STT GDC Ahmedabad 1 is 4 MW on the facility card and about 3 MW in the page narrative — a 25% disagreement inside one record. It is counted at 4 MW anyway, because it is a standalone facility with no parent aggregate, which makes it one of only two STT records in this entire registry that contribute anything to a total. The other is Jaipur. Everything else STT publishes — including 133 MW in Mumbai and 68 MW in Chennai — counts nothing. Gujarat itself publishes 3,168 MW of announcements and counts 5 MW. This building is four of them.
1At a glance
2Four or three
This is the smallest version of the same problem that appears across the whole estate, and it is the one that matters most because this record is actually used.
| If the building is | Then | Effect on the total |
|---|---|---|
| 4 MW of power capacity | the card is a facility figure | 4 MW counted, basis unlabelled |
| 4 MW of design capacity with 3 MW installed | the narrative is current | the total is 25% high |
| 3 MW of IT load inside a 4 MW envelope | both are right, at different levels | then 4 MW is the facility and 3 MW is the IT load |
The third reading is the most likely and the least stated. A building with 4 MW of electrical capacity serving 3 MW of IT load implies a small amount of plant overhead — which is what a well-run facility looks like.
The registry counts 4 MW because the card is the artifact that reconciles, and records the 3 MW in the notes. That is defensible but it is not clean, and the honest position is that this record is a 3-or-4 megawatt building about which the operator has published two numbers.
3The only counted STT record with a problem
The pattern across the STT estate is now unambiguous, and this record proves it.
| Record | Published | Has a parent aggregate? | Counted |
|---|---|---|---|
| STT Mumbai portfolio | 133 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Chennai portfolio | 68 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Noida portfolio | 63 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Pune portfolio | 40 to 81 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Kolkata portfolio | 9 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Delhi portfolio | 12 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Bengaluru portfolio | 23 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Hyderabad portfolio | 6 MW | yes — itself | 0 |
| STT Ahmedabad 1 | 4 MW | no | 4 MW |
| STT Jaipur 1 | 6 MW | no | 6 MW |
Two records count, and they are the two cities where STT runs a single building and publishes no portfolio. Everything else — 354 MW of published city portfolios — counts nothing.
The conclusion is uncomfortable and worth stating: this registry gives countability to operators who publish least. A company that publishes a well-structured portfolio is excluded; a company that publishes one card per city is counted. That is the opposite of the intended incentive.
Four megawatts is not the finding. The finding is that a 4 MW record with a 25% internal conflict is counted, while a 133 MW portfolio with exact reconciliation is not.
That single asymmetry is the strongest possible argument for fixing the additivity model before selling any state total.
4Gujarat, announced and counted
Gujarat is the widest announcement-to-reality gap in the file, and this building sits at the bottom of it.
| Record | MW | Counted |
|---|---|---|
| Reliance Jamnagar 3 GW AI DC cluster | 3,000 | no — announced |
| Reliance–Meta Jamnagar built-to-suit | 168 | no — announced |
| STT Ahmedabad 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Yotta GIFT City G1 | 1 | 1 |
| State total | 3,173 published | 5 MW counted |
A ratio of 634 to one. Gujarat has the largest single data centre announcement in the country — Reliance’s 3 GW Jamnagar cluster — and five megawatts of counted capacity, four of which are this building.
That is not a Gujarat problem specifically. It is what a state looks like when a single mega-announcement dwarfs a thin existing market, and it is the reason announcement totals are worthless as supply forecasts.
5Procurement
6Limits and open questions
- 4 MW against 3 MW in one record. The conflict is unresolved and the larger figure is the one counted.
- No stage, racks, floor area or PUE.
- No stated basis for either figure.
- Single source. No directory corroborates either number.
- The record is used in totals, which makes the conflict more consequential than it would be in an uncounted portfolio.
- What would close it. A statement that the 4 MW is facility capacity and the 3 MW is IT load. That would resolve it entirely.
7Sources
Sources: STT GDC India Ahmedabad city page, STT GDC India facility pages for Ahmedabad, STT GDC India corporate site, Reliance Jamnagar announcement material for the Gujarat comparison, and Indian market commentary on the Gujarat data centre market.