Heath Haussamen
Project Jupiter’s developers are ditching controversial plans to build two gas-fired power plants and a diesel backup and switching to a less-polluting power source that uses fuel cells.
The result is a 92 percent decrease in nitrogen oxide emissions, Oracle, one of the project’s developers, said in a news release. Nitrogen oxides are toxic pollutants. They produce ozone and contribute to climate change.
The new power design, which uses fuel cells produced by a company called Bloom Energy, will reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions as well.
The developers’ initial air quality permit applications for two power plants (here and here) sought the ability to pump more than 14 million tons of greenhouse gas into the air each year, which is more than twice the amount emitted by the cities of Albuquerque and Las Cruces combined.
Project Jupiter now plans to build one power plant, and the new permit application seeks approval to emit 10.1 million tons per year, according to a legal notice published in the Las Cruces Sun-News. While still massive, that’s almost a 30 percent reduction.
The N.M. Environment Department has not yet released Project Jupiter’s new air quality permit application.
‘A lower environmental footprint’
With communities across the United States revolting against the construction of data centers in their backyards, Oracle and Bloom are betting on fuel cells to reduce emissions — and controversy.
Project Jupiter, the campus of advanced artificial intelligence data centers in Santa Teresa that will power OpenAI’s ChatGPT, will be one of the largest ever built. The developers are promoting its new power source as a model for others.
“Bloom’s fuel cell technology enables us to deliver highly reliable on-site power with a lower environmental footprint, supporting the project’s performance needs while contributing to stronger environmental outcomes,” Mahesh Thiagarajan, executive vice president of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, said in the news release.
And Bloom’s Chief Commercial Officer, Aman Joshi, said in the release that its fuel cells “dramatically” reduce water use and provide cleaner and quieter energy. Because the power plant isn’t connected to the grid, it also “helps protect electricity rates for local residents,” he said.
“This is a model that can be replicated across America — it is digital power for the digital age,” Joshi said.
Bloom’s fuel cells will provide “up to 2.45 GW” for Project Jupiter, the news release states. That’s roughly comparable to the entire generating capacity of El Paso Electric, which serves 465,000 customers across 10,000 square miles from Hatch, N.M. to Van Horn, Texas.
Previous plans were ‘unacceptable’
Project Jupiter’s announcement comes after months of public criticism of its plans to build gas-fired power plants, and weeks in which the developers acknowledged that they planned to use water in their power generation, which is not what they promised the public or county officials. The latter upset supporters and opponents of Project Jupiter alike.
State Rep. Nathan Small, one of Project Jupiter’s most vocal supporters, praised the developers’ shift. He said the previous plans for power generation and water use were, “frankly, unacceptable.”
“There were very strong commitments that were made as part of this project,” Small said. “It’s important and good to see those commitments again being recognized.”
State Rep. Sarah Silva, another supporter of the project, said Oracle’s announcement is a win for the community. (Disclosure: Silva is this reporter’s spouse.)
“The organizing from residents, county commissioners and local journalism changed the outcome,” she said. “Project Jupiter has secured a smarter, cleaner way to operate its data centers because of the community.”
‘Cautious optimism’
Some Doña Ana County commissioners were more measured in their responses.
“There’s cautious optimism,” said Manuel Sanchez, who chairs the county commission and voted in favor of tax incentives for Project Jupiter last year. “There’s a lot of questions that come up.”
Sanchez, an engineer who works in power generation sales for General Electric, said he needs to learn more about how the fuel cells work. And while Oracle’s news release says the water used in power generation will be “negligible,” Sanchez wants to know exactly how much it will use.
Project Jupiter has also stated its intent to build 1 GW of renewable energy generation capacity by 2032. Sanchez wants to know if that’s still in the works.
Commissioner Susana Chaparro, who voted against Project Jupiter’s tax incentives last year, said she wants to see the developers’ new promises in legally binding agreements.
“I appreciate the effort being made by Oracle,” she said. “However, any changes I want in writing and voted on by the entire commission.”
‘Look at what accountability did’
Sanchez and Chaparro said they are meeting with Oracle on Thursday to discuss the situation. Commissioners voted earlier this month to investigate the news reports that the developers planned to use more water than promised. The meeting is part of those efforts.
Commissioners and staff will report what they learned to the public at a future meeting.
Silva said earlier this month she was “shocked” by the revelation that Project Jupiter planned to use more water than previously disclosed. On Monday, she said watchdogging the project remains essential.
“Look at what accountability did in this instance,” Silva said. “I’ll keep working to hold Project Jupiter accountable.”
New plans ‘will have to be verified’
Small said trying to grow our state’s economy in Santa Teresa, which is adjacent to El Paso and Cuidad Juárez — areas with higher populations and more industrialization — creates a challenge in terms of air quality.
That’s why Project Jupiter’s plan to reduce emissions matters. “It can show how New Mexico can lead the way in cleaning up the air in our border region,” Small said. “And frankly, we need the State of Texas and Chihuahua to follow suit.”
He said the developers’ new power plan is “a significant and meaningful step forward” but “one that will have to be verified as we go along.” The chair of the House Appropriations and Finance Committee said the Legislature has separated NMED’s compliance division from its permit division and increased funding so the agency can address situations like this one.
“We want and rely upon our regulators to be independent, and to have the resources to carry out their jobs,” Small said.
AN ASK: I’ve been watchdogging Project Jupiter since the beginning. I won’t stop. Please, support my efforts by making a donation or signing up to make monthly contributions. Thank you!
DISCLOSURES: State Rep. Sarah Silva, a supporter of Project Jupiter, is my spouse. And state Rep. Nathan Small, another supporter, performed our wedding.
I once respected your journalism. I no longer do. Despite the disclosures you note at the end, your writing is beginning to stink of industry propaganda.
Ok, but why? And did you read my last several articles? Especially this one: https://haussamen.com/2026/04/24/we-need-a-better-deal-from-project-jupiter/
Agreed. Quoting Small and Silva (two leaders that sold us out, have never spoken out about accountability or the continuing lies from the developers) as supporting the changes (which in the news release has a disclaimer at the end saying that non of this is set in stone and subject to change once again) is gross. Small is gross, Silva is acting cowardly.
Heath won’t dig fast the surface and is constantly writing mistaken facts such as my lawsuit being dismissed (it wasn’t) and glossing over the fact that the developers submitted a phoney environmental impact study to planning and zoning for approval (which they did).
You want to take credit and donations for “watchdogging” while your people (Small & Silva) try to save face.
You never reply to my comments unless I’m calling out your mistakes, then you rush to comment that you’re doing your best.
I’m with Esperanza on this one.
The developers of data centers intentionally seek out communities with gutted newspapers such as Las Cruces and our piss-poor Sun News.
You’ve never touched on my latest lawsuit filing which has a pretty damn good argument position, dissecting how the developers submitted phoney letters of notice to themselves instead of following the distance requirements set fourth by code.
Dig deeper Heath; you’re losing your supporters and the cost of guarding your spouse and your wedding official.
I’m sorry to say Heath, but I agree. You are not asking the major questions that need to be asked. What is journalism worth when you skim the surface instead of dive deep? This is the “Forward-Looking Statements Disclaimer” at the bottom of the page linked: “Statements in this article relating to Oracle’s future plans, expectations, beliefs, and intentions are “forward-looking statements” and are subject to material risks and uncertainties. Many factors could affect Oracle’s current expectations and actual results, and could cause actual results to differ materially. A discussion of such factors and other risks that affect Oracle’s business is contained in Oracle’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings, including Oracle’s most recent reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q under the heading “Risk Factors.” These filings are available on the SEC’s website or on Oracle’s website at http://www.oracle.com/investor. All information in this article is current as of April 27, 2026 and Oracle undertakes no duty to update any statement in light of new information or future events.” Heath, we need more from you.
Annie – while i generally agree with you and have already posted why i think that, so far, heath is missing the boat on this one, you should be aware of what the “Forward-Looking Statements Disclaimer” is, and why it’s not too relevant here. (I happened to be lawyering in san francisco during the dot.com boom, and we represented a company that went public and made zillions for everyone at the company (even as an outside lawyer, i got enough to buy the used pickup truck i still drive.) during that time, some scumbag lawyers made a living from suing on behalf of shareholders every time something the management said went wrong, whether or not the management could have known. they started reading every word or prediction management uttered as a promise, so they could sue for fraud it it turned out wrong. SO, . . . everything they ever say, from annual report to a press briefing to an appearance at an on-line seminar, they ALWAYS say that about EVERYTHING. So, although you are generally right, laying too much weight on those form statements isn’t real constructive. Some real questions on this one are: (1) isn’t it true the biggest such gizmo you got working is a comparatively tiny one in korea? (2) won’t this be nearly as bad for the environment as the microgrid, and (3) doesn’t this end up using a bunch more water? among probably others.
Thanks to both of you, Peter and Annie, for your comments. I shared some of this in response to Peter’s other comment below, but here’s a bit more comprehensive summary of where I am on this:
I treated this report as a breaking news article. While I didn’t intend it to be an in-depth report like many others I have written, for what it’s worth, I believe it was the most comprehensive, extensively-sourced article about this topic that was published that day. This was a significant and unexpected announcement — so much so that, to the extent that the sources in it may mostly lean in one direction in terms of supporting Project Jupiter, that’s because the prominent opponents of Project Jupiter who I usually talk with either didn’t call me back that day or didn’t have anything to say about it, at least to me, because they wanted more information to have an opinion.
So I’ve spent the rest of the week pushing Oracle to answer some follow-up questions, because I share some of your concerns and have lots of questions. They gave me some initial responses. That led to more questions, and I’m waiting for answers. What I wrote in this article isn’t the last of what I’ll be reporting on this issue. But because of the unprecedented nature of what they’re proposing to do with Bloom Energy, I need to know more about their plans before I know what questions to ask of others who can help assess the situation. Otherwise I’m just speculating, and I don’t usually think that’s a particularly helpful thing for journalists to do.
I appreciate the feedback and I’m certainly open to continuing the discussion if either of you want to respond further. I’m far from perfect, and I’m just one journalist with a laptop. I am doing my best to cover this issue, but I’m always open to feedback and other perspectives that might help me see something I don’t, ask a question I missed, etc.
Thanks again.
A 30% reduction from a number that dwarfed current emissions pollutions across the state of NM and El Paso is NOT A WIN. This is a brand new unproven solution that was only announced because of reporting by Santa Fe New Mexican. The new press release by Oracle also lies by stating “Facts” that no CRUA water will be used and NO new wells will be drilled.
Well, then why did the state just approve a new 600’ well to be drilled?
Why did I uncover emails between Jupiter developers and county manager discussing buying and selling land to the county to build a new desal plant next to Jupiter? The emails discuss how the single well from the aid farm is not nearly enough water for the project.
Dig deeper Heath.
I agree. 30% is nothing for emissions that will still triple EPE’s TOTAL current emissions…
Oh, now Sanchez “needs to learn more” about fuel cell technology? Well, it seems like you “learned more” about GE gas powered turbines when you attended MIT – maybe you “learned more” about the real emissions use from these same exact GE turbines Project Jupiter planned on using when you worked for GE selling these same exact gas powered turbines.
How did Comissioner Sanchez magically forget all of his MIT trained expertise when voting on Jupiter when it was known 2 microgrids full of turbines were going to be utilized and then got his vote without a single question or discussion into this?
It seems to me that that least one Comissioner (Sanchez) is an EXPERT in the field of gas powered turbines, but is now claiming he needs to learn more to deem fuel cell technology viable.
It seems to me that even if the Comissioner’s are well educated to the point of being an EXPERT that it does not matter, the support vote will go down as Yes regardless.
Why? Not sure – no journalist will ask Sanchez point blank. No journalist will interview Small or Silvia with the hard hitting questions, point blank. No journalist is pressing Senator Hamblin to speak up. How can you support green chamber of commerce and project Jupiter st the same time? Easy! Biggest donors to green chamber of commerce are solar companies poised to make big bucks off these mega developers scrambling for a green washing offset solution to quell public disdain.
My guess? Golden parachute promises whispered into their ears. “Make this happen and we’ll take take of you even if you’re fired. This is a matter of national security. You don’t want to let down your country, do you?”
It’s funny watching everyone scramble to save face now that the cat is out of the bag. Well, everyone besides Chaparro and everyone that has sued, been arrested, or protested this project from day one.
Thinking about this while making my coffee has me concluding this: Haussamen has also directly contributed to New Mexico being sold out to data center developers. We’ve been played as Haussamen helped.
He helped by directing the narrative. Directing attention away from Sanchez, Small, Silva, Grisham and others who all colluded to make this project happen at lighting speed.
The real watchdogs have been Josh and Alaina at Santa Fe New Mexican and freakin rockstar Algernon at ABQ Journal along with Peter and Walt. Yes, you contributed to a segment with Peter and Walt, but not with any breakthrough reporting or any reporting that helped slow or stop Jupiter by any stretch.
Yeah, the breakthrough news reports that have led to change have come from everywhere but here, Haussamen dot com, family member of Jupiter supporter (still to this day).
Whether you’re knowingly helping Jupiter or not is not important. What is importantly is that you realize that you are part of the problem by doing surface level reporting, like this is a small side hobby like playing checkers in the park.
Interview Small on why he twisted the microgrid house bill around by strong arming the group at the round house which is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Yeah, your buddy Nathan is the one you should be watching, however you’ve mentioned him by name in dozens of Jupiter reports exactly twice, very lightly with no meat or potatoes.
This claim is on record by the way. I’m sure you’ve heard the podcast with our reps…
Do better Heath.
Hi Derrick! Here’s the thing: The reason I don’t engage with you more is because of the way you treat people who do engage with you. It’s not because of any opinion you hold about Project Jupiter or my journalism. Your criticism is fine. I’ve been around journalism and politics a long time and have a thick skin.
I’ve also spent much of my career working to try to help build bridges instead of digging ravines. I’m interested in engaging with people who share that value.
I did make a mistake in one of my articles about your lawsuit. That’s because the court website had its own mistake and wasn’t updated with documents that were newer than what I was quoting from. Regardless, as soon as you made me aware of it, I corrected it. Because admitting when we make mistakes is what journalists and humans should do. I appreciate you letting me know about that. I always strive to publish accurate information.
Look, you can trash my work and praise other journalists all you want. That’s fine. There are several journalists doing good work on Project Jupiter now, and I’m grateful for that. There were not last fall when the commission was considering tax incentives. Throughout, I don’t believe anyone has been more aggressive and thorough than me in their reporting on this.
You’re entitled to disagree. And to criticize me. It’s pretty low-hanging fruit, because I’m fully transparent about my potential conflicts and make it really easy for you to trash me and my work if that’s what you want to do with my value of being transparent. But if that’s how you want to spend your time, go for it.
I’m probably not going to respond again, for reasons stated above. Have a nice day.
Thanks for your coverage of Project Jupiter.
One thing you might want to look into a bit deeper is how NMED will handle public participation. For the turbines, NMED created a public participation plan when the applications were deemed complete. It is a little confused, but it seems they took comments before and after the applications were deemed complete and for the thirty days after a notice of completeness. They also seem to say that comments could be submitted up until issuance of the permits.
Anyway, I think a solid timeline for public participation opportunities would be helpful given the great public interest surrounding this project.
NMED has thirty days to decide if a permit is complete. Will they use the full thirty days and will they accept comments during this period? Do those comments become part of the record? Do they establish legal standing for people who submit them?
Will there be a second comment period after the permit is deemed complete? Here we should expect them to become part of the official record and for commenters to have legal standing.
Will comments NMED receives after the second comment period be part of the record and will people who submit have legal standing to challenge the permit?
NMED promised a hearing on the turbine permits. Will concerned citizens need to newly request a hearing on this new permit application?
Since hearings are somewhat formal and can be intimidating, will NMED consider a less formal public meeting where the public can voice their opinions? (I don’t mean a company dog and pony show, but an actual chance for residents to be heard?}
Finally, 7,000+ people commented on the turbine permits. Will all the people who commented receive some notice regarding this new permit, where to find it, and how to participate?
These are good questions. Thank you. I’ve been trying to get ahold of NMED for days about the new permit application, so hopefully I’ll have some answers soon.
How could anyone that thinks they are a journalist, write a story like this without addressing what the cost difference in proven gas turbine electric generation versus largely unproven commercial sized fuel cells. Pathetic…
Thanks for the feedback. Tell me what you think should be written about that, and why?
It’s become clear to me that many oppose all data centers, and their concern is about AI more than it is about the environment.
The concerns about water are based on emotion and ignorance. Jupiter is not getting any new water allocation except for potable water for employee use, that’s bathrooms and sinks. Any business would need that. The data center and the power plant will use non-potable water. They will secure water rights from other water users. Jupiter is not getting any new water allocation. Their overall water usage is one-quarter of one percent of the Dona Ana County water supply. That puts this project on par with golf courses and a few acres of pecans.
Concerns about pollution from power generation are more founded. Jupiter needs lots of electricity. Technology has become an energy-intensive industry. With this new proposal to use hydrogen fuel cells as opposed to natural gas generators, Jupiter is showing its commitment to using the best technology available. That means we can rationally expect Jupiter to reduce its emissions in the future.
Data Centers are the next step in the development of the IT industry. So far, it is indisputable that the industry has benefited humanity. It is perfectly rational to expect that it will continue to do so in the future. In the 70s, I saw HAL lock Dave out of the space capsule. (2001 A Space Odyssey) As a prediction of the future, it failed. As a warning, it succeeded. Whatever restrictions need to be made in IT should be made by democratically elected legislatures and not by the permitting processes for building facilities.
Heath – Ask (1) whether it isn’t true that this is a minimal improvement, since it takes almost as much gas to make the fuel cells as to run the microgrids with gas, and (2) what’s the largest fuel cell operation they actually have in operation. I’m no expert, and rely on others, but I’m told the largest is in Korea and is pretty tiny compared to Jupiter’s needs. Please look into this and let us know. By the way, given your track record and my knowledge of you, although I think you’re wrong here, or at least haven’t yet learned some material information, I disagree with the “industry propaganda” attack. You perform a great and independent servicer, and I hope you look into this a little deeper.
Hey Peter,
Thanks for your comments. tell me more about what you think I’m wrong about in this article? I’m not sure I understand.
I treated this report as a breaking news article — and, incidentally, it was the most comprehensive one anyone wrote that day. I’ve spent the rest of the week pushing Oracle to answer some follow-up questions, because I share your concerns and have lots of questions. They gave me some initial responses, and that led to more questions, and I’m waiting for answers. What I wrote in this article isn’t the last of what I’ll be reporting on this issue. But because of the unprecedented nature of what they’re proposing to do with Bloom Energy, I need to know more about their plans before I know what questions to ask of others who can help assess the situation.
I’ll respond a little more in your response to Annie as well.