagged for elevated concern fall in the lowest-scoring band of this batch. The specific inputs, weightings, and thresholds are proprietary.
Sites are identified by lat/lng within Texas ERCOT market boundaries. No site names or company affiliations are published in this report. LBNL queue withdrawal rate of ~48% is applied as a population-level base rate, not site-specific.
Want to see where risk signals stack up across Texas? Explore the Texas County Exposure Map →
Want a named-site analysis for your portfolio? See the Capital Diligence Pack →