This and the following 3 real situations and what each would look like with and without a CDA.
In 2022 and 2023, Loudoun County — the self-described “Data Center Alley” of the world — faced a documented strain on its water supply as data center operators drawing on county-managed water systems accelerated cooling demands. Hyperscale facilities in the county collectively consume tens of millions of gallons annually for evaporative cooling towers. Because individual permits were issued project-by-project through standard Loudoun County and Virginia DEQ processes, there was no cumulative accounting — each facility met its individual permit threshold, but aggregate demand quietly stressed the Goose Creek watershed system. Residents in downstream communities and local environmental advocates raised concerns that were largely absorbed into routine permitting cycles with no enforceable response.
Without a CDA, the story ends there. Each developer got its permit, made its disclosures, and moved on. No community-facing water monitoring, no commitment to recirculation technology upgrades, no trigger mechanism if cumulative draw exceeded a defined threshold.
With a CDA, the developer would have entered a joint fact-finding process with the county, the utility, and a community coalition before breaking ground. The CDA would define a cumulative water draw ceiling tied to the watershed’s sustainable yield, require real-time metering reported to a community oversight body, mandate a technology upgrade path toward closed-loop or air-side economization, and include a community benefit fund — potentially directed at stormwater or well infrastructure for adjacent residential areas — triggered if the facility exceeded its baseline. Crucially, the oversight body would have had standing to enforce these provisions contractually, not just petition a regulator.