Grade pending
This site is tracked but not yet publicly graded: site-level data is too thin for a robust nominative grade, and a grade is published only after review and right of reply. The facts below are sourced; they are not a verdict.
Water & desalination — how to read this site
Israel's water supply is majority desalinated. Basin water stress (WRI Aqueduct) is therefore not treated as a certain drawdown of the local resource by this site. But the impact isn't erased — it is shifted: desalination is highly electricity-intensive (on a carbon-heavy, gas-based grid) and discharges brine (marine impact not yet quantified). No free pass: the energy pillar stands, the externality is flagged. This reading will evolve on proof of the site's water source and cooling.
Pillar sub-scores
A pillar mixes what is endured and what is chosen; a grade is not the average of the pillars.“Rated D on site; project data insufficient to grade project & process.”
This site is in IL — the country's site index: en_attente (undefined). See the country index →
Tracked indicators
| Indicator | Value | Reading | State | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy | ||||
| Local grid carbon intensity How much CO₂ is emitted to produce the electricity the site will consume, based on the regional grid. The lower the value, the better. | 492.69 gCO2e/kWh | Measured | Ember — yearly electricity data: CO2 intensity 492.69 gCO2/kWh (ISR 2025, national grid mean) — accessed 2026-08-04 | |
| Grid connection capacity / proximity How easily the site can be connected to the power grid: available capacity and distance to the nearest substation. | — | — | — | |
| Grid congestion / connection queue How congested the local grid is: the more saturated, the more the connection competes with other users. | — | — | — | |
| PUE (announced energy efficiency) The announced energy efficiency: total electricity used versus what actually powers computing. Closer to 1 is better. The lower the value, the better. | — PUE | — | — | |
| Water | ||||
| Local water stress Water tension in the area: in an already water-scarce region, withdrawals weigh more heavily. | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Water body status The ecological health of the affected river or aquifer, per the EU classification (from 'high' to 'bad'). | — | — | — | |
| Basin withdrawal pressure How intensively water is already withdrawn from the basin: a heavily-tapped basin ill affords a new user. | — | — | — | |
| Cooling technology + announced water volume The cooling technology chosen and the water volume it will consume, as announced by the operator. | — | — | — | |
| Land & biodiversity | ||||
| Overlap / distance to protected areas How close the project is to protected natural areas (Natura 2000, nature reserves…). | near_1_to_5km | Measured | INPA nature reserves & national parks (public ArcGIS mirror of the national layer; official GIS backends are walled) — overlap by distance ring — accessed 2026-08-04 | |
| Soil status (artificialized / natural / agricultural) What the land was before: already built (brownfield), natural, or farmland — sealing farmland or nature weighs most. | artificialized | Measured | Sentinel-2 10m annual land cover (Impact Observatory/Esri, CC BY 4.0) — class 7 at point, 2023 — accessed 2026-08-04 | |
| Ecological corridors (TVB) Whether the project severs a wildlife corridor (green-and-blue network). | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Project ground footprint The project's ground footprint in hectares: the larger, the greater the land impact. The lower the value, the better. | — hectares | — | — | |
| Avoid-reduce-offset measures / heat recovery Measures to avoid, reduce or offset harm, and to reuse the heat produced. | — | — | — | |
| Local impact | ||||
| Municipality socio-economic profile The host town's social profile. A safeguard: a project must never improve its grade by locating in a vulnerable town. | — | — | — | |
| Absorption capacity (project size vs municipality) The project's size relative to the town: a very large project in a small town disrupts more. The lower the value, the better. | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Technological hazard / nearby Seveso sites The presence of hazardous industrial sites (Seveso) nearby, adding risk to the surroundings. | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Announced jobs The number of permanent jobs announced, relative to project size. More is better. The higher the value, the better. | — permanent jobs per 100 MW | — | — | |
| Announced tax revenue The tax revenue the project would bring to the town, as announced. | — | — | — | |
| Observed level of opposition The scale of observed opposition: appeals, petitions, mobilizations reported by the press. | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Elected officials' position (voted facts only) Elected officials' position as expressed by official votes only (council decisions), with no personal judgment. | Not disclosed | — | Missing | — |
| Transparency & governance | ||||
| Consultation / consent / governance (procedural proxies) The quality of the democratic process: public inquiry held, environmental authority opinion, appeals, CNDP referral. | — | — | — | |
| Documentation transparency / file availability How genuinely accessible the project's file is to the public: published studies, figures and commitments. | — | — | — | |
Operator response
The operator can send us a response about this datasheet. When a response is received and publishable, it appears here, clearly attributed and dated.
A factual error? Use “Report an error”, attaching a source or supporting document.
State of the available data
22 indicators tracked · 3 measured · 0 announced (unverified) · 6 missing.