The proposed RBI data centre in Odisha has become a test of how the state balances digital infrastructure with water security after the Congress alleged that the facility could require around 2 crore litres of fresh water every day. The criticism, raised ahead of the centre’s proposed inauguration by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on October 25, has placed groundwater, agricultural livelihoods and local employment at the centre of the project’s public debate.
The concerns were raised by former Odisha finance minister Panchanan Kanungo at a press conference in Bhubaneswar. According to the report, Kanungo said the facility’s water requirement was likely to be met from groundwater in Khurda district. He argued that such extraction could put pressure on local resources and affect agricultural activity. Congress spokesperson Sonali Sahu was also present at the press conference.
The allegation does not establish that the data centre will in fact consume the stated volume of groundwater or that farmers will lose access to water. The supplied report contains no response from the Reserve Bank of India, the Odisha government or the project’s implementing agencies on the proposed source of water, the centre’s cooling system, its actual daily requirement or the safeguards planned for local users. Those details are central to assessing the project’s environmental impact.
The dispute illustrates a wider infrastructure challenge. Data centres are often discussed as digital or financial infrastructure because they support computing, banking, storage and network operations. At the site level, however, they are also utility-intensive facilities. Their operation depends on reliable electricity, cooling systems, land, communications networks and water-management arrangements. This means that the impact of a data centre is not confined to its buildings or technology systems; it can extend into the water, power and land-use systems of the surrounding district.
In this case, the political opposition has focused on the possibility that the project could compete with existing users of groundwater. Khurda contains agricultural areas as well as expanding urban and industrial zones, making the allocation of water a question of governance rather than only project engineering. If a large facility is supplied from the same aquifers used by households and farms, the relevant public questions include the volume that can be extracted sustainably, the seasonality of groundwater recharge, the effect on nearby wells and the authority responsible for monitoring usage.
The Congress has demanded that the government disclose the project’s water requirements, its likely impact on local resources, the employment it is expected to generate and the safeguards intended to protect farmers. These demands point to a gap between announcing a major project and explaining its operating conditions. Land allocation and inauguration dates may establish the project’s administrative progress, but they do not by themselves show whether the facility has a workable water balance or whether local communities will receive measurable economic benefits.
The employment question is especially important because the project is being presented as part of Odisha’s future, according to the criticism reported by Deccan Chronicle. Kanungo questioned how many local people would receive jobs at the proposed centre and asked how industrialisation would create employment for residents of the state. A data centre can represent a substantial capital investment without generating employment at the scale associated with more labour-intensive industries. The number, type and duration of jobs therefore matter as much as the project’s headline investment or technological profile.
The supplied report does not provide the project’s expected workforce, construction cost, land area, operational capacity or local hiring plan. It also does not identify whether the proposed jobs would be in facility management, security, maintenance, engineering, information technology or other functions. Without those details, the employment benefit remains an assertion to be tested rather than an established outcome.
The water-use figure cited by the Congress also requires careful examination. Kanungo referred to a daily requirement of around 2 crore litres, or 20 million litres, and said that cooling machinery at a single data centre could require that quantity of fresh water. He further estimated the annual value of the water at Rs 7,200 crore by applying a rate of Rs 10 per litre. The report presents these as claims made at the press conference, not as figures confirmed by the RBI, the state government or an independent technical assessment.
That distinction matters because water consumption in data centres depends on the cooling technology, climate, operating capacity, water source, recycling arrangements and treatment systems used at a particular facility. The supplied material does not specify which cooling design the Odisha centre will use or whether its water system will rely on fresh water, treated wastewater, recycled water or a combination of sources. It also does not state whether the cited daily figure refers to direct consumption, intake, replacement water or a maximum operating requirement.
The absence of those details makes public disclosure an essential part of the project’s next stage. A credible assessment would need to distinguish between water withdrawn and water consumed, identify the source, state the proposed daily and seasonal volumes, and explain how wastewater will be treated and discharged. It would also need to show whether the project has been assessed against drinking-water demand, irrigation requirements and the condition of local groundwater reserves.
The Congress also raised a regional water-governance issue by referring to the Mahanadi water dispute with Chhattisgarh. That dispute is separate from the RBI facility’s local water requirement, and the supplied report does not establish a direct operational link between the two. However, its inclusion in the political criticism shows how major infrastructure projects become part of broader debates about water allocation, state capacity and the distribution of development benefits.
For Odisha, the project therefore raises questions beyond whether a data centre can be built on schedule. It asks how the state evaluates infrastructure that may bring strategic and technological value but also impose demands on common resources. It also asks whether approvals are being structured around the needs of the facility alone or around a wider water budget that accounts for residents, agriculture, industry and ecological systems.
The institutional responsibilities are likely to be distributed across several authorities, although the supplied report does not identify the specific approvals or agencies involved. The RBI would be relevant to the facility’s design and operations, while the Odisha government would be involved in land and infrastructure decisions. Water-resource, groundwater, local-government and environmental authorities would be important to any assessment of extraction, supply and discharge. The absence of a published project-level explanation from these institutions leaves the public debate dependent on political claims rather than a common technical record.
This is also why the proposed inauguration should not be treated as the end of the accountability process. A launch can mark a political or administrative milestone, but the resource consequences of a data centre emerge through daily operations. Monitoring would have to continue after commissioning, with information on water withdrawal, recycling, groundwater levels, discharge quality and compliance made available to affected communities. The report does not say whether such a monitoring framework has been announced.
The central evidence currently confirms that the Congress has raised concerns about the proposed RBI data centre in Khurda, cited a possible requirement of around 20 million litres of fresh water a day and demanded disclosure of water, employment and farmer-protection details. It does not confirm the facility’s actual consumption, its source of water, its effect on groundwater or the number of jobs it will create. Those unresolved facts will determine whether the project becomes an example of carefully planned digital infrastructure or another case in which urban and industrial expansion is assessed without sufficient attention to local resource limits.
