Planning Waste-to-Energy-Coupled AI Data Centers Through Grade-Matched Cooling and Corridor Screening
Qi He, Chunyu Qu, Wenjie Zuo
Abstract
AI data-center (DC) growth is increasingly constrained by limited deliverable electricity, interconnection capacity, and cooling demand. This study develops a boundary-consistent screening framework for waste-to-energy (WtE)-coupled AI DC cooling, treating cooling as an energy service that can be supplied through grade matching rather than solely through electricity-driven mechanical chilling. The framework translates plant-side exportable heat into corridor-level planning objects by explicitly accounting for thermal attenuation, absorption-based conversion, and parasitic electricity associated with delivery and auxiliaries. Three results structure the analysis. First, a reference-case energy-service ledger shows how a representative regulated WtE plant with municipal solid-waste throughput of 1500 t/day and lower heating value of 10 MJ/kg yields ~78.1 MWth of exportable driving heat and, at a 20 km corridor, ~53.0 MWcool of delivered cooling and ~8.0 MWe of net avoided cooling electricity after parasitic debiting. Second, the coupled system is governed by operating regimes, not a single efficiency score. Under the baseline package, full thermal coverage is maintained up to ~20.9 km, the stricter quality-adjusted criterion remains positive to ~22.9 km, and the electricity–relief criterion remains positive to ~44.7 km. Third, deployment-scale translation for a 1 GW IT campus (u=0.70, L=5 km) implies a net grid relief of ~116.9–264.4 MW across scenario packages, while the required WtE footprint ranges from roughly three to 148 equivalent representative plants, or about 0.6–40 full-load-equivalent plants at a 25% displacement target. The contribution is a siting-ready planning framework that identifies when WtE-coupled cooling remains corridor-feasible, when it becomes hybrid and marginal, and when infrastructure scale rather than thermodynamic benefit becomes the binding constraint. It is intended as a screening tool for planning and comparison, not as a project-specific hydraulic or plant-cycle design.