Wisconsin

Answers to FAQs about AI data centers, including water, energy usage

Published

3 months ago

February 23, 2026

Press Room

Answers to FAQs about AI data centers, including water, energy usage

The rapid development of artificial intelligence is sparking the development of data centers that provide computing power for the technology. Water usage and energy consumption are among the concerns.

The Journal Sentinel asked readers to send us their questions about Wisconsin data centers. More than 300 responded.

We will be posting the answers to those questions here over the next weeks as more are published. This story will also be updated with a video replay of our Feb. 23 town hall meeting. You can still get free tickets to the event, which will be held from 5 to 7 p.m. at the Turner Hall ballroom in Milwaukee.

We are we just hearing about the AI data centers now?

There are a few reasons why data centers have become so high profile across the country in the last few years — and in Wisconsin over the last year, especially. Much of the data center boom we’re seeing now is tied to the scale of computing needed to advance AI.

For one, the infrastructure needed for AI is much larger and more resource intensive than the existing data centers we’ve had for decades. That scale unlocks new cost-benefit analyses for the communities they’re proposed in, which often makes them much more controversial and often ignites community-wide, even region-wide discussions.

This is playing out across the country. Still, Wisconsin is not at the forefront of this data center buildout with 51. Virginia (570) has the most data centers in the country, followed by Texas (407) and California (288). And so when people are trying to figure out what a new data center proposal means for their community, they’re reading about how data centers are affecting other states.

How much land is being devoted to artificial intelligence data centers?

The answer depends on the project. In Wisconsin, the newer facilities range from 16 acres (the Meta site in Beaver Dam) to 250 acres (as proposed in Janesville) to 1,900 acres (the Vantage project in Port Washington). Those examples are a pretty good sample of what we’re seeing across the country. Most AI‑focused hyperscale data center campuses today are being planned on roughly 200–500 acres, with some of the headline projects at 1,000–2,000 acres.

For context, 16 acres is about 12 football fields. And 250 acres is comparable to one or to two large 18‑hole golf courses, a big regional shopping center plus its parking lot or a mid-sized university campus, like Northwestern University in Chicago. The University of Wisconsin–Madison’s main campus is around 1,000 acres, which is about the size of the Village of Shorewood.

Data centers also require land for supporting infrastructure

However, there’s a bit more complexity embedded into the original question. Data center sites themselves are a starting point for this conversation, but there’s a lot of additional infrastructure and land needed beyond those sites. Powering such facilities typically requires new energy generation in the form of new power plants and transmission lines, which also need land.

For instance, the first phase of construction in Port Washington, which will be used by OpenAI and Oracle, is 672 acres and requires about 1.3 gigawatts of electricity (one gigawatt equals one billion watts.) That could equate to the output of about one or two big modern power plants, or a few mid-sized facilities. And utility infrastructure isn’t just about power plants. Data centers also often need power lines to move the energy across the grid from the plant to the warehouse, if they aren’t built on-site. For example, there’s a transmission line project proposed to bring power to the Port Washington facility that spans across five counties in eastern Wisconsin and would be between 100 and 120 miles long.

With newer technology, why is so much water and power needed?

To answer requires a brief explanation of how artificial intelligence works. In the past, data centers were used to power the internet and for cloud storage, software and business records management.

AI requires a vast amount of data and computing power to perform numerous computations and to train chatbots and build enterprise tools for companies. The scale is higher than the amount of computing and data storage, requiring vast warehouses of interconnected computers and servers running around the clock. This requires a lot more power, typically at least 1 GW per data center campus.

That equipment generates heat and needs to be cooled, which also requires additional power — and water. Proponents point to the use of closed loop cooling systems in the Port Washington and Mount Pleasant projects which use considerably less water than previous coolant systems.

What are the life spans of data centers? How soon will they be obsolete?

Generally, data centers are designed to operate for around 10 to 20 years before they need major upgrade or full replacement, but different components have a range of life cycles. Like with most commercial buildings, the underlying building shell can last much longer that 20 year, but the internal systems, including specialized IT gear and power and cooling systems, are typically designed for 10-20 of use before they start to become “obsolete.”

However, the servers, which contain the chips that store and process data, have a much shorter lifecycle and are typically replaced every 3 to 5, though they can often function 7–10 years with good maintenance. There are several reasons for that. The frontiers of chip technology are constantly evolving and so using the newest hardware usually provides higher performance and energy efficiency, which reduces the risks of system failure.

Source link

Click to comment

Wisconsin

Wisconsin Football’s Transfer Class Surges in Updated Rankings

Published

2 hours ago

May 21, 2026

Press Room

Wisconsin Football’s Transfer Class Surges in Updated Rankings

Spring practice has wrapped up across the country, and college football has officially entered its quiet period of summer doldrums.

However, the mass influx of new intel on transfers gleaned from spring ball means top recruiting sites 247Sports and On3/Rivals have updated their national transfer portal rankings, and the Badgers’ class has gained more respect from both services since the initial transfer boom in the winter.

Wisconsin’s 2026 transfer haul currently checks in at No. 15 in the country on On3/Rivals, up slightly from its perch at No. 18 this winter. That’s good enough for third in the Big Ten behind UCLA (No. 11) and Indiana (No. 1).

247Sports sees the Badgers’ class a little differently; they’ve awarded Wisconsin with the No. 38-ranked class in the nation. That checks in at ninth in the Big Ten. Still, the outlet has bumped its individual ratings for several of the Badgers’ incoming transfers.

After initially not having signed a four-star transfer portal prospect in the eyes of 247Sports, the site has bumped quarterback Colton Joseph, running back Abu Sama and safety Marvin Burks Jr. to four-star transfer prospects, giving the Badgers three blue-chip portal players. Center Austin Kawecki was also bumped to a high three-star portal prospect.

On3, meanwhile, sees Wisconsin with just one four-star portal prospect in the Iowa State transfer tailback Sama.

It’s interesting to note that On3’s transfer portal grading system evaluates all of Wisconsin’s portal movement, additions and departures combined. 247Sports’ system is less additive and only evaluates teams based on how it ranks their newcomers.

Why it matters

New Wisconsin running back Abu Sama III. | Nirmalendu Majumdar/Ames Tribune / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

In this day and age, programs have no choice but to deftly navigate the transfer portal if they want any shot at success. That doesn’t always mean you need to add over 30 signees, like Wisconsin did, but it’s a good sign that the Badgers are gaining recognition for one of the most important aspects of roster building.

Wisconsin is going to be a team largely fueled by mercenaries this season. I’d expect the vast majority of the Badgers’ production, especially on offense where new faces at quarterback, running back, tight end and receiver figure to dominate reps.

The Badgers still have a solid core of home-grown players, namely their two studs at inside linebacker and a handful of key cogs along the offensive line. After all, they rank 35th nationally in returning production; the cupboard isn’t entirely bare.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Source link

Wisconsin

Community rallies for performance of "A Mother of a Revolution"

Published

14 hours ago

May 21, 2026

Press Room

Community rallies for performance of "A Mother of a Revolution"

Community members and supporters pack Immanuel Evangelical Lutheran Church and the outside areas for the community performance of “A Mother of a Revolution” on May 20, 2026 in Watertown, Wisconsin. Composer Omar Thomas even traveled from Texas to conduct the performance of his song.

Source link

Wisconsin

Sonja Henning voted most-impactful Wisconsin high school girls basketball player

Published

1 day ago

May 20, 2026

Press Room

Sonja Henning voted most-impactful Wisconsin high school girls basketball player

On May 14, we debuted the third in a series of reader polls asking who you consider the best high school girls basketball players in Wisconsin history, with 10 primary suggestions. We received nearly 1,800 votes, and here’s how people voted:

Sonja Henning voted as most impactful player in Wisconsin high school girls basketball history

Former Racine Horlick standout Sonja Henning was the reader’s choice for the best girls basketball player in state history after receiving 608 votes.

The lightning-quick Henning, a Wisconsin Basketball Coaches Association Hall of Fame inductee in 2010, scored 2,236 points as a four-year starter at Horlick. When her high school career ended in 1987, she was the leading girls scorer in state history.

Henning was a two-time first-team all-state pick and the state’s Ms. Basketball winner in 1987, when she also made the Parade All-America team.

She continued her basketball career at Stanford, helping the Cardinal to the 1990 national championship and earning All-America honors as a senior.

After leaving Stanford, she played in several professional leagues before joining the WNBA and helping the Houston Comets win the league title in 1999. She spent most of the next three seasons with the Seattle Storm before ending her WNBA career in 2003 with the Indiana Fever.

While Henning was the top choice, she wasn’t the only popular one.

Here’s how you voted.