Amazon's New Texas Power Plant Could Emit More CO2 Than Any Coal Plant in America
A gas plant built to power Amazon's West Texas data center holds a pollution permit larger than any coal facility in the US. The company says its climate commitment stands, but its own emissions have risen for years.
Key points
- Amazon has invested in a new natural-gas power plant in Pecos County, Texas, called GW Ranch, to power a nearby data center.
- Texas regulators issued GW Ranch a permit to release up to 33 million tons of CO2 per year, more than any coal plant currently operating in the US.
- The plant's 35 gas turbines are designed to generate 7.65 gigawatts of electricity, enough to power roughly six million average US homes.
- Jeff Bezos pledged in 2019 to make Amazon carbon-neutral by 2040, but the company's emissions have risen every year since AI demand accelerated.
- Amazon confirmed it owns the site and plans to buy power from GW Ranch.
Amazon is building one of the most polluting power plants in American history to keep its artificial intelligence data centers running in West Texas.
The plant, called GW Ranch, sits in Pecos County. It runs on natural gas burned through 35 turbines and will generate 7.65 gigawatts of electricity. At least initially, that power won't flow to Texas homes or businesses. It goes straight to Amazon's nearby data center.
How bad is the pollution permit?
Texas issued GW Ranch a permit allowing it to release as much as 33 million tons of CO2 annually, more than the largest coal-burning plant in the United States currently emits. Cleanview, a research firm that monitors data centers and their linked power projects, flagged the permit's size. Facilities rarely reach their permitted ceiling, but the ceiling still matters: it signals how loosely the plant is constrained.
For comparison, the average American car produces roughly 4.6 tons of CO2 a year, making GW Ranch's limit equivalent to about 7 million cars running continuously. Texas is already tracking this kind of pressure: our 4 August report on Governor Greg Abbott's data center audit showed regulators struggling to account for how much electricity and disruption each new facility will demand.
What does this mean for Amazon's climate pledge?
Amazon's climate position is under real strain. Jeff Bezos co-founded the Climate Pledge in 2019, committing the company to net-zero carbon emissions, meaning it removes as much carbon as it produces, by 2040. The company's actual emissions have climbed for several consecutive years, driven largely by the electricity demands of AI data centers.
Amazon spokeswoman Margaret Callahan told the New York Times, which first reported the story: "The world looks different now than when we co-founded the climate pledge, but our commitment hasn't changed."
That sentence is doing a lot of work. It admits the situation has shifted while offering no concrete adjustment to the pledge itself. AI has transformed how much electricity large tech companies consume, and several of them are now building private power plants to keep pace.
Is Amazon alone in doing this?
No. Meta, Google and others have turned to gas and non-renewable sources as AI computing demands have grown sharply. The Trump administration has also moved to loosen restrictions on polluting power plants, making projects like this easier to permit. What separates GW Ranch is its scale: a permitted ceiling of 33 million tons of CO2 is extraordinary by any measure. The pattern extends beyond Texas. We reported on 31 July that SpaceX used 69 unpermitted gas turbines to power xAI's Memphis data center, leaving nearby residents to wait until at least mid-2027 for a cleaner solution.
What should ordinary people take from this?
Every AI query, every cloud-storage backup, every streamed video runs on electricity from somewhere. When companies build off-grid plants to feed data centers, those emissions fall outside normal grid accounting and can be harder for regulators to track. If Amazon's climate pledge matters to you as a customer, watch this project closely. The gap between a company's stated commitment and its permitted pollution ceiling is where the real story lives.
Common questions
Does a permit mean the plant will actually emit 33 million tons?
No. Permits set a legal ceiling, not a forecast. Plants typically emit less than their maximum allowance. A ceiling this high, though, removes meaningful pressure to operate cleanly.
Why can't the plant just use renewable energy?
Amazon and other companies say solar and wind alone can't yet supply the constant, uninterrupted power that large data centers need around the clock, especially in remote locations. Gas turbines run continuously regardless of weather.
