How Georgia learned wastewater from data centres is under-monitored

Although data centres lack smokestacks or waste pipes, they can still harm the environment, especially water. 

In Mansfield, Georgia, residents report that a new data centre development has upended their well water. 

“Whatever water comes [from our tap] is … contaminated with sediment, presumably linked to the nearby construction,” one local noted. 

A recent investigation also highlights similar incidents in Tennessee and elsewhere in Georgia, where rural data centres have “led to environmental damage [and] water contamination” for nearby communities.

These stories are reminders that in the data centre boom, the most immediate threat to local ecosystems may not be emissions or electricity use.

If you're looking to monitor water, find your next instrument in our international directory of companies supplying water monitoring equipment.

Land disturbance and hydrology

The damage begins with land disturbance. Forests and brush are cleared, removing the root structures that hold soil in place. 

Bulldozers grade and level slopes, altering runoff patterns. 

Paved surfaces (roofs, roads, car parks) prevent water from soaking into the ground, turning rainfall into high-velocity sheet flow. 

And when erosion controls are poorly timed or poorly maintained, stormwater rapidly washes exposed sediment into creeks, reservoirs and even water treatment plants. 

According to EPA guidance, an un-stabilised construction site can lose 35 to 45 tons of sediment per acre per year if not protected.

Collectively, these practices mean that during the construction phase, data centres can become prolific sediment sources, especially in areas with clay soils and heavy rain. 

Unfortunately, standard erosion and sediment control plans are often reactive and reliant on occasional inspection. 

Without instrumentation, problems can go unnoticed until they show up in someone’s tap.

What cuts to nature-friendly farming mean for farmland monitoring

As Westminster sharpens its pencils for a Spending Review on June 11th, the farming and land management sectors are bracing for more than just budget trims.  They’re preparing for what could be... Read More

Sediment is a pollutant, not just a nuisance

The consequences of sediment pollution are often underestimated. Silt may seem harmless, but in water systems it can be disastrous. 

It clogs treatment filters, drives up costs, and overwhelms local infrastructure. 

In rivers and wetlands, fine particles smother fish habitats, clog gills, and bury spawning beds. 

Sediment also alters turbidity, reducing the sunlight available to aquatic plants and disrupting natural cycles.

Worse, these particles are chemically active: phosphorus, heavy metals like lead or zinc, and even pathogens often hitch a ride on suspended sediment. 

What seems like a bit of mud may actually be a chemical payload entering the watershed. In this context, sediment isn't just a by-product, it's a pollutant vector.

Monitoring water quality and runoff in real time

To detect and respond to these risks, a different monitoring approach is needed, one rooted in continuous measurement. 

Real-time turbidity sensors can be installed at stormwater outfalls and downstream intakes, providing alerts when sediment loads spike. 

These can be paired with flow meters and water level loggers to distinguish natural fluctuations from excessive runoff. 

Linking rainfall gauges to runoff data allows site operators to understand precisely how each storm affects soil loss.

Remote sensing, via drones or satellite, can track vegetation removal and erosion patterns over time. 

This provides an early warning system, one that spots bare slopes and unprotected drainages before the sediment hits the water. 

Sophisticated hydrological models can also be used to predict sediment pulses based on construction schedules and weather forecasts.

Combined with on-the-ground validation from local water sampling, whether by agencies or community groups, these tools give regulators and operators the chance to prevent pollution, not just clean it up after the fact.

This PFAS is in almost every UK river – here’s how monitoring must change

In a comprehensive new study, researchers from the University of York have found trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), a highly persistent and mobile PFAS compound, in 31 of 32 rivers sampled across the UK.T... Read More

The regulatory gap

While many U.S. jurisdictions require erosion and sediment control plans, few mandate instrumentation. 

Georgia is one of several states now moving toward action levels for turbidity, but enforcement is still patchy. 

Most compliance remains based on plan review, not real-time performance.

Until runoff monitoring becomes as standard as energy metering, sediment control will continue to rely on complaints and chance discoveries. 

Some agencies are moving in the right direction, requiring telemetry or digitised reporting, but a culture of prevention through data has not yet taken hold.

What comes next

As hyperscale data centres spread into rural watersheds, it’s time to update oversight. 

Next steps could include:

• Mandatory runoff telemetry: Require real-time turbidity and flow monitoring at any large construction site.
• Performance-based permits: Make stormwater permits contingent on meeting turbidity and sediment limits in practice, with clear penalties for exceedance.
• Satellite/digital compliance tools: Use earth observation to flag unexpected land-clearing or erosion on data centre sites, enabling rapid response.
• Public transparency: Publish water-quality data and runoff indicators on public dashboards so communities can see potential impacts in real time.

The Mansfield project is a wake-up call. Digital infrastructure still has a physical footprint, and that footprint flows downstream. 

Sediment pollution from data centres isn’t just a temporary construction nuisance, it’s a clear and present threat to water quality.