eStruxture CAL-3

Total facility power: 90 MW. The current data sheet's total-power rating for the completed design, not measured demand. [7] Proponent statement

Power for computing equipment: 70 MW. This is the computing portion of the 90 MW total facility rating, not another 70 MW on top of it. [7] Proponent statement

Utility service: Multiple FortisAlberta lines. The data sheet identifies multiple 15 MW utility lines serving dedicated electrical lineups and lists Fortis as the power provider. [7] Proponent statement

Rack density: Up to 125 kW+ per cabinet. A maximum design capability for selected deployments, not the average density of every rack. [7][5] Proponent statement

Diesel backup power?Backup generation×Backup generators provide electricity when the normal supply is unavailable. They may also run for testing or maintenance.Installed capacity does not establish continuous operation, annual fuel use, or emissions. Operating hours and permit conditions are separate evidence.Learn more →: 21 generators / 66.75 MW. The application covers twenty 3.25 MW units and one 1.75 MW unit for life-safety systems. Up to 19 would run together during an outage. Their combined rated capacity includes redundancy and is separate from the data centre's electricity demand. [12] Proponent statement

Generators installed before filing: AUC application submitted afterwards. eStruxture says it missed the AUC approval requirement because of an administrative oversight. It had already bought and installed the generators when it applied. The company said they had not been tested or operated as of August 28, 2026. [12] Proponent statement

Generator testing: Monthly, one unit at a time. eStruxture proposes daytime tests of up to 30 minutes per generator. Its submitted policy prefers weekdays from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding statutory holidays. The policy is still marked for approval and leaves minimum test duration and load blank. [12][2] Proponent statement

Reliability design: Tier III designed. The design aims to allow maintenance without interrupting service. eStruxture lists Uptime Institute Tier III by Design as a planned certification; ADCW has not confirmed that certification has been issued. [7][5] ADCW context

Diesel use and carbon emissions: 11,920 L/hour and 32 tonnes CO₂/hour. These are eStruxture's estimates for 19 generators running at the loads listed in its filing. They show the scale of that backup-power scenario. Actual fuel use and annual emissions will depend on how often, how long, and at what load the generators run; those totals are not published. [3] Proponent projection

Other diesel emissions: Hourly estimates for 19 generators. The same scenario estimates 310 kg of nitrogen oxides and non-methane hydrocarbons combined, 170 kg of carbon monoxide, 9.7 kg of particulate matter, and 0.30 kg of sulphur dioxide per hour. These are amounts released by the generators. They do not show what people would breathe at nearby homes. [3] Proponent projection

Backup power during an outage: Several generators may run overnight. The submitted policy allows generators to run together, at high load, for as long as needed during a loss of utility power, including overnight. The weekday testing schedule does not limit that emergency response. The policy is marked for approval, so these provisions are not confirmed AUC approval conditions. [2] Proponent statement

Air quality at nearby homes: Supporting results not included. eStruxture says the generators would meet Alberta's nitrogen dioxide air-quality objectives. The supplied attachment lists hourly emissions, but does not show how pollutants would spread or their predicted concentrations near the ground. It therefore does not provide the results needed to assess that claim. [12][3] ADCW context

Water and wastewater servicing: 2,560 L/day allocated to the property. The permit requires demand calculations and connections to High Plains Industrial Park's drinking-water and wastewater systems, with extra water capacity to be purchased if needed. This is an allocation, not measured use or a confirmed cooling-water requirement. [1] Public record

Cooling design and water needs: Air cooling 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 → liquid cooling?Liquid cooling×Liquid carries heat away from computing equipment, for example through cold plates at the chips.This describes how heat leaves the equipment. It does not identify how heat is ultimately released outside, or establish the site's water demand.Learn more →. eStruxture describes air cooling combined with liquid delivered directly to computer chips, with the mix varying by deployment density. Closed-loop cooling recirculates fluid. The company says it has moved away from public water for cooling, but initial fill and ongoing top-up needs are not disclosed. The site's servicing requirements still apply; total actual water use, wastewater, and discharge?Withdrawal, consumption, and discharge×Withdrawal is water taken from a source. Consumption is the portion not returned to the same water system. Discharge is water released after use or treatment.These are different quantities. Check which one a water figure describes before comparing projects.Learn more → volumes remain unknown. [7][18][1] ADCW context

Sound during normal operation: 43–45 dBA at four nearby locations. The March 20, 2025 study predicts these levels with the generators off and sound barriers in place. It assessed an earlier design with two buildings and 144 chillers. These are predictions, not measurements of the completed facility. [4] Proponent projection

Sound during generator testing: 47–53 dBA during the day. The study describes testing one generator at a time, although its equipment list also mentions ten per phase. It does not show how loud an outage would be with several generators running together. eStruxture claims the smaller fleet would reduce generator sound by about 5.35 dB, but supplies no updated predictions at nearby locations. [4][12] ADCW context

Phase 1 building: 205,000 sq. ft.. The company data sheet lists six data halls with 51,750 square feet of space for computing equipment on a 12.6-acre site. [7] Proponent statement

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 establish project-specific consultation, effects, or community positions. [19] ADCW context

Application notification: Seven First Nations notified. The applicant says it notified Kainai, Piikani, Siksika, Tsuut'ina, and the Bearspaw, Chiniki, and Goodstoney Nations. It reported no questions or comments by August 28, 2026. This is the applicant's participation record, not evidence of consent or an AUC finding on consultation. [12] Proponent statement

Development permit?Development permit×A municipality's approval allows a specified use or development on a particular site, subject to its land-use rules and any conditions.Separate provincial or utility approvals may still be needed. A permit does not establish that construction has begun or that the facility is operating.Learn more → issued: October 17, 2025. The issued permit covers the same property and data centre tenancy as the June 17, 2025 public notice. The documents do not explain the gap between the dates or confirm that all permit conditions have been met. [1][11] Public record

Development approval: PRDP20251314. The County's approved-permit notice covers an office and warehouse building accommodating a data centre at Lot 12, Block 7, Plan 2410651; NE 12-26-29-W4M. [11] Public record

Public notice and appeal: Appeal deadline July 8, 2025. The reviewed County search did not identify a later appeal decision. Subsequent building permits and construction records show the project continued. [11][13][14] ADCW context

New-construction permit: PRBD20255100. The November 2025 County report lists 27,263 m² and an estimated construction value of CA$24.0 million at the CAL-3 address. This permit value is not the project's full capital cost. [13] Public record

Alteration permit: PRBD20258056. The April 2026 County report lists 4,020 m² and an estimated construction value of CA$5.15 million at the same address. It should not be added to company investment claims without a complete cost reconciliation. [14] Public record

County sector research: Report received for information. The County's commissioned report considers 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 assessment, adopted policy, or a change to CAL-3's existing permits. [15][16] ADCW context

County policy context: CAL-3 recognized as an East Balzac development. Rocky View County publicly identified CAL-2 and CAL-3 while describing its broader approach to responsible AI data centre development. [17] Public record

Standby-generator application: AUC decision pending. Proceeding 31020 requests approval for the already-installed emergency standby generators. The application asked for a decision by September 29, 2026; that is the applicant's requested date, not a regulator deadline or approval. The filing is not an approval or operating authorization. [12] ADCW context

Participant involvement: No unresolved concerns reported by applicant. The participation program used a 2 km notification radius and 800 m consultation radius. One landowner asked about noise and later reported no concerns. Rocky View County said it had not independently verified the technical, environmental, fuel, emissions, noise, safety, or emergency-response information. [12] Proponent statement

Has the facility opened?: Not yet confirmed. The launch event and tenant announcement do not confirm that testing is complete, occupancy permission has been granted, or customers are operating at the site. [5][8] ADCW context

Announced investment: More than CA$750 million. eStruxture's CAL-3 full-build estimate, also listed as CA$750 million by Alberta Major Projects. A later company statement describes more than CA$1 billion invested across Alberta's digital infrastructure more broadly, not a revised CAL-3-only cost. [9][10][8] ADCW context

Anchor tenant: CoreWeave. CoreWeave committed to an undisclosed portion of Phase 1 capacity for AI cloud infrastructure. eStruxture does not publish the tenant's contracted MW. [8] Proponent statement

Phase 1 availability: Sold out. An operator claim. The remaining tenants, contracted capacity, and workload mix have not been disclosed. [6] Proponent statement

Target opening: Fall 2026. eStruxture's target depends on testing and bringing systems into service, permission to occupy the building, utility readiness, and customers moving in. An opening date has not been confirmed. [5][8] Proponent projection