Wednesday, December 31, 2025

The Rural Crescent Was about Water

The update to the Comprehensive Plan, Pathway to 2040 does us no favors. It sacrificed the sustainability and quality of our water resources for greenfield development and growth through sprawl. Removing the protected Rural Crescent from the Prince William County comprehensive plan and allowing for higher density sprawling suburban development, even with green infrastructure (GI), will over time likely result in impairment to our water resources that provide the fresh source water for the Occoquan Reservoir

The Rural Crescent, established in 1998, acted as a crucial urban growth boundary, protecting an extensive area of undeveloped farmland and forests. Its primary functions, which are vital for the county's water supply, include: 

  • Watershed protection: It covered most of the Prince William County’s 40% of the Occoquan Watershed, a key source of public drinking water for a large portion of Northern Virginia.
  • Groundwater recharge: The large amount of open, pervious land allowed rainwater to slowly infiltrate the ground, replenishing the aquifers that supply wells for the western part of the county and providing base flow to the streams and creeks that come together to form Bull Run and the Occoquan River.
  • Pollutant filtration: The natural landscape's vegetation and soil effectively filtered pollutants before they enter local streams and the Occoquan Reservoir. 

Higher density sprawling suburban development fundamentally alters these natural processes by introducing vast areas of impervious surfaces (roofs, roads, parking lots). This leads to: 

  • Increased and rapid stormwater runoff: This causes erosion, flooding, and carries pollutants directly into waterways.
  • Inland salinization: More roads and neighborhoods increase the amount of seasonal salting and increases the salinity of our streams, creeks, and rivers -all our water resources.
  • Reduced groundwater recharge: Water cannot penetrate impervious surfaces, putting groundwater supplies at risk as well as impairing our perennial streams which depend on the surface /groundwater interface to survive.
  • Infrastructure strain: High-density development requires the extension of public water and sewer lines, which has historically been restricted in the Rural Crescent to prevent this very sprawl and its associated costs and environmental impacts. 

While green infrastructure practices (like rain gardens and permeable pavements) are effective at managing stormwater within developed areas, they cannot fully replicate the scale and efficiency of a vast, naturally functioning forest and open space ecosystem. Preserving large natural landscapes is widely considered the most effective method for protecting regional water resources. Green Infrastructure is a necessary mitigation tool within existing or designated development areas, not a substitute for the preservation of critical environmental lands.

Sunday, December 28, 2025

Is Green Infrastructure Enough?

Replacing open space and forested areas with moderate to high-density development and then using green infrastructure (GI) will not mitigate the damage to water resources . While GI is a critical tool for managing stormwater, it cannot fully replicate the comprehensive hydrological functions of mature, natural ecosystems like forests. Green infrastructure is planting some trees, having a green roof maybe making a wetland area, it can reduce flooding in a city, but it cannot replicate acres of woodland and open space and natural wetlands. 

Replacing forests and open spaces with impervious surfaces fundamentally alters the natural water cycle, leading to increased runoff, reduced groundwater recharge, and higher pollutant loads. Green infrastructure can help manage these impacts, but preserving existing natural landscapes is considered the most effective and economical way to protect water resources. This is why the Rural Crescent was an essential element of a sustainable region.

Comparing Natural Landscapes, Development, and Green Infrastructure




Key Considerations
  • Preservation First: The most effective approach to protecting water resources is to preserve natural open spaces, forests, and wetlands in the first place. Development should be directed toward areas with less ecological value.
  • GI as a Mitigation Tool, Not a Replacement: Green infrastructure is essential for making developed areas more sustainable and resilient. It effectively lessens the negative impacts of development by mimicking natural processes, but it does not eliminate them entirely. It is a critical tool for mitigation, not a 1-to-1 replacement for a natural landscape.
  • The Role of High-Density Development: Paradoxically, when development is necessary, higher-density, compact development can be better for regional water quality than low-density sprawl. This is because it consumes less land overall, allowing more extensive natural areas to be preserved. Integrating GI into this compact development is a key strategy for smart growth.
  • Limitations of Green Infrastructure: The effectiveness of GI can be limited by factors such as space constraints in dense urban areas, soil conditions, maintenance requirements, and initial costs. Furthermore, some GI designs may not be suitable for infiltrating water if there is a risk of mobilizing existing ground contaminants

Wednesday, December 24, 2025

Dirty by Design- Subordinating Human Health to Data Centers

After the December  2025, power auction results confirmed a 6,623 MW shortfall in the reliability target, PJM and Virginia regulators are pivoting toward a strategy that treats data centers not just as consumers, but as a "distributed power plant" of last resort.

Here is the breakdown of how this "backup generator" strategy is being formalized between PJM, Dominion Energy, and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

The DEQ "Emergency" Redefinition

The Virginia DEQ issued a critical guidance memo (APG-578) in late 2025 that effectively opens the door for this strategy.

  • The "Planned Outage" Loophole: Historically, data centers were only allowed to run their diesel generators during "sudden and unforeseeable" emergencies. The DEQ has now expanded this to include "planned outages" or "grid stress events" scheduled by the utility with 14 days' notice or less.
  • Consent and Compliance: By redefining these as "emergencies," DEQ allows data centers to bypass certain air quality restrictions that usually prevent them from running Tier II (dirtier) diesel engines for non-emergency power.

"Demand Response" vs. "Interruptible Service"

PJM is currently finalizing a "Large Load" proposal for FERC that would fundamentally change how data centers in the Dominion Zone connect to the grid:

  • Interruptible by Default: New data center interconnections are increasingly being offered "interruptible" status. This means they are allowed to connect to the grid only if they agree to drop their load (switch to backup generators) when the grid hits 95% capacity.
  • The Reliability Gap: The 6,623 MW auction shortfall essentially becomes a "paper gap" if PJM can count on data centers to voluntarily remove themselves from the grid during peak winter or summer events.

The Environmental Trade-off

This strategy has sparked a fierce debate in Northern Virginia (Loudoun and Prince William Counties):

  • Localized Pollution: A study from Virginia’s legislative research arm (JLARC) warned that if the thousands of data center generators in "Data Center Alley" all turned on at once, they could release 9,000 tons of nitrogen oxides—roughly half of the total annual emissions for all sources in Northern Virginia.
  • Noise and Health: Residents are concerned that "grid stress" events (like a 3-day cold snap) could result in thousands of diesel engines running for 72 hours straight in residential corridors.

Why this matters for the 2027/2028 Planning Year

Because the December 2025 auction failed to secure enough "firm" power (coal, gas, or nuclear) to meet the 20% reserve margin, the grid will enter the 2027/2028 year with only a 14.8% margin.

To bridge that 5% gap, PJM is betting on:

  1. The DEQ Policy: Ensuring data centers can legally run their backups.
  2. Dominion’s New GS-5 Rate Class: A new rate category for 25MW+ customers that incentivizes them to move their own power generation on-site (BYOC - "Bring Your Own Capacity").

While this keeps the "lights on" for residents, it effectively turns Northern Virginia into a de facto diesel power plant whenever it gets too cold or too hot, bypassing the spirit of the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) which sought to eliminate carbon emissions.

The Virginia DEQ recently acknowledged that they have never performed a cumulative modeling exercise for these clusters. Under the new DEQ guidance, if PJM declares a "Grid Stress Event" (such as a 48-hour cold snap), the "generator zones" in Ashburn and Gainesville would effectively become the primary power source for the data centers. This would mean thousands of diesel engines running simultaneously in close proximity to schools and homes, potentially releasing half of the region's annual Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) budget in just a few days.

Sunday, December 21, 2025

PJM price control creates shortages at record high prices

The results of the PJM Base Residual Auction for the 2027/2028 Planning Year were released on December 17, 2025.  For the first time ever, the entire 13 state PJM footprint (serving more than 65 million people) failed to meet its target reliability standards due to explosive electricity demand from data centers and price controls.

The price for the December 2025 auction was capped due to a legal settlement aimed at preventing a "runaway" price spike that could have crippled household and business budgets across the entire 13-state PJM region.

Without this cap, it is estimated that the price would have hit at least $529/MW-day in the range of pervious auctions, but the ceiling was held it at $333.44/MW-day. Though this effectively saved ratepayers an estimated $9.9 billion in this auction, PJM was unable to obtain all the power they needed to reach their reliability target. PJM was able to purchase only 63% of the 17,922 MW needed to reach the 20% reliability target.

Key Auction Results

The auction cleared a total of 134,479 MW of capacity, falling significantly short of the intended targets.

  • Clearing Price: Prices hit the FERC-approved cap of $333.44/MW-day across the entire PJM footprint.
  • Total Market Cost: The total cost to secure this capacity reached $16.4 billion, a record high (up from $16.1 billion in the July 2025 auction and $14.7 billion in the 2024 auction).
  • Reliability Gap: The auction was short by 6,623 MW, leaving PJM with a 14.8% reserve margin—well below its 20% reliability target. (See DEQ below)
  • Resource Mix: 43% Natural Gas, 21% Nuclear, 20% Coal, 5% Demand Response, and roughly 5% from renewables (Wind, Solar, Hydro).

Major Factors in the Auction failure

The extreme results were the product of several converging factors:

  • The Data Center/ AI Boom: Forecasted peak load for 2027-2028 year increased by roughly 5,250 MW, with a staggering 97% (5,100 MW) of that growth attributed specifically to data center demand.
  • Stagnant Supply: Only 774 MW of new generation was available, as new projects struggle with slow interconnection queues and high construction costs.
  • Retirements: The grid continues to lose "firm" generation as older coal and gas plants retire faster than new resources can be connected to meet state mandated climate targets like the Virginia Clean Economy Act and similar “Clean Energy Standard” laws in Maryland and Illinois.
  • Regulatory Caps: Without the court-ordered and FERC-approved price caps, PJM estimated prices would have hit $529/MW-day.

Critical Implications

The 2025 auction marks a turning point for energy policy and consumer costs in the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest.

For Consumers

  • Higher Bills: Electricity bills for households and businesses across 13 states (including PA, NJ, VA, and OH) are expected to rise. Analysts estimate retail rate increases of 3.7% to 10.6% in the short term, with some regions potentially seeing much steeper hikes by 2027.
  • For a residential customer in the Dominion Energy territory, for the 2026–2027 timeframe the estimated monthly cost for 1,000 kWh is expected to rise to ~$150.00 – $165.00. Up from ~$116 in 2020. This includes~$24.00 – $28.00 from VCEA Riders.
  • Affordability Crisis:  Ratepayers are subsidizing the infrastructure necessary to power the explosive demand growth from the data center/ AI boom. These are the richest corporations on earth.  In addition, this has sparked intense political backlash from state governors.

For Grid Reliability

  • Operational Risk: Being 6.6 GW short of the 1-in-10-year reliability standard means the grid has a thinner margin for error during extreme weather events (e.g., Winter Storm Elliott-style scenarios or heat wavers).
  • Emergency Measures: PJM may need to rely on "Incremental Auctions" in 2027 or ask retiring plants to stay online via "Reliability Must-Run" contracts to bridge the gap.
  • The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is currently considering allowing data centers to run backup diesel generators during planned outage events.  There are currently 4,000 MW of backup generation in Northern Virginia alone.  These generators are generally Tier II or unrated diesel engines (designed only for emergency use) and are a highly polluting energy source. Increased operation would increase the emission of harmful air pollutants, posing a significant public health burden, but essentially solving PJM’s reliability margin.
  • Reform Pressure: There is mounting pressure on PJM and FERC to accelerate the "interconnection queue"—the process of approving new power plants—which currently has over 57 GW of projects waiting to proceed. There is also currently tremendous pushback from residents over the transmission lines necessary for this.

The "Shapiro Settlement"

In late 2024, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro filed a formal complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). He argued that PJM’s auction design was "deeply flawed" and would lead to unjustified price increases.

  • The Deal: To resolve the complaint, PJM and FERC agreed to a temporary "Price Collar" for the 2026/27 and 2027/28 auctions.
  • The Goal: The cap was meant to act as a "circuit breaker" or "guardrail" to give the grid operator time to fix its backlogged process for connecting new, cheaper power plants (like solar and batteries) without exposing consumers to infinite price hikes in the meantime.

Market Power Concerns

The price collar was put in place because regulators were concerned about "Market Power." In a typical market, if prices go up, new competitors rush in to sell their product. However, growth in demand from data centers has been unprecedented. PJM has a massive backlog of new power projects waiting to be built. The energy sector is highly regulated and controlled. The base residual auction was designed to attract new investment by offering high prices. However, the energy market is highly regulated to assure reliability of the grid and growth in a planned manner, and it has been decades since the power grid has experienced growth. 

The cap exists because regulators decided it was unfair to make consumers pay "scarcity prices" for a shortage that was created by local politicians who approved millions upon millions of square feet of data centers without considering the power demand or transmission necessary. The state politicians who passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act and similar “Clean Energy Standard” laws in Maryland and Illinois that requires the  retirement of dispatchable fossil fuel generated power faster than new resources can be connected to meet state mandated climate targets . And of course the grid operator's own administrative delays for permits, and transmission lines, and completed construction that their bureaucracy helped create. Now residents are pushing back. 


Wednesday, December 17, 2025

An Early Cold Snap and WSSC aging Pipes

A colder-than-average December is triggering an increase in water main breaks and leaks across Montgomery and Prince George’s counties. The Potomac River temperature is a powerful predictor of water main breaks and leaks. As the river temperature drops, water main breaks/leaks increase, as shown in the chart below.

from WSSC

Between November 26 and Tuesday, the river temperature dropped about 17 degrees from 49 to 32 degrees, triggering a significant uptick in the number of water main breaks and leaks. WSSC Water has experienced 293 breaks/leaks since November 26. 

There is a direct connection between dropping water temperatures in the Potomac River and the increase in water main breaks.  According to the WSSC, they typically see an increase in breaks a few days after the Potomac River temperature hits a new low as the colder water hits the distribution system. The dropping water temperature can “shock” water mains, and though the pipes become accustomed to the cold water; whenever water temperatures hit a new low, there follows a spike in breaks.

On average, WSSC crews repair more than 1,800 water main breaks and leaks each year, with the vast majority of them, approximately 1,200, occurring between November and February. WSSC has already repaired approximately 300 breaks since November this year.  Last winter as seen below, the total number of breaks was above average. There is a large percentage of the distribution system that is quite old.

WSSC Water spends approximately $17 million each year for emergency water main repairs alone, with about $10 million spent November through February. During a typical year, WSSC Water crews repair more than 1,800 water main breaks and leaks, approximately 65 % of which (1,152) occur between November and February. 

Aging infrastructure is a critical factor in breaks and leaks. The older pipes are “shocked” by the colder water, causing them to break. Approximately 42% of the water mains in WSSC Water’s system are more than 50 years old. 


During a typical year, WSSC Water crews repair nearly 1,800 water main breaks and leaks, approximately 63% of which (1,127) occur between November and February. 

 

WSSC Water asks for patience, during the busy winter months. All water main breaks and leaks are inspected and prioritized for repair, taking into account the damage being caused, the safety of the area and the number of customers impacted. With the escalating number of water main breaks, response time can be delayed due to the limited number of crews working across the 1,000-square-mile service area. 

According to WSSC a leak that is not causing damage can be left running to ensure customers have water service until a crew is available to make repairs. Water mains in the WSSC Water distribution system range from three inches to 96 inches in diameter. WSSC Water’s emergency water main break and leak repair costs have increased significantly in recent years. In FY 25, WSSC Water spent $33 million responding to 2,259 breaks and leaks, with $22 million spent between November and February, the four busiest winter months: 

  • FY 25: $33 million | 2,259 breaks and leaks
  • FY 24: $20 million | 1,697 breaks and leaks
  • FY 23: $17 million | 1,566 breaks and leaks

While emergency repairs address immediate service needs, areas experiencing repeated water main breaks will be addressed through WSSC Water’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which focuses on long-term system reliability and infrastructure renewal. The Fiscal Years 2026-2031 CIP is $4.8 billion. 

WSSC Water, serving 1.9 million customers in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, maintains nearly 6,000 miles of water mains covering a 1,000-square-mile area. With such an extensive, aging distribution system spanning the two counties, WSSC Water encourages customers to report water main breaks and leaks as quickly as possible.

Responding to these emergencies has slowed WSSC’s ability to replace the older water mains and WSSC continues to work to update the system. WSSC serves 1.9 million customers in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, with approximately 5,900 miles of water mains covering a 1,000-square-mile area. With such an extensive, aging distribution system spanning the two counties it is hard to keep up and very difficult to move forward to reduce the age of the system of pipes.

Sunday, December 14, 2025

New Report Exposes our Region’s Water Vulnerability

 

From a new release from the ICPRB:

We have always assumed when we turn on the tap, there will be water; but that is not true for everyone and may not always be true for us in the DMV. New research from the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) notes that changing weather patterns and increased water demand from data centers are putting a strain on the region’s water supply. Without significant investment in water infrastructure this may have dire consequences according the ICPRB.

The report, 2025 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Study - Demand and Resource Availability Forecast for the Year 2050, shows that the region will have plentiful water most years, but there is an increasing chance — up to about 1 percent in 2030 and up to about 5 percent in 2050 — that there will be water shortages. This is when there is not enough water to meet the demands of the water users while still leaving enough water in the Potomac River to protect the sensitive aquatic habitat below Little Falls Dam.

According to the report, despite exponential population growth in the region, overall water use had stayed remarkably stable over the past several decades due to the use of low flow fixtures and appliances. Water use in general peaked in 2005; however, the ICPRB predicts an increase in water demand in the coming decades, with a 17 % increase in water use by 2050. This translates to a rise from approximately 465 million gallons per day (MGD) to about 538 MGD. For the first time, the study specifically evaluated the impact of data centers. It found that their upstream water use is expected to grow substantially, potentially consuming up to 80 million gallons on peak days by 2050. So that population water use will continue to decline.

In addition to more overall water demand, the river’s flow may be impacted by predicted changes in temperature and precipitation through a process that has been characterized as “hot drought” by ICPRB. “Results from our study indicate that extreme hydrological droughts may become more severe due to increasing temperatures," explains Dr. Cherie Schultz, Director of ICPRB’s Section for Cooperative Water Supply Operations on the Potomac. “A major uncertainty in many regions, including the Potomac, is the response of future stream flow to the competing effects of temperature change and precipitation change. Rising temperatures will tend to decrease flows due to increases in evaporation, while predicted increases in precipitation will tend to increase flows,” continued Dr. Schultz. “It is changing weather patterns combined with the increase in demand that may be putting the whole system at risk,” states ICPRB Executive Director Michael Nardolilli.

The study estimates that during an extreme drought event, changes in river flow could range from a 3% increase to a 25% decrease for the period 2010–2039. This potential for flow reduction worsens over time, with a projected range of a 9% increase to a 32% decrease in flow for the period 2040–2069, depending on how sensitive flows are to rising temperatures. The study uses climate change data derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) to model these future impacts. Though, the water supply planning is primarily tested against the risk of a future extreme drought similar in severity to the 1930 drought  the worst the region experienced on record.

The data center forecast estimates are based on grid-connected energy forecasts, which are rapidly evolving as the sector continues to expand. In the Washington metropolitan area, data centers could use as much as 80 million gallons on peak days by 2050. This could signal the growing significance of data centers in the region’s water demand. The report notes that balancing energy, water, regulations, and infrastructure constraints may be needed to strengthen resiliency in this sector. One step forward would be to improve transparency around data center water use. The majority of the Washington metropolitan area’s water supply is provided by the Potomac River.

from ICPRB

While most regions have two or more sources of water, the Potomac River is the only source of drinking water for the residents of Washington D.C. and Arlington County. Two upstream reservoirs, Jennings Randolph and Little Seneca, are available to release water to augment Potomac River flow should the river get too low to meet the region’s demands. In addition, off-Potomac reservoirs, Fairfax Water's Occoquan Reservoir and WSSC Water's Patuxent reservoir, are used to partially meet these suppliers' demands. According to the study, four out of nine modeled scenarios predict that in the event of an extreme drought, the upstream reservoirs will run out of water as early as 2030, indicating that short-term measures should be taken to improve reliability.

Some short-term solutions are already in the works. Improvements in ICPRB’s river flow forecasts can help water resource planners better predict when to release water from upstream reservoirs. A water reuse project recently announced by DC Water, dubbed Pure Water DC, aims to create a more resilient water source for residents of the District. Two drinking water reservoirs currently in the planning stages, Loudoun Water’s Milestone Reservoir (expected operational by 2028) and Fairfax Water’s Edgemon Reservoir (expected operational by 2040), were already included in the report’s calculations.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, initiated a D.C. Metropolitan Area Backup Water Supply Feasibility Study last fall which could lead the way to possible long-term solutions. However, with federal funding issues hanging in the balance, it is unclear when that study will be completed.  “We can no longer ignore the fact that parts of the DC region have only one source of drinking water – the Potomac River – and just a one-day back-up of water supply. Today’s release of the 2025 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Study highlights the need to expedite the study so that we can reduce the vulnerability of the DC region from a cutoff of drinking water because of drought or contamination events (both accidental and deliberate),” explained Nardolilli.

“This report confirms the need for innovative and cooperative approaches, as well as funding, to secure the water supply for our region,” said WSSC Water General Manager and CEO Kishia L. Powell. “The Potomac River has provided the vast majority of the region’s drinking water for generations. But climate pressures and growing demand will impact our ability to meet the region’s needs in just a few years. This report makes clear that we need to continue with substantial investments to safeguard public health, enhance reliability and resiliency, and ensure the long-term economic vitality of the region.”

 An earlier study released by ICPRB found that a significant water supply disruption could result in losses of almost $15 billion in gross regional product and hundreds of millions in tax losses, all within the first month. “For nearly 50 years Fairfax Water, WSSC Water, the Washington Aqueduct and ICPRB have been working together to ensure adequate water supply for the Washington Metropolitan Region now and into the future” said Fairfax Water General Manager and CEO Jamie Bain Hedges. “This study further advances our collective mission to supply life’s most essential service for decades to come.” The water supply study released on December 5th is conducted every five years by the Section for Cooperative Water Supply Operations on the Potomac (CO-OP) of the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) on behalf of the three major water suppliers: Fairfax Water, WSSC Water, and the Washington Aqueduct. This is the first year that the study has explored the impacts of data centers on the water supply.

Wednesday, December 10, 2025

Chesapeake Bay states Approve a new Watershed Agreement for the Next Era of Bay Restoration

 

From an EPA press release:

The Chesapeake Executive Council met at the National Aquarium last week to formally approve a revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. Since 1983, the Chesapeake Bay Program has used the “voluntary agreements” to guide restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, the nation’s largest estuary and its watershed.

The ceremonial signing of the agreement is the culmination of work that began more than three years ago, when the partnership began to hammer out a path forward that outlined the next steps necessary to meet the pollution reduction goals and estuary health outcomes that the previous Watershed Agreement had hoped to complete by 2025. The partnership prepared recommendations that addressed lessons learned about the science of restoration while focusing on the future of the Chesapeake Bay Program beyond 2025. At last year’s meeting, the Executive Council formally tasked the partnership with revising the Watershed Agreement this past year. 

The result is a new agreement that builds on what has already been achieved—and the work still to be done—while using the latest science, elevating conservation as a key focus, and ensuring, as much as possible, that its goals are clear, measurable and time-bound. The target completion dates were extended or modified to push deadlines to 2030, 2035, or 2040.

“Today we made a commitment to the Chesapeake Bay and a commitment to the people of Maryland and our neighboring states,” said Maryland Governor Wes Moore. “The revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement will make our rivers and streams cleaner. It will bolster Maryland’s seafood, tourism and recreational businesses. Most importantly, it will ensure we protect the precious heirloom that is the Chesapeake Bay so we can pass it down to the next generations in a better condition than we received it.”

The revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement contains four goals:

  1. Thriving Habitats and Wildlife
  2. Clean Water
  3. Healthy Landscapes
  4. Engaged Communities

The partnership will now update or develop new Management Strategies for each outcome that outline how it will be achieved and include considerations such as monitoring, assessing and reporting progress, as well as where coordination with partners and stakeholders is needed.

Additionally, the structure and governance of the partnership was streamlined and simplified.  The Chesapeake Bay Program will implement these revisions and regularly report progress to the Principals' Staff Committee for their final approval expected by July 1, 2026.

“Throughout my Administration, protecting the Chesapeake Bay, one of our most treasured natural resources, has not been an afterthought, it has been a commitment we have reaffirmed each and every day. Through transparent engagement with our Bay Program partners and Virginia stakeholders, we have demonstrated that targeted investments combined with voluntary partnerships equal real results. Virginia is poised to meet our goals and accelerate our progress, and I am pleased that the actions taken by the Chesapeake Executive Council have set the partnership on a path for continued improvement by understanding the need for realistic targets and structural efficiencies.” Glenn Youngkin, Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was unanimously elected to be chair of the Executive Council, succeeding Maryland Governor Wes Moore, who has served in the role for the past two years. “My Administration has accelerated Pennsylvania’s progress in restoring local waterways across the Commonwealth and reduced our share of pollution to the Bay, ensuring every Pennsylvanian has access to clean air and water while supporting our farmers and our agriculture industry,” said Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. “I’m honored to be elected as the next chair of the Chesapeake Executive Council by my fellow governors and I’m looking forward to continuing this work to get stuff done together for the people we serve.” 

The Executive Council was formed as part of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement of 1983 and consists of the governors of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, the mayor of the District of Columbia, the chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission and the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, who represents the federal government. 

“The Chesapeake Bay is one of our country’s most important resources,” said U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi. “The efforts of the Chesapeake Bay Program over the past 42 years have shown the power of collaboration and cooperative federalism in restoring and protecting our nation’s waters. Partnerships such as the Chesapeake Bay Program help to carry out President Trump’s agenda to provide clean air, land and water for every American and support economic growth.” 

Sunday, December 7, 2025

Does Prince William have a Housing Crisis?

Every residential development rezoning to increase allowed density that has been approved has been justified by “Prince William’s housing crisis”. The data supports that Prince William County is experiencing a severe housing affordability crisis, which the Board of County Supervisors and other officials often refer to as a "housing crisis". The problem is less about a lack of available physical housing units, though Prince William County failed to meet the MCOG’s overall housing target, and more about a significant shortage of homes that residents, particularly those with low and moderate incomes, can afford to rent or buy. 

Supervisors, staff and residents use the term "crisis" to describe the situation because:

  • Housing costs are soaring while wages are not keeping pace. The median sales price for a home in the county was around $565K in October 2025, which is significantly above the national average.
  • Many households are "cost-burdened," meaning they spend more than 30% of their income on housing. An analysis found that over 50% of the county's renters fall into this category.
  • There is a significant shortage of affordable units. A 2023 report noted a deficit of 8,800 affordable rental units alone, and projections for 2040 indicate a potential shortage of 14,000 to 23,000 housing units in total if 2019 trends continued.
  • Essential workers like teachers, firefighters, and nurses often struggle to live in the community they serve.

The Housing Affordability Crisis in Prince William County

The core issue is affordability, driven by a persistent mismatch between housing supply (especially for lower and middle-income residents in areas with transit and services) and demand.

Key Data Points

  • Cost Burden for Renters: A staggering 50% of renter households in Prince William County are considered "cost-burdened," meaning they pay more than 30% of their monthly income for housing. This leaves less money for necessities like food, healthcare, and transportation.
  • Affordable Rental Shortage: The county is reportedly short at least 8,800 affordable rental units. The greatest need is clustered at the Extremely Low Income level (30% of the Area Median Income (AMI) and below).
  • Homeownership Out of Reach: The median sale price for a home has risen significantly. Based on mortgage standards, someone making the median annual income in the county often cannot afford a median-priced home. Essential workers like teachers, nurses, police, and firefighters are often priced out of the market.
  • Supply Shortfall: The county has consistently failed to meet the annual production targets set by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG). For example, Prince William County's target was 2,353 new units in 2024, but only 1,202 were built.

Prince William County and local organizations are actively pursuing several strategies to address the crisis, focusing on increasing supply, improving affordability, and preventing homelessness.

County-Level Policy Solutions

  • Affordable Dwelling Unit (AfDU) Ordinance: The county recently adopted its first-ever AfDU ordinance (effective December 2025), which offers density bonuses to developers who include affordable housing units in their projects. This targets households earning 80% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI), with greater incentives for those at 50% AMI or below.
  • Housing Trust Fund (HTF): A Housing Trust Fund has been established, with a commitment of $5 million annually through 2029, to provide gap financing for affordable housing developments.
  • Comprehensive Plan Updates: The county's planning process is focused on finding new land capacity through rezoning and increasing residential densities, particularly in transit-oriented communities, to meet the future housing demand.

Homelessness Prevention and Assistance

Local non-profits and county services are focused on immediate and long-term support for those in crisis:

  • Coordinated Entry System (CES): This system is the single point of access for all people experiencing or at risk of homelessness in Prince William County. It assesses needs and connects households to resources like emergency shelter, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing.
  • Rental/Mortgage Assistance: Programs like the Emergency Housing Assistance Program (EHAP II) offer financial help to eligible households facing housing hardships.
  • First-Time Homebuyers Program (FTHB): This program provides loans for down payment and closing cost assistance for low- and moderate-income residents.

The consensus from county staff, elected officials and advocates is that an "all-of-the-above" approach—combining policy, funding, and community collaboration—is necessary to overcome the housing affordability challenge. However, developers seem to be driving the direction of the response through rezoning of greenfield rather than smart solutions. 

The termination of the Rural Crescent policy in the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan (approved in late 2022) has two major impacts on the housing and conservation discussion:

  1. It removes the primary planning tool for limiting sprawl and protecting open space.
  2. It dramatically expands the potential land available for increased housing density. Yet, the development community continually looks to expand density beyond the planning in the Comprehensive Plan- Pathway to 2040.

 Shift in the County's Plan (BOCS)

The termination of the Rural Crescent (which previously restricted development to 1 unit per 10 acres) was explicitly justified and motivated by the need to address the housing affordability crisis by making more land available for residential development.

  • The New Land Use Designations: The 2040 Comprehensive Plan replaces the "Rural Area" with designations like "Agricultural and Forestry" (upzoned from 1 unit/10 acres to 1 unit/5 acres as proposed in the draft) and "Conservation Residential" (allowing for clustered homes at up to 1 unit per 2 acres with 60% of the land preserved in easement).
  • Massive Increase in Development Potential: This change essentially doubles the potential development density in large swaths of the county, which translates to the potential for thousands of new homes—which some claim can now be closer to the "affordable" threshold (though not necessarily meeting the deep affordability needs).
  • Alignment with Affordable Housing Goal: The BOCS's adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan aligns its land use policy (which governs where and how much can be built) with its Housing Chapter policies (AfDU Ordinance and Housing Trust Fund), providing the land supply needed to meet the affordability goals.

The Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) and other groups were the most vocal opponents of this change.

  • Loss of a Core Tool: The Rural Crescent was the single most important tool for Prince William County to combat sprawl and protect the county's western watersheds and historical resources. Its termination was a major loss that enables "haphazard" development.
  • The New Battleground is fighting poorly conceived individual rezoning applications in the former Rural Crescent area, which would convert thousands of acres of rural land to data center and industrial use, and higher density housing zoning than the watershed can support impacting water resources necessary to supply the Occoquan Reservoir.
  • Focus on Environmental Conditions: Any new development in the "Agricultural and Forestry" or "Conservation Residential" areas should strictly adheres to environmental protections, limits on public sewer extensions (which facilitate high density), and open space preservation as approved in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan which had the input of consultants and professional staff. 

Updated Comparison Summary

Feature

BOCS Approved Plans (Post-2040 Comp Plan)

Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) Ideas

Relationship

Land Supply

Significantly increased by eliminating the 1:10 density restriction in the former Rural Crescent and allowing for higher densities (1:5 and 1:2 clustered).

Strong opposition to this land supply increase, arguing it is unsustainable, leads to sprawl, and strains infrastructure.

Direct Conflict

Affordability Tool

AfDU Ordinance and Housing Trust Fund remain the core tools for subsidizing affordability.

Supports the Housing Trust Fund but insists new density must be focused on existing urbanized areas and transit corridors, not the former rural area.

Divergence on Location

Environmental Focus

Emphasizes "Conservation Residential" policies to cluster development and preserve some open space (60%) on site.

Demands maximum enforcement of conservation measures and opposes the extension of public sewer/water into the former Rural Crescent as a prerequisite for higher density.

Tension over Enforcement

 In short, the County Staff is attempting to solve the housing crisis by making more land available for development through the new Comprehensive Plan, while simultaneously using the AfDU Ordinance to mandate a portion of that new supply be affordable. The BOCS is approving almost all rezonings to generate tax money from data centers to fund their programs and further increase housing density. They have forgotten that it is necessary to also protect the Occoquan Watershed to provide drinking water to the eastern portion of Prince William County.  As the Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) points out this environmentally damaging overreach, the housing crisis should be solved through higher density and redevelopment in the existing urban core

Wednesday, December 3, 2025

NERC Predicting Blackouts Over Winter

From a NERC Press Release:

NERC’s 2025–2026 Winter Reliability Assessment (WRA) finds that much of North America is again at an elevated risk of having insufficient energy supplies to meet demand in extreme operating conditions. Although resources are adequate for normal winter peak demand, any prolonged, wide-area cold snaps will be challenging and may result in blackouts. This is largely due to rising electricity demand, which has grown by 20 GW since last winter, significantly outpacing winter on-peak capacity. This, coupled with the changing resource mix, is affecting the winter outlook.

“Electricity demand continues to grow faster than the resources being added to the grid, especially during the most extreme winter conditions where actual demand can topple forecasts by as much as 25%--as we saw in 2021 in ERCOT and SPP,” said John Moura, NERC’s director of Reliability Assessments and Performance Analysis. “This latest assessment highlights progress on cold weather readiness but underscores that more work remains to ensure energy and fuel supplies can be reliably delivered even during the harshest conditions.”

Although evidence from the past two winters indicates notable improvement in the delivery of natural gas to bulk power system generators, natural gas availability for generators remains precarious during extreme winter conditions due to the uneven application of voluntary freeze protection mitigations impacting production and transportation.

“Natural gas is an essential fuel for electricity generation in winter. Winter fuel supplies for thermal generators must be readily available during the periods of high demand for both electricity and natural gas that accompany extreme cold weather,” said Mark Olson, NERC’s manager of Reliability Assessment. “Although we are seeing evidence of improved performance, grid operators in areas that rely on single-fuel gas-fired generators are exposed to unanticipated generator loss during cold snaps when gas supply interruptions are more prevalent,” said Mark Olson, NERC’s manager of Reliability Assessment. 

NERC’s cold weather Reliability Standards address recommendations from winter storms Elliott and Uri reviews. The most recent standard, EOP-012-3, became effective on October 1, 2025, among the improvements in the new version are enhanced and expanded requirements to ensure that Generator Owners (GO) implement corrective actions to address known issues affecting their ability to operate in cold weather in a timely manner.

This year’s assessment, previewed in the 2025-2026 WRA video and summarized in the WRA infographic, makes a series of recommendations to reduce the risks of energy shortfalls on the bulk power system this winter:

  • Cold Weather Preparations: GOs should complete winter readiness plans and checklists prior to December, deploy weatherization packages well in advance of approaching winter storms, and frequently check and maintain cold weather mitigations while conditions persist. 

  • Load Forecasting: Be cognizant of the potential for short-term load forecasts to underestimate load in extreme cold weather events and be prepared to take early action to implement protocols and procedures for managing potential reserve deficiencies. .

  • Fuel: They should prepare their operating plans to manage potential supply shortfalls and take proactive steps fand should maintain awareness of potential extreme cold weather developing over holiday weekends and the implications for fuel planning and procurement that may result over long, holiday weekends.  

  • Regulation and Policy: State and provincial regulators can assist grid owners and operators in advance of and during extreme cold weather by amplifying public appeals for electricity and natural gas conservation, and supporting requested environmental and transportation waivers.

Undertaken annually in coordination with the Regional Entities, NERC’s WRA examines multiple factors that collectively provide deep and unique insights into reliability risk. These factors include resource adequacy, encompassing reserve margins and scenarios to identify operational risk; fuel assurance; and preparations to mitigate reliability concerns.

 

Sunday, November 30, 2025

DEQ Proposes Changes to Backup Generator Rules

 The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulates backup generators primarily through air quality permits and rules governing their operation, particularly in the context of data centers. The regulations specify when generators can be used, their emission standards, and permit requirements, with a general emphasis on non-emergency use limitations. 

The data centers that increasingly fuel our interactions need to run 24 hours a day to keep the internet going. So, these facilities include backup power generators, often fueled by diesel or natural gas, and intended to run only during emergencies. Each data center is equipped with sometimes dozens, sometimes hundreds of tractor trailer-sized generators. Running generators burns fossil fuels for power emits pollutants such as particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxides and carbon dioxide. 

In the summer of 2022 Virginia regulators proposed allowing Northern Virginia data centers to use backup generators in a more continuous manner for a five-month period during which energy “transmission problems” were anticipated. Homeowners’ associations that were already opposing data center projects in their backyards quickly coalesced to contest the proposal. The data center industry ended up asking regulators to rescind it.

But the outsized power demands have only grown since then, especially as more hyperscale data centers enabling AI come online. This past summer, the region faced another test of its grid when power demand for cooling reached record highs during heat waves in June and July. PJM Interconnection, which manages the grid for the northeastern U.S., issued permission in late June for places with high power consumption to use backup systems instead of the grid to prevent blackouts.

Electricity demand continues to grow faster than the generation being added to the grid. An extreme period of cold when the ubiquitous air heat exchanges cannot make the temperature gap and are forced to operate on the les efficient electric heat resistance to warm the homes could topple the grid.

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is currently accepting comments (until December 4th ) on a proposed change that would allow data centers to run backup diesel generators during planned outage events. Until now, these generators could only be used in the case of “sudden and reasonably unforeseeable events” or maintenance. In other words, these diesel generators–one of the most polluting forms of energy generation–were only ever meant to serve as backup power in emergency situations.

Below are the comments from the Piedmont Environmental Council:

“Utilities want the flexibility for the data centers to be able to run their existing backup diesel generators during planned outage events. This is driven by a desire to expedite timelines and avoid paying for more expensive options better equipped to protect public health."

"Planned outages, such as while transmission lines are built or worked on, are considered foreseeable, meaning data center operators have sufficient time — and are expected to — seek alternative options. Options typically used include: a) renting mobile Tier IV gas generators with higher pollution controls, or b) retrofitting Tier II generators with SCRs (selective catalytic reduction systems) to protect the public from pollution."

"But DEQ's proposal would allow data centers to potentially turn on hundreds to thousands of diesel generators, putting public health at greater risk. We believe this change should not be allowed or, at the very least, should be strictly limited and regulated."

The Public Comment Period ends on Thursday. Until then you can provide your comment at the following link: Guidance Document Public Comment Forum

Thursday, November 27, 2025

DEQ Proposes to Allow more Frequent Operation of Backup Generators

A bad idea is once more being considered. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) proposes to allow backup diesel generators to operate more often, particularly at data centers in Northern Virginia. This would lead to significant increases in air pollution, noise, and environmental impacts in the region, especially to residential communities and schools.

There are 4,000 MW of backup generation (primarily diesel) in the Potomac River Basin is concentrated in Northern Virginia, with an estimated 9,000 permitted diesel generators across the state, many of which serve data centers in Loudoun and Prince William counties (Source 1,2,8).


Air and Health Impacts

The core issue is that these generators are generally Tier II or unrated diesel engines (designed only for emergency use) and are a highly polluting energy source (Source 1.2, 3.3). Increased operation would directly increase the emission of harmful air pollutants, posing a significant public health burden.

  • Particulate Matter (PM): Diesel generators emit diesel particulate matter (DPM), a known carcinogen (Source 1.1). Increased use would raise the concentration of PM2.5 (fine particulate matter), which can penetrate deeply into the lungs and bloodstream, exacerbating asthma, bronchitis, and other respiratory and cardiovascular diseases (Source 1.8).
  • Ozone Precursors (NOx): The generators emit large amounts of nitrogen oxides, which react with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to form ground-level ozone (smog) (Source 3.3). Allowing generators to run during anticipated disruptions often coincides with peak summer heat and grid stress, which are already the highest ozone-forming conditions (Source 1.2).
  • Cumulative Health Costs: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) and related studies estimate that even a fraction of the permitted emissions could result in an annual public health cost of $190–260 million in Virginia and surrounding states (Source 1,8).

Impact on Schools and Residential Areas:

Children are especially vulnerable to air quality impacts. Proximity of generator clusters to sensitive receptors—such as schools, hospitals, and residential areas—is a key concern, as increased operation would directly expose these communities to higher levels of toxic emissions (Source 1,2).


Noise Impacts

The allowance for more frequent operation, especially for non-emergency reasons like planned maintenance or grid support, would lead to chronic noise pollution in adjacent communities.

  • Disruptive Decibel Levels: Diesel generators are extremely loud. When multiple units run simultaneously, they produce a constant, industrial-grade humming and droning noise (Source 3,2).
  • Quality of Life: Residents near data centers already report that the noise from cooling equipment and routine testing disrupts sleep, conversation, and the ability to use outdoor spaces (Source 3,2). Extending the permitted operating time beyond brief emergency tests would make this noise pollution a pervasive, ongoing issue.
  • Increased Frequency: The proposal is designed to allow use during "planned outage events" or grid constraints (Source 1,2). This shifts the use from unpredictable, rare emergencies to foreseeable, planned operations, increasing the overall frequency and duration of loud generator operation (Source 3,2).

Environmental and Regulatory Impacts

  • Climate Change (GHG): Increased burning of diesel fuel for non-emergency grid support directly increases greenhouse gas emissions, making it more difficult for Virginia to meet its climate goals, such as the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) targets (Source 1,1).
  • Cumulative Emissions: The total number of permitted generators is enormous (nearly 9,000 across the state, with thousands concentrated in Northern Virginia) (Source 1.8). The concern is that DEQ has not publicly estimated the potential cumulative impact of thousands of these generators operating together for extended periods, effectively using them as a temporary, polluting power plant (Source 1,2).
  • Regulatory Precedent: Environmental groups oppose the change, fearing it sets a "slippery slope" precedent that allows generators, which are permitted only for emergency use, to be used for demand response—where data centers are paid to reduce grid usage by running their polluting backup power (Source 1,2).

Sources

  1. PEC Web Map, "Data Centers, Diesel Generators and Air Quality"
  2. PEC Virginia, "Proposed Increase to Data Center Diesel Generator Use"
  3. Bay Journal, "Virginia regulators consider letting data centers regularly use fossil-fuel power for part of the year"
  4. Trinity Consultants, "Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Releases Three Air Permitting Guidance Documents for Data Centers"
  5. Virginia Conservation Network, "ADDRESSING DATA CENTER IMPACTS & ENSURING TRANSPARENCY"
  6. JLARC, "Data Centers in Virginia"
  7. McGuireWoods, "Virginia DEQ Withdraws Proposed Rule Allowing Extended Backup Generator Use"
  8. Virginia Regulatory Town Hall, View Comments on Proposed Rule

Wednesday, November 26, 2025

COP 30 Ends

COP30 that was held  in the rainforest in Belém, Brazil, in November 2025, closed declaring that it achieved agreements on tripling adaptation finance and launched initiatives to protect forests and scale up climate finance. However, it failed to adopt a formal roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, leading to disappointment among many nations and civil society groups. The United States did not send an official delegation though California Governor Galvin Newsome made an appearance.

What was decided:

  • Finance at scale: Mobilise $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 for climate action.
  • Adaptation boost: Double adaptation finance by 2025 and triple by 2035.
  • New initiatives: Launch of the Global Implementation Accelerator and Belém Mission to 1.5°C to drive ambition and implementation.
  • Climate disinformation: Commitment to promote information integrity and counter false narratives.

COPs continue to operate around consensus. Many compromises are made, but just one country can veto a proposal. At the conference Brazilian scientist Carlos Nobre issued a stark warning: fossil fuel use must fall to zero by 2040 – 2045 at the latest to avoid temperature rises of up to 2.5°C by mid-century. That trajectory, he said, would spell the near-total loss of coral reefs, the collapse of the Amazon rainforest and an accelerated melt of the Greenland ice sheet.

The world is in a critical state is supported by scientific data released at the conference: 

  • CO2 emissions are projected to reach a new record high in 2025 (38.1 billion tonnes), an increase of 1.1% over 2024 levels.
  • 1.5°C Goal is beyond reach: The remaining carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5°C is "virtually exhausted" and expected to be gone before 2030 at the current emission rate which is still rising. Keeping warming below 1.5°C is "no longer plausible".
  • Warming and Water Stress: Global temperatures will continue to rise with 2024 likely the first year to temporarily exceed the 1.5°C threshold. The accompanying impacts, including droughts and water stress, are intensifying. 

Expectations were high that COP30's final decision would include explicit reference to phasing out fossil fuels. More than 80 countries backed Brazil’s proposal for a formal ‘roadmap.’ However, more nations did not.

The Tropical Forests Forever Facility was launched. The goal is to raise $125 billion to pay countries to conserve forests. There were  $5.5 billion in initial pledges. Brazil also committed to creating new Indigenous territories.

  • Methane Reductions: Seven countries (including the UK, Canada, and Germany) signed a separate statement to achieve "near zero" methane emissions from the fossil fuel sector.
  • Renewable Energy: Public utility companies in various countries pledged nearly $150 billion for new grids and energy storage to accelerate the global clean energy transition. 

COP30 fell short of the decisive action on fossil fuels that many scientists say is necessary to "correct course" and keep the 1.5°C limit within reach.

  

Sunday, November 23, 2025

Drought Expands

The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), in coordination with the Virginia Drought Monitoring Task Force, has expanded the drought watch advisory to now include 50 counties and 23 cities. Virginia has endured three dry years and this water year (October 1 2025 -September 30 2026) has started off very dry.

from DEQ

The drought advisory is intended to help Virginians prepare for a potential drought and now includes the following areas:

  • Middle James: Albemarle, Amelia, Amherst, Appomattox, Buckingham, Chesterfield, Cumberland, Fluvanna, Goochland, Hanover, Henrico, Nelson, Powhatan, Prince Edward counties; and the cities of Charlottesville, Colonial Heights, Hopewell, Lynchburg, Petersburg, and Richmond
  • Northern Virginia:  Arlington, Fairfax, Fauquier, Loudoun, and Prince William counties; and the cities of Arlington, Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park 
  • Northern Piedmont: Culpeper, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Orange, Rappahannock, Spotsylvania, and Stafford counties; and the city of Fredericksburg
  • Roanoke River: Bedford, Campbell, Charlotte, Franklin, Patrick, Halifax, Henry, Mecklenburg, Pittsylvania, and Roanoke counties; and the cities of Bedford, Martinsville, Salem, and Roanoke
  • Upper James: Alleghany, Bath, Craig, Botetourt, Highland, and Rockbridge counties; and the city of Covington
  • Shenandoah: Augusta, Clarke, Frederick, Page, Rockingham, Shenandoah, and Warren counties; and the cities of Buena Vista, Harrisonburg, Lexington, Staunton, Waynesboro, and Winchester

Recent lack of precipitation has resulted in continued below normal or declines in streamflow and groundwater levels throughout northern, central, and south-central regions of the state. The forecast for the next week suggests limited precipitation east of the Blue Ridge Mountains (0.10 to 0.25”) with slightly higher, but still below normal, totals forecasted in western portions of the Commonwealth (0.25 to 0.5”). Above normal temperatures are predicted over all the Commonwealth for the next two weeks. Below normal water levels are present in Smith Mountain Lake and Switzer Lake with storage at all other major water supply reservoirs at normal levels.

Groundwater monitoring wells along the Blue Ridge Mountains and throughout northern portions of the state continue to exhibit moderate declines and were generally below or much below normal levels in these areas. Groundwater levels in three indicator wells were below the 5th percentile, one in the Roanoke and two in the Northern Virginia drought evaluation regions. Groundwater levels in three indicator wells were between the 5th and 10th percentiles, one in each of the Roanoke, Northern Virginia, and Upper James drought evaluation regions.

from USGS



DEQ is working with local governments, public water works, and water users in the affected areas to ensure that conservation and drought response plans and ordinances are followed. Localities and residents that are supplied water from the Potomac River should consult the Metropolitan Washington Water Supply and Drought Awareness Response Plan for specific triggers and actions to be taken. All Virginians are encouraged to protect water supplies by minimizing water use, monitoring drought conditions, and detecting and repairing leaks.


Wednesday, November 19, 2025

Water Impacts of Data Centers in the Potomac River Basin

The following is a summary of a recent presentation by Alimatou Seck, PhD Senior Water Resources Scientist Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB). All points, and data are hers. The video of the presentation is worth watching if want to know more.

Webinar: Water Impacts from Data Centers in the Potomac River Basin - YouTube

Water Supply System Overview

The Washington Metropolitan Area (WMA) water supply system provides water to approximately 6.1 million residents across three states. On average, the system meets a demand of 400 million gallons per day (MGD), with peak demand escalating to 600 MGD during the month of August. Upstream, consumptive water use averages 107 MGD annually, but reaches 125 MGD in the summer. This upstream use has a noticeable effect on the overall flow of the Potomac River.
 
Data Center Water Use

Data centers play a critical role in supporting digital infrastructure, and their growth has accelerated rapidly due to advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and the expansion of cloud computing services. In the United States, water consumption had been stable for a extended period of time then water consumption specifically by data centers increased from 15 MGD in 2014 to 48 MGD in 2023. In Virginia alone, data centers used an estimated 2.1 billion gallons of water in 2023, averaging about 6 MGD.
 
Cooling Technologies

Data centers utilize various cooling methods to manage heat and maintain operational efficiency. These include air cooling, evaporative cooling, and direct liquid cooling. Among these, direct liquid cooling is recognized for its lower water footprint compared to traditional cooling techniques. Additionally, hybrid cooling systems are being adopted to further minimize water losses by recirculating water within the system.
 
Water Use Estimates

On average, each data center facility uses between 38,000 and 42,000 gallons of water per day, though this data includes the older and smaller data centers built earlier and few of the new hyperscale data centers that are currently being built. Data centers do not disclose their power usage nor water usage. Dr. Seck used power consumption as derived from backup generator permits and disclosure from the ICPRB water utility partner to determine the relationship between power consumption and water use. Then she used the projections from the JLARC report to project a range of water use. Projections indicate that water use by data centers will increase substantially by 2050. The extent of growth will largely dependent on the adoption of efficient cooling technologies.
 
Future Projections

Looking ahead, the water consumption of data centers is expected to rise markedly. Under medium-growth scenarios, peak day water use could reach as high as 80 MGD by 2050 (that's 13% of summer water use). Water use also displays seasonal variability, using the most water in the summers when temperatures are highest. Combining the drought experience in the summer of 2023 with the projected growth in summer water demand it appears that there will not be enough storage and reserves in the system to meet the forecast demand during dry / drought periods.
 
Key Takeaways
  • Currently, data centers have a modest impact on overall water use in the region, but they represent a rapidly growing sector.
  • Future water use will be shaped by technology choices and trends in energy demand.
  • Building resilience in the system will require effective management of both water and energy needs, especially in the face of uncertainty.
Further Considerations
  • Transparency in water and energy usage data is essential for managing future demand effectively.
  • There is potential for state-level regulations to restrict water withdrawals by data centers in the future.
  • Ongoing innovations in technology and operational practices can improve water use efficiency across the sector.