The AI era is giving fracking a second act, a surprising twist for an industry that, even during its early 2010s boom years, was blamed by climate advocates for poisoned water tables, man-made earthquakes, and the stubborn persistence of fossil fuels.
AI companies are building massive data centers near major gas-production sites, often generating their own power by tapping directly into fossil fuels. It’s a trend that’s been overshadowed by headlines about the intersection of AI and healthcare (and solving climate change), but it’s one that could reshape — and raise difficult questions for — the communities that host these facilities.
Take the latest example. This week, the Wall Street Journal reported that AI coding assistant startup Poolside is constructing a data center complex on more than 500 acres in West Texas — about 300 miles west of Dallas — a footprint two-thirds the size of Central Park. The facility will generate its own power by tapping natural gas from the Permian Basin, the nation’s most productive oil and gas field, where hydraulic fracturing isn’t just common but really the only game in town.
The project, dubbed Horizon, will produce two gigawatts of computing power. That’s equivalent to the Hoover Dam’s entire electric capacity, except instead of harnessing the Colorado River, it’s burning fracked gas. Poolside is developing the facility with CoreWeave, a cloud computing company that rents out access to Nvidia AI chips and that’s supplying access to more than 40,000 of them. The Journal calls it an “energy Wild West,” which seems apt.
Yet Poolside is far from alone. Nearly all the major AI players are pursuing similar strategies. Last month, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman toured his company’s flagship Stargate data center in Abilene, Texas — around 200 miles from the Permian Basin — where he was candid, saying, “We’re burning gas to run this data center.”
The complex requires about 900 megawatts of electricity across eight buildings and includes a new gas-fired power plant using turbines similar to those that power warships, according to the Associated Press. The companies say the plant provides only backup power, with most electricity coming from the local grid. That grid, for the record, draws from a mix of natural gas and the sprawling wind and solar farms in West Texas.
But the people living near these projects aren’t exactly comforted. Arlene Mendler lives across the street from Stargate. She told the AP she wishes someone had asked her opinion before bulldozers eliminated a huge tract of mesquite shrubland to make room for what’s being built atop it.
Techcrunch event
San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025
“It has completely changed the way we were living,” Mendler told the AP. She moved to the area 33 years ago seeking “peace, quiet, tranquility.” Now construction is the soundtrack in the background, and bright lights on the scene have spoiled her nighttime views.
Then there’s the water. In drought-prone West Texas, locals are particularly nervous about how new data centers will impact the water supply. The city’s reservoirs were at roughly half-capacity during Altman’s visit, with residents on a twice-weekly outdoor watering schedule. Oracle claims each of the eight buildings will need just 12,000 gallons per year after an initial million-gallon fill for closed-loop cooling systems. But Shaolei Ren, a University of California, Riverside professor who studies AI’s environmental footprint, told the AP that’s misleading. These systems require more electricity, which means more indirect water consumption at the power plants generating that electricity.
Meta is pursuing a similar strategy. In Richland Parish, the poorest region of Louisiana, the company plans to build a $10 billion data center the size of 1,700 football fields that will require two gigawatts of power for computation alone. Utility company Entergy will spend $3.2 billion to build three large natural-gas power plants with 2.3 gigawatts of capacity to feed the facility by burning gas extracted through fracking in the nearby Haynesville Shale. Louisiana residents, like those in Abilene, aren’t thrilled to be encircled by bulldozers around the clock.
(Meta is also building in Texas, though elsewhere in the state. This week the company announced a $1.5 billion data center in El Paso, near the New Mexico border, with one gigawatt of capacity expected online in 2028. El Paso isn’t near the Permian Basin, and Meta says the facility will be matched with 100% clean and renewable energy. One point for Meta.)
Even Elon Musk’s xAI, whose Memphis facility has generated considerable controversy this year, has fracking connections. Memphis Light, Gas and Water – which currently sells power to xAI but will eventually own the substations xAI is building – purchases natural gas on the spot market and pipes it to Memphis via two companies: Texas Gas Transmission Corp. and Trunkline Gas Company.
Texas Gas Transmission is a bidirectional pipeline carrying natural gas from Gulf Coast supply areas and several major hydraulically fractured shale formations through Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky, and Tennessee. Trunkline Gas Company, the other Memphis supplier, also carries natural gas from fracked sources.
If you’re wondering why AI companies are pursuing this path, they’ll tell you it’s not just about electricity; it’s also about beating China.
That was the argument Chris Lehane made last week. Lehane, a veteran political operative who joined OpenAI as vice president of global affairs in 2024, laid out the case during an on-stage interview with TechCrunch.
“We believe that in the not-too-distant future, at least in the U.S., and really around the world, we are going to need to be generating in the neighborhood of a gigawatt of energy a week,” Lehane said. He pointed to China’s massive energy buildout: 450 gigawatts and 33 nuclear facilities constructed in the last year alone.
When TechCrunch asked about Stargate’s decision to build in economically challenged areas like Abilene, or Lordstown, Ohio, where more gas-powered plants are planned, Lehane returned to geopolitics. “If we [as a country] do this right, you have an opportunity to re-industrialize countries, bring manufacturing back and also transition our energy systems so that we do the modernization that needs to take place.”
The Trump administration is certainly on board. The July 2025 executive order fast-tracks gas-powered AI data centers by streamlining environmental permits, offering financial incentives, and opening federal lands for projects using natural gas, coal, or nuclear power — while explicitly excluding renewables from support.
For now, most AI users remain largely unaware of the carbon footprint behind their dazzling new toys and work tools. They’re more focused on capabilities like Sora 2 – OpenAI’s hyperrealistic video-generation product that requires exponentially more energy than a simple chatbot – than on where the electricity comes from.
The companies are counting on this. They’ve positioned natural gas as the pragmatic, inevitable answer to AI’s exploding power demands. But the speed and scale of this fossil fuel buildout deserves more attention than it’s getting.
If this is a bubble, it won’t be pretty. The AI sector has become a circular firing squad of dependencies: OpenAI needs Microsoft needs Nvidia needs Broadcom needs Oracle needs data center operators who need OpenAI. They’re all buying from and selling to each other in a self-reinforcing loop. The Financial Times noted this week if the foundation cracks, there’ll be a lot of expensive infrastructure left standing around, both the digital and the gas-burning kind.
OpenAI’s ability alone to meet its obligations is “increasingly a concern for the wider economy,” the outlet wrote.
One key question that’s been largely absent from the conversation is whether all this new capacity is even necessary. A Duke University study found that utilities typically use only 53% of their available capacity throughout the year. That suggests significant room to accommodate new demand without constructing new power plants, as MIT Technology Review reported earlier this year.
The Duke researchers estimate that if data centers reduced electricity consumption by roughly half for just a few hours during annual peak demand periods, utilities could handle an additional 76 gigawatts of new load. That would effectively absorb the 65 gigawatts data centers are projected to need by 2029.
That kind of flexibility would allow companies to launch AI data centers faster. More importantly, it could provide a reprieve from the rush to build natural gas infrastructure, giving utilities time to develop cleaner alternatives.
But again, that would mean losing ground to an autocratic regime, per Lehane and many others in the industry, so instead, the natural gas building spree appears likely to saddle regions with more fossil-fuel plants and leave residents with soaring electricity bills to finance today’s investments, including long after the tech companies’ contracts expire.
Meta, for instance, has guaranteed it will cover Entergy’s costs for the new Louisiana generation for 15 years. Poolside’s lease with CoreWeave runs for 15 years. What happens to customers when those contracts end remains an open question.
Things may eventually change. A lot of private money is being funneled into small modular reactors and solar installations with the expectation that these cleaner energy alternatives will become more central energy sources for these data centers. Fusion startups like Helion and Commonwealth Fusion Systems have similarly raised substantial funding from those the front lines of AI, including Nvidia and Altman.
This optimism isn’t confined to private investment circles. The excitement has spilled over into public markets, where several “non-revenue-generating” energy companies that have managed to go public have truly anticipatory, market caps, based on the expectation that they will one day fuel these data centers.
In the meantime — which could still be decades — the most pressing concern is that the people who’ll be left holding the bag, financially and environmentally, never asked for any of this in the first place.
