STT GDC’s Pune page carries four capacities at once: 40 MW of IT load across three advanced facilities, support for up to 140 MW of IT capacity, a 200 MVA power sanction, and five building cards that sum to 81 MW. The headline says three facilities and the page lists five buildings, which is where the arithmetic breaks: 81 against 40. One reconciliation fits — the three smallest cards, 9, 15 and 15, total 39 MW, and the other two at 18 and 24 look like the expansion. That is an inference, not an operator statement, and this page shows the arithmetic rather than asserting the answer.
1At a glance
2Four numbers, four scopes
Most operator pages confuse two things. This one manages four, and each means something different.
| Figure | Unit of meaning | Can it be used as supply? |
|---|---|---|
| 40 MW | current IT load across three facilities | yes, if the perimeter is right |
| 81 MW | the sum of five building cards | yes, if the cards are current rather than design |
| 140 MW | IT capacity the site can support | no — a capability, not a building |
| 200 MVA | sanctioned apparent power | no — a different unit, larger than the megawatts it serves |
Two of the four cannot be supply under any reading. The other two could be, and they differ by a factor of two. That is the whole problem: a reader has to choose between 40 and 81 with nothing on the page to decide it.
The comparison with Noida is instructive. There the cards overshot the headline by 4 MW, which looks like a stale perimeter. Here they overshoot by 41 — a hundred per cent — which is not a rounding problem, it is a scope problem.
3The reconciliation that might fit
One arithmetic arrangement explains every published figure, and it is not the one most readers would assume.
| Arrangement | Sum | Against the 40 MW headline |
|---|---|---|
| Pune 1, 2 and 3 — the three smallest | 39 MW | 1 MW under — the closest fit |
| The three largest | 57 MW | 17 MW over |
| All five cards | 81 MW | 41 MW over, double the headline |
| Pune 4 and 5 as the expansion | 42 MW | the headline plus this equals 82, against 81 of cards |
Read that first and last row together. The three smallest cards total 39, which is 40 to the nearest round number — and the remaining two cards total 42, which added to the headline gives 82 against 81 of itemised capacity. Both sides land within a megawatt of closing.
The reading that follows: the 40 MW headline describes Pune 1, 2 and 3, and Pune 4 and 5 are the expansion, which is consistent with a page that describes the footprint as operational and expanding, and with a 140 MW support capacity that only makes sense if more buildings are coming.
Published: 40 MW IT, 140 MW support, 200 MVA, and five cards of 9, 15, 15, 18 and 24 MW.
Inferred here, and labelled as such: that the headline covers the three smallest cards. The operator never says it, and the alternative — that all five cards are current and the headline is stale — would mean STT operates twice the Pune capacity it claims.
4Why 140 and 200 are not supply
These are the two figures most likely to be quoted out of context, and both are easy to misuse.
| Figure | What it is | What it would be wrong to say |
|---|---|---|
| 140 MW of IT support | the capacity the site and its utilities can serve if built out | "STT has 140 MW in Pune" |
| 200 MVA sanctioned | approved apparent power from the utility | "STT has 200 MW in Pune" |
| The relationship | 140 MW of IT inside 200 MVA of apparent power implies a power factor near 0.70 | a low factor, which is normal once cooling load is included |
| The gap | 140 minus 40 is 100 MW of headroom | "STT will build 100 MW in Pune" — headroom is not a plan |
The power factor of 0.70 is worth a pause. A data centre campus drawing 140 MW of IT through 200 MVA of sanctioned power is running a low apparent-to-real ratio, which is what you see when the sanction is sized for the whole campus including chillers, and the IT figure is measured at the racks. Both numbers can be right. Neither describes the other.
The proper use of 140 MW is as a ceiling on how large Pune could get, and of 200 MVA as the utility’s commitment behind it. Neither is a forecast, and neither should enter a supply model.
5The Pune market
Pune counts 51.5 MW in this registry, almost all of it one operator. STT contributes none of it.
| Operator | Counted | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Nxtra, four Pune buildings | 49.5 MW | 4.5 + 17 + 4 + 24 MW, all additive |
| Iron Mountain PUN 1 | 2 MW | operational, additive |
| STT GDC, five Pune cards | 0 MW | children marked unknown, headline non-additive |
| Pune counted total | 51.5 MW | two operators |
| STT’s published Pune footprint | 40 to 81 MW | depending on which scope you accept |
The consequence is stark. Depending on the reading, STT either operates close to or larger than everything else counted in Pune combined — and the registry counts it as nothing at all.
This is the same defect documented on the Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and Noida pages: a well-behaved operator publishing both a city headline and building cards ends up invisible, because the child rows are flagged non-additive and the parent row is flagged non-additive too. The fix is a data-model decision — count the facility, hold the aggregate as a ceiling — and it should be made before any state total is quoted to a buyer.
6Procurement
7Limits and open questions
- No reconciliation published. The inference on this page is arithmetic, not an operator statement.
- Three facilities against five buildings. The page itself is inconsistent about how many sites exist.
- No stage for any card. Not one of the five says whether it is operating, filling or planned.
- No racks, floor area or PUE anywhere in the Pune portfolio.
- 140 MW and 200 MVA are capability figures and must never be quoted as capacity.
- What would close it. A table mapping the headline to the cards. It would take one row per building.
8Sources
Sources: STT GDC India Pune city page, STT GDC India facility pages for Pune, STT GDC India corporate site, Data Center Dynamics on the KKR and Singtel acquisition, Nxtra Pune material for the market comparison, and Indian market commentary on the Pune data centre market.