Beacon Indus Data Center Hub

Data hall demand: Approximately 1,200 MW. The power plant is intended to serve four 300 MW data halls under normal operations. [1][9] Proponent statement

Reciprocating generation: 100 units totalling 460 MW. The filing describes 100 natural-gas engines rated at 4.6 MW each. [9] Proponent statement

Combined-cycle generation: Four generating blocks. The proposed plant combines reciprocating engines with four combined-cycle gas-turbine blocks for 1.494 GW total capacity. [9] Proponent statement

Projected annual generation: About 10,500 GWh. The proponent estimate assumes full campus operation. [9] Proponent projection

Maximum annual GHG estimate: 4.784 million tonnes CO₂e. The federal filing's maximum estimate assumes a 1.2 GW load at 100 per cent utilization. It is not a measured result. [9] Proponent projection

Carbon capture: Future-ready design claimed. The filing discusses possible future carbon capture, renewable gas, hydrogen and offsets, but does not commit to a capture system or operating date. [9] ADCW context

Projected campus demand: About 1,500 m³/day (1.5 million L/day). The filing says water would come from the regional or municipal system through Langdon Waterworks. [9][13] Proponent projection

Cooling design: Air-cooled and closed-loop?Closed-loop cooling×Cooling fluid circulates repeatedly through a contained loop instead of being routinely discharged after one pass.That describes the loop, not the whole site's water use. A separate heat-rejection system can still use water, and filling, maintenance, and leaks also matter.Learn more → systems. The filing says the power systems would not use cooling towers or evaporative cooling. [9] Proponent statement

Power-plant and site use: About 750 m³/day (750,000 L/day). The estimate covers heat-recovery steam-generator makeup, fire protection, domestic use and maintenance within the overall campus projection. [9] Proponent projection

Wastewater: Regional system proposed. The proponent proposes the East Rocky View regional system if feasible, with approved disposal alternatives if capacity or connection is unavailable. [9] Proponent statement

Noise-impact assessment: Numerical receptor table not identified. The public summary says the completed model evaluated cumulative daytime and nighttime sound and low-frequency characteristics at assessed receptors. It identifies engines and generators, exhausts, ventilation openings, coolers, compressors, pumps, and transformers as operational sources, but ADCW did not identify the numerical receptor table in the summary reviewed. The assessment remains a prediction under active AUC review, not an operating measurement. [9][1] ADCW context

Planning area: 3.83 km² (383 ha). The approved area structure plan covers about 946 acres. The federal filing describes a smaller 627.2-acre data-centre campus within the broader planning area. [4][9] ADCW context

Treaty geography: Treaty 7 territory. The federal historical treaty-boundary dataset places the project area within Treaty 7. This is geographic context and does not by itself establish project-specific consultation, effects or positions. [14] ADCW context

Federal participation: Indigenous input informed the issues list. IAAC says its Summary of Issues reflected input from Indigenous groups, the public and government authorities. The registry page does not treat that input as a completed Crown consultation determination for all other approvals. [11][12] Public record

Issues identified: Rights, water, cumulative effects and engagement. IAAC asked the proponent to clarify meaningful engagement, impacts on Section 35 rights and traditional land use, clean drinking water and food security, cumulative effects and Indigenous economic benefits. [11] Public record

Final consultation outcomes: Not found. The reviewed federal, AUC and municipal sources do not provide one complete public record of communities consulted, concerns resolved, accommodation measures or final Crown determinations across all approvals. [11][12][1] ADCW context

Municipal planning: Area structure plan and redesignation approved. Rocky View County Council approved the planning framework and Special, Data Centre district on June 17, 2025. [3][4] Public record

Municipal construction approval: Development permits still required. The County states that municipal development permits are required even if the AUC approves the power plant. [3] Public record

County sector research: Report received for information. The County's commissioned report discusses infrastructure capacity, agricultural land, water, energy, and municipal policy at a sector level. Council received it on September 22, 2026. It is not a site-specific study, adopted policy, or a new decision on Beacon's development permits. [6][7] ADCW context

County policy update: Later permits are now discretionary. On July 21, 2026, Council made data-centre campuses discretionary uses and reserved those permit decisions for Council. The separate pause on new S-DAT rezoning decisions does not reverse Beacon's June 2025 redesignation. [5][8] Public record

Federal early decision: No further Impact Assessment Act review. IAAC decided on March 9, 2026 that a further federal impact assessment was not required because potential federal effects could be limited or addressed through existing federal and provincial laws. The notice does not authorize construction. [12][10] Public record

AUC review: Oral hearing held; decision pending. Proceeding 30524 covers the proposed 1.494 GW thermal power plant. The AUC says it held the oral hearing, but has not issued a final decision or stated that the proceeding is formally closed. [1] Public record

Cumulative-effects evidence: Beacon's review challenged by intervener expert. Dr. Brad Stelfox, retained by the Indus and Area Residents Group and appearing as an independent expert witness, says Beacon and Stantec's review leaves out relevant regional land uses, does not model how effects could build over time, and considers only the Indus data centre despite other operating and proposed projects in the region. This is expert evidence filed by an intervener, not an AUC finding. [2][1] ADCW context

County participation: Rocky View County is participating. The County identifies noise, emissions, water, agricultural land and rural quality of life among its areas of concern. [3] Public record

Public engagement: Open house held April 15, 2025. The event formed part of the area structure plan process. Later regulatory processes have separate participation rules. [4] Public record

Beacon Alberta portfolio: 4.5 GW across six sites. Beacon announced up to CA$10 billion in Alberta investment and said sites could energize as early as 2027. These are portfolio-level claims, not a confirmed Indus funding or opening schedule. [16][17] ADCW context

Employment estimates: About 300 permanent jobs. The company FAQ says more than 1,500 construction jobs, while the federal filing says up to 4,500. The reviewed records do not reconcile the construction estimates. [13][9] ADCW context

Target operation: Third quarter of 2027. A proponent schedule that remains subject to approvals, construction and commercial decisions. [9] Proponent projection