Utah Citizens Seek Vote to Reverse 40,000-Acre Stratos Data Center Approval
Updated
Updated · The Verge · May 20
Utah Citizens Seek Vote to Reverse 40,000-Acre Stratos Data Center Approval
3 articles · Updated · The Verge · May 20
A Utah citizen group has applied for a referendum that could overturn Box Elder County’s approval of the 40,000-acre Stratos Project in Hansel Valley.
The challenge targets a project backed by Kevin O’Leary that would span 62 square miles, cost more than $4 billion in its first phase and consume 9GW of power.
Opponents cite environmental risks, including an estimated 16GW thermal load, possible local temperature increases of 2 to 5 degrees by day and 8 to 12 degrees at night, and 30.2 million tons of annual CO2 emissions.
Water has become another flashpoint after nearly 4,000 public objections helped derail one spring-water application; developers have since filed a new request tied to an unnamed Hansel Valley spring.
The referendum fight opens a broader test of whether local opposition can still slow or stop a politically backed AI infrastructure project that has county and gubernatorial support but still needs permits.
A small Utah county is voting to block a mega data center. Can citizens halt a multi-billion-dollar push for AI dominance?
Can a single data center double Utah's power use without draining its water and polluting its air?
Utah's new laws create a haven for giant data centers. Is this a national blueprint or a warning for other rural states?
Box Elder County’s Stratos Project: $100 Billion Data Center Ignites Environmental, Political, and Legal Firestorm in Utah
Overview
The Stratos Project in Box Elder County has sparked intense public debate, with large crowds attending county meetings in both Brigham City and Tremonton to voice concerns. This widespread opposition is driving efforts like the Box Elder Accountability Referendum (BEAR), as residents seek a greater say in the project’s future. The strong public response has prompted officials, including Governor Spencer Cox, to adjust their approach, introducing phased development and stricter oversight. The ongoing controversy highlights the clash between rapid technological development and community demands for transparency, environmental protection, and meaningful public participation.