Loading page…
Three petitions challenge the project’s environmental approvals, while residents and the state dispute whether land was taken against their will.
Listen to this story
State clearances leave Google and Adani’s planned $15 billion Visakhapatnam campus room to draw up to 2.51GW—more than twice the 1GW publicly announced, though that is permitted capacity, not built infrastructure. The gap matters because it sets a much larger potential power footprint amid disputes over environmental review, water, forest land and land acquisition.
Andhra Pradesh’s approvals were issued in nine days without public consultation, according to the Guardian investigation; petitioners’ allegations are not court findings.
The state’s incentives, including tax breaks and discounted land, are estimated at 220 billion rupees over 20 years—not spending to date.
More than 100 acres of forest clearing are required, but the full area has not been reported cleared; Google says the centers will use air cooling.
Google publicly announced a 1-gigawatt AI data center project in India. State environmental clearances permit it to reach 2.51 gigawatts, a Guardian investigation found. That difference has emerged as residents contest the project’s land arrangements and petitioners challenge an approval process completed without public consultation.
The $15 billion development spans three planned data center sites around Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh. Google is working with the Adani Group on the project. Asked about its scale, Google described it to the Guardian as a “gigawatt scale AI hub” but did not specify a capacity in that response. The 2.51-gigawatt figure is what the clearances allow, not capacity already built.
Capacity sets the scale of power the campus could demand. Google has pledged to help generate new clean energy for the hub. Activists worry about the environmental cost of meeting its electricity needs in a country where, according to the Guardian, coal supplies 75% of grid electricity. That national figure does not establish how the finished project will be powered.
Andhra Pradesh issued the environmental clearances in nine days, without public consultation, the Guardian found. Three petitions filed with India’s National Green Tribunal challenge the approvals. A separate public-interest case has been filed in the Andhra Pradesh high court. The tribunal petitioners allege that the assessment of environmental and water-supply risks was inadequate and misleading; those are allegations, not court findings.
More than 100 acres of forest clearing are required for the project, according to the Guardian; the full area has not been reported as cleared. Another site is near a reserve forest, a drinking-water reservoir and a wildlife sanctuary. Google says the data centers will use air cooling, not water cooling, and will not affect local drinking-water supplies. The Adani Group says it obtained the necessary legal approvals.
In Tarluvada, residents describe costs that differ from the state’s account. According to the Guardian, T Applaraju is among 520 local families whose previously allocated land was taken back for the development. He said guards blocked families from plots they had farmed for years. Farmer P Venkat Rao said he received $40,000 for his acre, but a promised replacement plot and a job for his family had not materialized.
The state government denies that land was forcibly taken and says eligible residents received generous compensation. Google says it has engaged deeply with local communities and expects the project to generate thousands of jobs around Visakhapatnam.
State officials see the campus as part of a push to build an AI and digital economy. Incentives for Google, including tax breaks and discounted land, are estimated at 220 billion rupees over 20 years. That is a projected public commitment, not spending to date.
Editorial analysis
The gap between announced and permitted capacity is more than a question of how Google describes the project. In our view, it makes the speed and openness of the environmental review especially consequential: residents had no public consultation before approvals covering a much larger scale than the public figure. Permission does not mean Google will build to that limit. The next concrete test is whether the National Green Tribunal examines the permitted capacity and the alleged gaps in the environmental assessment before construction advances further.
Loading discussion...
Join the conversation
What would make the original approval sufficient?
Be the first to share a perspective or an experience.
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.