Capacity Coverage
85%
294 of 346 facilities
Data Transparency
This instrument tracks our coverage gaps. The public index is only as good as the underlying data. Here is exactly what we know and what we are still missing across all 346 facilities.
Capacity Coverage
85%
294 of 346 facilities
Capacity Scope Coverage
15.3%
45 of 294 selected-MW records
Coordinates Coverage
85%
294 of 346 facilities
Source URL Coverage
100%
346 of 346 facilities
Energy Type Coverage
66.8%
231 of 346 facilities
AI Focus Coverage
91.3%
316 of 346 facilities
Timeline Year Coverage
78.6%
272 of 346 facilities
Operator Coverage
0%
0 of 346 facilities
City Coverage
88.2%
305 of 346 facilities
Use predictable JSON and CSV endpoints before drawing conclusions from the dataset.
These surfaces show where the index is strongest by geography and operator.
Selected MW is now tracked separately from its source boundary: IT load, facility power, grid envelope, program capacity, or another disclosed basis.
Scoped Capacity
15.3%
45 of 294 selected-MW records
Unscoped MW
42.9 GW
249 records need classification
Next records to classify before treating capacity rollups as comparable.
52 facilities requiring MW estimates.
115 facilities needing power source clarification.
30 facilities needing AI workload clarification.
74 facilities needing timeline clarification.
A transparent inventory of what the index currently captures well and where research is still thin.