Amazon’s push into new datacentre locations in some of the world’s driest areas have raised significant alarm. Residents and activists expressed concern over the company’s massive, unsustainable water use. In reality, according to leaked documents, the tech behemoth operates out of more than 600 active data centers. Hundreds more are in development, and these data centers require a staggering volume of water to cool their intricate circuitry. If the water Amazon uses every year were turned into Olympic swimming pools, it would fill 11,600 of them.
According to the leaked documents, Amazon puts its water usage into primary and secondary categories. But it has decided to go with only the first, the primary usage estimate. This will inform its internal annual progress reports on reducing water consumption targets. This decision was probably made in order to avoid what could have been great reputational harm. We suspect that the company does not want its total water use to be public knowledge.
Concerns Over Water Consumption
As Amazon continues to deploy new datacentres in increasingly arid regions, the short-term effects of high water consumption become more concerning. The company’s datacentres operate at least 20% of the fresh water used in the State. This record-level consumption has alarmed and outraged environmentalists and industry experts.
The leaked documents highlight a fear within Amazon regarding the reputational risks associated with revealing the full extent of its water consumption. The lead authors of the guidance document fear stakeholder pushback. They are concerned that in the event a company goes public with sustainability goals derived from only a portion of its direct water footprint this will lead to backlash.
“The reputational risk of publicly committing to a goal for only a portion of Amazon’s direct water footprint is significant.” – Document’s authors
Amazon has been called out before for its lack of transparency when it comes to sustainable practices. In an interview on social media, one current software developer at Amazon expressed disappointment. They feel the company needs to be transparent and challenge the company to stop hiding its total water use.
“It would be better if they could own up to it,” – Current Amazon software developer
The Water Positive Initiative
In November 2022, Amazon launched a new Water Positive sustainability initiative. The state’s aim is for Amazon Web Services (AWS) to give back a greater quantity of water than it extracts from the watershed by 2030. In accordance with AWS’s sustainability report released last month, the company has thus far met over 53% of this goal.
To further their goals, AWS has recently allocated $109 million in funding to develop water offset projects. Unfortunately, nearly half of this total could end up going to unrelated costs. Legislative and advocacy critics have claimed that AWS’s methodology is opaque. In addition, they’re notable for how it includes “scope 3” emissions, ones linked to water use in supply chains.
Scope 3 emissions encompass indirect emissions that occur in a company’s value chain, including water utilized for irrigation on cotton plantations supplying Amazon’s fashion lines and for vegetables provided through Amazon Fresh. Environmental science professionals stress the need to account for direct and indirect water use. This method provides the most complete picture of a company’s overall environmental footprint.
“In environmental science, it is standard practice to include both to more accurately capture the true water cost of datacentres.” – Shaolei Ren
Internal and External Reactions
A lot of the reaction around the revelations concerning Amazon’s water strategy has been positive, both inside and outside the company. Although many employees are pushing for the department to be more transparent and accountable, some remain doubtful that any new efforts will amount to real change.
One member of the internal team was extremely frustrated. Those on the call felt that the company was still a bit reticent to fully commit to transparency around its water use policies. To just admit that water uses are a low priority would at least show some measure of truthfulness, they pointed out.
“Even if they said it was a low priority, at least that would be honest.” – Current Amazon software developer
Amazon spokesperson Kelly Callahan stressed that the models referenced in these leaked documents were only in the early developmental stage. They had not been fully vetted at that point. She explained that just because these documents are created, it does not mean there is an accurate or final document.
“A document’s existence doesn’t guarantee its accuracy or finality,” – Amazon’s Callahan
Callahan further explained that the back and forth nature of conversations in a large company often rewrites papers or exposes bad results or assertions. This shows how internal assessments of sustainability practices at Amazon are dynamic, fluid, and ever-changing.
“Meetings often reshape documents or reveal flawed findings or claims.” – Amazon’s Callahan
As one industry specialist stated, hiding or minimizing water use just breeds distrust between companies and community stakeholders. Nathan Wangusi, an environmental advocate and transnational corporate accountability activist, emphasized the need for transparency in corporate operations.
“You don’t need to obscure or obfuscate,” – Nathan Wangusi