Advancing data center construction means turning rising demand into facilities that can actually be powered, approved and brought online—not simply announcing more projects. In CBRE’s eight primary North American markets, construction reached a record in the first half of 2026, yet power constraints, infrastructure bottlenecks and approvals continued to limit how quickly capacity could be delivered.
What the latest construction figures show—and what they do not
CBRE reported 7,481 MW under construction across its eight primary North American data center markets in H1 2026, up 24.8% and above the previous high reached in 2024. That is a measure of active construction in those markets, not a count of all proposed projects or a guarantee that every megawatt will arrive on its original schedule.
| Indicator | Reported result | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity under construction | 7,481 MW in H1 2026, up 24.8% in CBRE’s eight primary North American markets | Active construction, not the full project pipeline. |
| Capacity under construction that was preleased | More than 80%, compared with 74.3% one year earlier | A large share of construction was already committed to customers. |
| Capacity available for preleasing | Less than 1,500 MW, equivalent to roughly six months of supply at the report’s then-current demand pace | A time-bound estimate of remaining capacity available to lease, not a general forecast. |
| Vacancy | 1.4% at the end of H1 2026 | CBRE’s figure for its primary markets and reporting period. |
| US project pipeline | 125 GW at the end of Q1 2025, according to Wood Mackenzie | Includes projects with planning, permitting, construction or commissioning activity from January 2023 through April 2025; it is not all active construction. |
The CBRE construction and preleasing figures describe a tight market: much of the capacity being built was already spoken for, and the available-to-prelease amount was limited relative to the demand pace at the time. Preleasing indicates a customer commitment; it does not itself establish that a facility has been completed or energized.
CBRE also reported that average asking rents rose across major deployment sizes in H1 2026, with the 3–10 MW segment increasing 8.3%. It said Northern Virginia recorded 467.7 MW of net absorption and 0.2% vacancy, while Atlanta had nearly 2,900 MW under construction and became the most active North American construction market for the first time. Northern Virginia remained the largest inventory market. These indicators describe different dimensions of the market and should be read within CBRE’s geography and reporting period.
#1 Best Overall
Why demand does not automatically become delivered capacity
A project can be announced because a developer or customer expects to need capacity; getting that capacity online depends on whether the project can secure and coordinate what it needs to proceed. CBRE identifies power constraints as a reason completion timelines are extending, and points to infrastructure bottlenecks and approvals as limits on how quickly supply reaches the market.
Power readiness
The relevant question is not just whether a project names a target capacity, but whether it has credible access to the required power and a workable timing path. A large pipeline figure cannot answer that project-level question by itself. Pat Lynch, Executive Managing Director, CBRE Data Center Solutions, put the constraint plainly in CBRE’s August 27, 2026 release: “The challenge is no longer whether developers want to build. It’s whether power, infrastructure and approvals can keep pace with the scale of demand.”
Infrastructure and approvals
Power access is only one part of readiness. The supporting infrastructure and required approvals must also align with the planned delivery date. The available market evidence identifies these as constraints, but does not establish a standard approval path or a universal construction schedule; those depend on the specific project and its location.
From site activity to usable supply
Construction activity, preleasing, commissioning and completed capacity are different stages or indicators. Treating every project in a multi-stage pipeline as if it were being built—or as if it were already available to tenants—overstates near-term supply. Wood Mackenzie’s 125 GW US pipeline estimate covers several project stages, whereas CBRE’s 7,481 MW figure measures capacity under construction in a defined set of North American markets and period.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsHow to assess whether a project can advance
For owners, developers, occupiers and construction teams, a useful assessment focuses on whether the project’s dependencies support its proposed delivery date. The following checks organize that assessment without assuming that one construction method or technology fits every facility.
- Power: Is access to the capacity the project needs credible, and is the expected timing clear?
- Infrastructure and approvals: Have the relevant supporting infrastructure and approvals been considered against the schedule, rather than left as assumptions?
- Market availability: Is the comparison based on active construction, preleasing, vacancy or a broad pipeline? Keep geography and reporting period consistent.
- Cooling and density: Do the design choices fit the intended workload and facility requirements? The available sources identify cooling as a design and cost consideration but do not rank technologies.
- Delivery and supply-chain resilience: Does the proposed delivery approach account for equipment, labor and supply constraints? The evidence does not establish a generic schedule or savings advantage for an alternative method.
- Cost basis: Are region, scope, density and measurement basis comparable before costs are used to select or compare a project?
These checks are decision points, not a substitute for project-specific engineering, permitting or commercial analysis. The market sources establish why power, infrastructure, approvals, cooling, delivery models and cost matter; they do not provide a universal project sequence or a comparative performance study of construction methods.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What cost benchmarks can—and cannot—tell you
Turner & Townsend’s 2025–2026 data centre construction cost index describes a survey of 250 experts across 52 markets and provides indicative benchmarks on a US$/W basis. The accessible index page does not expose regional benchmark amounts, so it cannot support a specific cost-per-watt figure here.
Even when benchmark values are available, a meaningful comparison needs the same basis: location, project scope, density and what is included in the cost. A broad index can inform a comparison, but should not be treated as a project quote or as evidence that two facilities with different requirements will cost the same to deliver.
Recommended Free Tools
Best Value
Cooling, resilience and sustainability need project-level evidence
Cooling innovation and supply-chain resilience are important construction considerations, but the cited material does not establish that one cooling design or delivery model is universally superior. The right choice depends on the facility and workload; a technology ranking or claim of standard schedule savings would go beyond the evidence available here.
Turner & Townsend’s summary flags power and water constraints as themes, but does not provide quantitative water-use, energy-efficiency, embodied-carbon or emissions figures. It therefore cannot substantiate numerical sustainability comparisons or claims that one construction approach has a particular environmental advantage.
Why pipeline totals need careful interpretation
Wood Mackenzie’s 125 GW figure is a US pipeline estimate at the end of Q1 2025. Its definition includes projects with planning, permitting, construction or commissioning activity during the period from January 2023 through April 2025. It is useful as a measure of development activity across stages, but it should not be compared directly with CBRE’s active-construction total as though both represented the same inventory.
The CBRE figures cover eight primary North American markets in H1 2026; Wood Mackenzie’s figure covers a US project pipeline at an earlier date and across multiple stages. Different geography, timing and definitions explain why the numbers answer different questions, rather than indicating a contradiction.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
