Michigan data center tracker

A data center is an electricity story before it is a building story. Every project below is tracked by the questions a customer of the same utility would ask: how much power has it asked for, who would supply it, what has been approved, and who is on the hook for the wires.

Where things stand

Projects tracked: 16
Still live: 12
Disclosed demand, live projects: 3.34 GW
Under an approved contract: 1.38 GW

Withdrawn and rejected projects are counted separately and their megawatts are excluded from the live figure — 4 of them, carrying 900 MW between them. Adding a cancelled proposal to a site under construction and calling the result Michigan’s data center demand is the most common error in this subject, and it always runs in the alarming direction.

7 of the 16 projects have no capacity figure on the public record at all. They are listed, and their megawatts are absent rather than estimated.

Why this count differs from every other count

Michigan’s data center trackers disagree wildly — two operating facilities in one dataset, forty-odd in another, thirty-plus proposed in a third. None of them is wrong. They are counting different things, and mostly not saying which. Here is what this page counts.

A project is included if it meets any of these

Disclosed or contracted electrical demand of 100 MW or more, the threshold Michigan's own approved large-load tariffs use; or
Covered by an MPSC special contract or large-load tariff case, whatever its size; or
A hyperscale-scale application on file with a Michigan municipality — a rezoning, special land use or site plan — where no MW figure has been disclosed.

Deliberately excluded

Commercial colocation and enterprise facilities below the threshold. Michigan has roughly forty to fifty of these; they are a different question and would swamp this one.
Sites named only in anonymous social media posts or in a developer's regional pipeline with no Michigan municipality attached.
Third-party water and emissions estimates. Only figures the developer or the municipality put on the record appear here.

The 100 MW threshold is not ours. It is the eligibility line in both of Michigan’s approved large-load frameworks, so this list tracks the loads the regulator itself has decided need separate rules. Full methodology.

Filter

Every tracked project

Ordered by how close each is to drawing power, then by size. Not by date — a withdrawn proposal filed last month is not more important than a site already under construction.

Hyperscale Data Michigan campus
Operating
Dowagiac, Cass County · Hyperscale Data, Inc.
340 MWannounced
Roughly 30 MW is running today, in a 1972 manufacturing building converted from bitcoin mining. The company expects 70 MW within 20 months and has agreed to acquire a further 48.5 acres.
Switch Pyramid campus
Operating
Gaines Township, Kent County · Switch, Inc.
320 MWannounced
Michigan's longest-running large data center campus, in the former Steelcase Pyramid. Further phases remain under development.
Stargate Michigan
Under construction
Saline Township, Washtenaw County · Related Digital, with Blackstone
1,383 MWcontracted
The project team and Governor Whitmer held a ceremony celebrating construction of the campus, by then already underway with more than 700 tradespeople on site, and announced a further $10 million to expand the Saline Recreation Center.
Project Cannoli
Approved
Van Buren Township, Wayne County · Panattoni Development
1,000 MWannounced
A development agreement was finalised.
Metrobloks Southfield
Approved
Southfield, Oakland County · Metrobloks LLC
100 MWreported estimate
City Council took up PSP25-0009, Metrobloks' site plan review request for a data center on a vacant Inkster Road lot (parcel 24-18-351-011). The city's 2025 Planning Commission annual report lists the site plan as approved, with a development value of $500 million.
Project Flex
Application submitted
Lyon Township, Oakland County · Verrus, operated by Sidewalk Infrastructure Partners
No capacity figure on the record
Kimley-Horn filed the sixth submission of the final site plan, answering the township consultants' review letters on the fifth. It asks for administrative approval, or else a place on the Planning Commission agenda. The same night the Planning Commission again carried AP-26-05 as a discussion item only, and its agenda listed Project Flex's final site plan review among possible cases for 9 November 2026.
Microsoft Gaines Township site
Application submitted
Gaines Township, Kent County · Microsoft
No capacity figure on the record
A rezoning application is pending before the township.
Microsoft Lowell Township site
Application submitted
Lowell Township, Kent County · Microsoft, after an earlier application by Franklin Partners
No capacity figure on the record
Microsoft's own proposal — a conditional rezoning of several Covenant Business Park parcels and a text amendment adding data centers as a use in the LI Light Industrial district — was set for introduction at the Planning Commission. It goes to the Township Board after Planning Commission review.
University of Michigan / Los Alamos research facility
Pre-application
Ypsilanti Township, Washtenaw County · University of Michigan with Los Alamos National Laboratory
100 MWannounced
University President Domenico Grasso wrote that Textile Road had emerged as the location best able to meet the project's requirements.
Alterra Marshall site
Pre-application
Marshall, Calhoun County · Alterra Development
No capacity figure on the record
Alterra entered a purchase agreement with the city in October 2025 and no rezoning is needed, but the city has imposed a one-year moratorium delaying construction.
Raeden Gibraltar site
Paused or under moratorium
Gibraltar, Wayne County · Raeden
100 MWreported estimate
Raeden announced it had sued in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (case 2:26-cv-12893) to confirm that a data center is a permitted use at 27800 West Jefferson, the former McLouth Steel site, and to restart the city's site plan review.
Buick City site
Paused or under moratorium
Flint, Genesee County · Hillwood-Sterling
No capacity figure on the record
Held by a one-year City Council moratorium that bars accepting permit applications or site plans for data centers.
Prologis Washington Township site
Withdrawn or rejected
Washington Township, Macomb County · Prologis
800 MWreported estimate
Prologis said it had decided not to pursue a project at the site. The township supervisor said Prologis told the township that DTE could not provide the power capacity in the timeframe it expected.
Thor Equities Augusta Township site
Withdrawn or rejected
Augusta Township, Washtenaw County · Thor Equities, with Form8tion
100 MWreported estimate
Voters repealed the ordinance, 2,314 against to 269 in favour — 89.59% to 10.41% on the county’s certified canvass.
Project Ironwood
Withdrawn or rejected
Dundee and Milan Townships, Monroe County · Cloverleaf Infrastructure
No capacity figure on the record
Cloverleaf withdrew its pre-development agreement after sustained local opposition.
Howell Township site
Withdrawn or rejected
Howell Township, Livingston County
No capacity figure on the record
Withdrawn. Reporting linked the assembly to Meta; no company confirmed involvement on the record.

Every project in this table has been checked by a person against the sources cited on its page. Where a figure has no authoritative source, or the sources conflict, the project page says so rather than resolving it quietly.

What the status words mean

“Proposed” is doing far too much work in most coverage of this subject. A signed development agreement is not a permit; a conditional rezoning is not a groundbreaking. Eight states instead, each tied to something in a public record.

Operating: Drawing power and serving load, in whole or in part.
Under construction: Ground has been broken on the site.
Approved: The municipality has granted the approval sought. Construction may still wait on permits, a power agreement, or both.
Application submitted: A rezoning, special land use or site plan application is on file and scheduled for public hearing.
Pre-application: Land assembled, optioned or purchased, or a pre-development agreement signed. Nothing before a planning commission yet.
Early discussion: Named in reporting or in a public official's remarks. No application on file with the municipality.
Paused or under moratorium: Stopped by a local moratorium, an adverse vote that did not kill it, or a developer pause. Not dead.
Withdrawn or rejected: The applicant pulled it, or the municipality refused it and no application is live.

What Michigan regulators have actually approved

The recurring question is whether these projects land on everyone else’s bill. Michigan has approved specific machinery intended to stop that. Whether it goes far enough is being contested right now. Both halves belong here, in terms rather than adjectives.

Consumers Energy — U-21859

Order issued November 6, 2025

Amended the General Service Primary Demand tariff to set standard terms for very large customers, rather than negotiating each one privately.

Who it applies to: New customers with 100 MW or more at one site, or an aggregated 100 MW across sites under common ownership with at least 20 MW each.
Contract length: At least 15 years, renewing automatically in 5-year terms absent four years' notice.
Minimum billing demand: After any ramp-up, the customer pays for at least 80% of contracted demand whether or not it uses it.
Financial assurance: A letter of credit or cash deposit sufficient to cover the exit fee, posted up front.
Exit fee: Minimum billing demand multiplied by the months remaining, including infrastructure costs. Capacity may be cut up to 10% on four years' notice without penalty; deeper cuts are pro-rated or reviewed by the Commission.
Cost-shift test: Before serving a large-load customer, Consumers must file an ex parte application demonstrating costs are not being shifted onto other customers. A $100,000 administrative fee covers project evaluation.

Michigan Public Service Commission: MPSC approves terms of service between Consumers Energy and data centers, other very large customers; adds protections for existing customers

DTE Electric — U-21990

Order issued December 18, 2025

Approved special contracts for electric service to the Saline Township data center, with conditions — a contract-by-contract approval rather than a general tariff.

Contracted demand: Roughly 1,383 MW.
Contract length: A power supply agreement of roughly 19 years, extendable by the customer for a further 20, plus a separate 15-year energy storage agreement.
Conditions imposed: Cost allocation and rate design proposals ensuring future large-load interconnection customers pay their own interconnection costs, plus an administrative fee for further large loads.

The Attorney General's motion to reopen and her separate petition for rehearing were both denied on 27 March 2026. On 17 April 2026 she filed a claim of appeal in the Michigan Court of Appeals, seeking to invalidate the approval as an unlawful ex parte order and to remand the matter for a contested case hearing. The proceeding is not closed.

The local pause

At least 52 Michigan communities had enacted temporary data center moratoriums as of June 29, 2026. Most run six months to a year. Michigan's Zoning Enabling Act forbids outright exclusionary zoning where a need is demonstrated, so these are pauses to write rules in, not bans. Source

A separate analysis of DTE Energy’s investor reporting put roughly 4.4 GW of data center demand in that utility’s pipeline as of February 27, 2026. An analysis of DTE Energy's investor reporting, covering DTE's pipeline rather than the whole state. It is not the sum of the disclosed capacities in this table and should not be reconciled against it. Source