Over the last few weeks 350 Spokane has received a variety of information related to potential data center development in the Spokane Region. This information was retrieved via a Freedom Of Information Act Request made by the Author of this post, Brittany Anderson, and the following is her summary of her findings.
My Signal group and I have been digging into data center proliferation in Spokane County since Avista announced the ‘500MW large load request’. Since then, I’ve been trying to follow the paper trail and figure out exactly what is being proposed, who is involved, what infrastructure is being planned, and what the potential environmental impacts could be.
I submitted a Spokane County public records request on June 12, and received the records on July 28, with help from my friend Aubreyana and myself to help cover the costs. I’ve also made records requests to FERC, Avista, Bonneville Power, the City of Spokane, the City of Airway Heights, and Spokane County, along with requesting additional records as new information has surfaced.
I requested the MOU from the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, and was told they do not have it and that I should contact Avista. I have now requested those records from Avista as well.
I also submitted the ecological and habitat overview from the June 12th records request to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife because I believe those environmental considerations need to be part of the conversation, and the lack of transparency has caused me to not trust any of our officials’ words.
I’ve contacted city council members, state representatives, county commissioners, the county board, and county planning staff. Unfortunately, communication back has been limited to nonexistent in some cases.
That is why I’ve been going through the actual records myself. I’m not relying solely on news coverage or what someone says the project is. I want to see what the documents actually show.
And the more I read, the more questions I have.
The records point to something much more complicated than simply “a data center.” There appear to be interconnected plans involving massive electrical demand, water use, cooling, wastewater, hydrogen/ammonia production and other infrastructure. That deserves a much more thorough public examination than we’ve seen so far.
One of my biggest concerns is the proposed hydrogen/ammonia component. If hydrogen produced through methane pyrolysis is ultimately used to make ammonia, the ammonia production and storage would introduce a completely different category of industrial hazard to the West Plains. Anhydrous ammonia is highly toxic, and a significant release could pose serious risks to nearby residents, businesses and workers. If the project is going to involve this, we need to know exactly what is being produced, how much, where it will be stored, and what emergency protections are planned.
The hydrogen process itself also raises questions. Turquoise hydrogen can produce solid carbon rather than directly releasing that carbon as CO², but that doesn’t make the resulting material disappear. At the scale being discussed, we need actual numbers for how much solid carbon would be produced, how it would be stored or transported, and what safeguards would prevent dust or particulate releases.
Large cooling systems can produce concentrated wastewater, commonly called ‘blowdown’, because minerals and treatment chemicals become concentrated as water is lost through evaporation. If that wastewater is going into a municipal treatment or reclamation system, we want to know exactly what is in it, how much will be produced, how it will be treated, and whether the existing infrastructure was designed for anything remotely approaching this scale.
That becomes even more important because the proposed system appears to involve reclaimed water and ultimately groundwater recharge. The Airway Heights Water Reclamation Facility and surrounding infrastructure therefore deserve serious scrutiny, not assumptions that everything will simply work because treatment exists.
PFAS is another area where I think the public deserves concrete answers rather than assurances. If PFAS or other persistent contaminants are present in the source water or industrial wastewater, what exact treatment technology will be used? What concentrations are expected before and after treatment? What happens during equipment failure, maintenance, treatment breakthrough or an emergency bypass? And what happens to the concentrated contaminants that are removed?
Most importantly, if treated water is ultimately being used in a system connected to groundwater recharge, we need independent evidence showing that the entire system can protect the aquifer under normal operations and during foreseeable failures.
I also want to be clear that I am not claiming every worst-case scenario will happen. I’m saying these are legitimate engineering and environmental questions that should be answered before a project of this magnitude moves forward, not after.
There are also basic transparency questions that remain. Who exactly are all of the parties involved? What is Apricus responsible for? What is the proposed relationship with the hyperscale/data center operator? Is Amazon or Microsoft involved, and if so, in what capacity? What information is being withheld under NDAs? What commitments have already been made between the developer, utilities and government agencies?
I’ve spent months requesting records because I believe the public has a right to understand what is happening here.
This isn’t about being automatically against every new development. It’s about the scale of this particular proposal and the consequences if something goes wrong.
We need the records. We need the numbers. We need independent technical and environmental analysis. We need our questions answered publicly. We need the risks and potential benefits discussed honestly, not minimized.
And for something this enormous, the people who will live with the consequences deserve a meaningful voice in the decision.
I believe that starts with a moratorium, thorough review, complete transparency, and answers before approvals, not after.
To allow for the greatest access to this information, here is a Google Drive link to the documents received by the FOIA request.
