Data centers have expanded to such an extent that their energy requirements now match those of entire U.S. states. Consider the Hyperion AI data center by Meta. Once finished, this data center will consume as much power as South Dakota.

Recently, Meta revealed plans to finance seven natural gas power facilities — in addition to the three previously pledged — to sustain the $27 billion data center. Together, these 10 power plants in Louisiana are expected to produce approximately 7.5 gigawatts of electricity, a bit more than what the entire Mount Rushmore State can generate. 

Like several tech firms, Meta has promoted its climate and environmental credentials over time. The company regularly issues sustainability reports and often boasts about its renewable energy acquisitions. It effectively secured a nuclear power facility for two decades.

The Hyperion data center location in Louisiana will evaluate the firm’s commitments.

Natural gas has been praised as a “bridge fuel” — construct a few natural gas power plants now while renewables, batteries, and nuclear energy develop further. This is likely how Meta rationalizes the decision internally. 

However, the bridge fuel argument has been around for decades, and it’s becoming less convincing. Prices for renewables and batteries have drastically decreased, while costs for gas turbines have surged. Meta has emerged as a significant buyer of solar, batteries, and nuclear energy in recent years, making its choice to heavily invest in natural gas all the more puzzling.

TechCrunch reached out to Meta. The company did not respond to several requests for comments.

The enormous turbines in Louisiana are projected to release 12.4 million metric tons of CO₂ into the atmosphere annually, based on TechCrunch’s calculations, which utilize data from the Department of Energy. This amount is 50% higher than Meta’s total carbon footprint in 2024, the latest year for which such statistics are available. 

That estimate likely underrepresents the climate effects, as it does not account for leaks from the natural gas supply chain. 

Methane, the primary constituent of natural gas, has a global warming potential 84 times greater than that of carbon dioxide. Leakage rates of just 0.2% along the supply chain can render the climate impact of natural gas worse than that of coal. In the U.S., natural gas extraction and transportation lose methane at a rate closer to 3%. This is hardly considered clean energy.

The company’s most recent sustainability report makes no reference to methane leaks. It does not mention methane or natural gas at all. Yet, this fuel is set to become one of the largest factors contributing to Meta’s carbon footprint in the upcoming years.

The company may indeed adhere to its climate commitments and devise methods to negate those emissions through carbon removal credits. However, it will now require significantly more of those credits, alongside a transparent assessment of the actual methane leakage entering the atmosphere to support its new power facilities.