Study projects health impacts from proposed data center; O'Leary's team disputes findings

SALT LAKE CITY — A new analysis of the proposed Stratos data center campus in Box Elder County estimates its emissions could contribute to as many as 45 premature deaths annually and hundreds of millions of dollars in health-related costs, but a representative for celebrity investor Kevin O'Leary and the project reject the study's conclusions.

The report, released this week by EmPower Analytics Group, examines potential air quality impacts from the artificial intelligence-focused data center campus. Researchers said they wanted to evaluate possible public health consequences before major decisions about the facility are made.

"The Stratos data center, if completed, would be one of the largest data center complexes in the world and one of the largest to be powered fully by methane gas," said Dr. Michael Cork, CEO and founder of EmPower Analytics Group.

The analysis estimates emissions from the project could lead to between five and 45 additional premature deaths per year, along with illness, such as increased asthma cases, hospital admissions and heart attacks. Researchers also projected annual health-related costs ranging up to $690 million.

Dr. Logan Mitchell, a climate scientist with Utah Clean Energy who partnered with the Natural Resource Defense Council, which commissioned the report, said the research found impacts would extend well beyond Box Elder County.

"One of the things that really stood out to me is how far this pollution would travel," Mitchell said. "It's going to affect all of northern Utah and actually into Idaho and Wyoming and Colorado and states even further afield."

He said the study found there would be more pollution in the air than normal. He pointed to winter months when inversion traps the pollutants in our valleys.

"After we've done all of this work to reduce our pollution, it's really taking us several steps backwards," Mitchell said.

Related:

Mitchell defended the inputs and methods used in the report.

"The tools that they use to produce this are really robust atmospheric modeling tools," he said. "They're really widely used."

The study is not peer-reviewed, but Cork said it draws on peer-reviewed science.

"Multiple reviewers examined our scientific assumptions," he said. "Decisions on this facility are being made now. So we've documented our methods and assumptions in the technical appendix and welcome scrutiny and feedback."

Cork said the report modeled two plausible power-generation scenarios for the facility, based on technology being used in other data centers.

"The lower emitting scenario is using it as a modern combined cycle gas plant, which is how many large power plants are built in the United States," he said. "The other is these gas engines, which in the report we call RICE engines, and these engines have been used to power facilities such as the Joule Partners data Center in Utah and represent a higher emitting scenario of how you might power a data center with methane gas."

Stratos has not publicly specified how it plans to power the campus.

"They're not necessarily the only two options," Cork said in response. "And in fact, it could be a combination of both. But they represent really plausible and realistic options of how you might power a data center the size of Stratos."

Cork also said the estimates could change once more information about the project is released.

"We evaluated this project (at) a three gigawatt and nine gigawatt scenario," he said. "Newer water applications now describe 7.5 GW. Holding the other assumptions fixed, that would reduce our estimates by roughly 17%."

Stratos representatives strongly disputed the findings. Spokesperson Paul Palandjian sent this response to KSL.

"Protecting public health and air quality is a core responsibility in developing Stratos, and everything we build will meet state and federal air-quality standards. That is not optional.

The report models scenarios built on assumptions about generating equipment that Stratos has not selected, and its authors acknowledge that the scenarios are not predictions of what will be built. Its higher-impact scenario scales the permitted emissions of a different Utah facility, including that facility's diesel backup generators, which is not our design. Presenting those estimates as established health outcomes from Stratos overstates what the analysis shows.

On electricity: Stratos generates its own power on site, behind the meter. It adds no load to the Utah grid and no cost to Utah ratepayers, so comparing it to statewide grid demand conflates two different things. Full build-out is phased, and as the project grows we will evaluate renewable sources as part of the generation mix.

On the current plan: the generation design uses turbines for primary power and reciprocating engines for backup and bridging, with emissions reduction and heat capture engineered in from the start. Specific equipment models have not been selected. The plant will be permitted under Utah and federal rules, including best available control technology for new gas-fired generation, which for modern plants means heat capture, low-NOx combustion, selective catalytic reduction, oxidation catalysts and continuous emissions monitoring. Air permitting requires dispersion modeling of the actual equipment, and that modeling will be made public. We will continue to evaluate lower-emission options as the design advances.

We take the concerns raised seriously. But publishing modeled assumptions as if they were Stratos's confirmed health impacts is irresponsible, and it fuels alarm the analysis doesn't support based on assumptions that are simply not true of Stratos."

Cork said the goal of the analysis is to help decision-makers understand how different energy choices could affect public health.

Mitchell argued cleaner alternatives are available, including solar power, battery storage and geothermal energy.

"It's a little bit of a puzzle where there's this rush to build these natural gas facilities when other technologies are available right now," Mitchell said. "They're actually cheaper."

Representatives for O'Leary did not respond to a request for an on-camera interview.