Who We Are

Based out of Southern Indiana, Louisville, Kentucky, and Dallas, Texas. Render Capital invests in early-stage companies across the Midwest and South(avoiding NY/SF/Boston), spanning multiple industries to build a robust and diverse portfolio.

Render Capital is dedicated to investing in companies transforming legacy industries and archaic models by making emerging technologies accessible. These industries represent a substantial part of the Midwest and Southern economies, providing significant opportunities for growth and innovation. By supporting businesses that drive this democratization, we aim to generate strong returns while capitalizing on the potential of these vital regions.

Water Rights in the Age of Data Centers

AI-era data centers don’t just compete on megawatts(MW), they compete on megagallons. A 100-MW campus using evaporative cooling can pull roughly 1.1 million gallons per day(MGD); even “efficient” sites average about 1.8-1.9 liters per kilowatt-hour(L/kWh) of Water Usage Effectiveness(WUE). In the Ohio River corridor, that load lands on systems already juggling summer peaks and regulatory guardrails. Louisville, Jefferson County, averages around 131 MGD with the ability to roughly double on demand; peak weeks have pushed near 160 MGD. Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky (NKY) run a two-plant setup that can deliver about 280 MGD (≈240 MGD surface water + ~40 MGD aquifer), a regional advantage, if governance matches physics.

Now layer the hidden drag: U.S. utilities lose on the order of trillions of gallons annually to leaks (known as non-revenue water), turning “paper capacity” into water households and manufacturers never see. At the same time, Clean Water Act Section 316(b) (CWA §316(b)) rules on intake screens and thermal discharge shape how and when river water can be used and returned, especially along the Ohio.

A few fast points on water rights, why they matter for siting in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio(Ohio River states):

• These are largely riparian regimes (rights tied to owning land next to water) with a reasonable use standard, not Western-style prior appropriation (“first in time, first in right”). Translation: you often need permits and demonstrably reasonable, non-injurious withdrawals rather than buying a senior right outright.

• Surface vs. groundwater: both are typically managed with state withdrawal permits above thresholds; subterranean withdrawals (aquifers) may face separate metering, reporting, and consumptive-use caps.

• Return flow matters: non-consumptive use with high return percentages (e.g., closed-loop or reclaimed water) can earn credit in planning models and ease permitting compared with fully evaporative systems.

• Drought and curtailment: In declared shortages, states and utilities can impose priority rules and curtailment orders; industrial contracts often include peaking limits, interruptible clauses, and penalties.

• Interstate context: while the Ohio River is multistate, cities still operate under state-issued permits, and basin compacts primarily police water quality, so entitlement clarity, transparent metering, and cross-border coordination are a must.

• Practically, most hyperscalers don’t “own” rights here; they negotiate long-term municipal/special-district supply contracts. The risk is political: opaque deals can trigger backlash; clear community benefits, public dashboards, and auditable allocation reduce friction.

The winner playbook in Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio, especially Louisville-Jefferson County, Northern Kentucky/Cincinnati, and Evansville–New Albany, isn’t public relations (PR); it’s permits, pipes, and proofs. Closed-loop and non-potable cooling, near-plant wastewater polishing, auditable allocation, dynamic pricing, and Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) can turn a data center from a net taker into a net neighbor. Governance beats glamour.

The open question for the basin: which city (and which statehouse) turns this constraint into an edge by inviting founders to build the water stack in public, and which will sit back behind decades of family-name politics only to watch opportunity (and growth) flow downstream?

If you’re a founder or know someone building a fintech solution(possibly an exchange?) for water rights, then please reach out to Triet Nguyen([email protected]).

What We’re Reading

1. Allocator’s Notebook: Union Square Ventures Funds I-III - Lessons learned from USV and Fred Wilson.

2. No Rivals: The Kingdom (Part IV) - Explores how Founders Fund’s influence now extends across Silicon Valley, the Pentagon, and the White House, shaping both technology and U.S. defense policy. It profiles key figures like Trae Stephens and Delian Asparouhov, whose ventures Anduril and Varda exemplify the firm’s incubation success and its fusion of capitalism with national strategy. Ultimately, it argues that Founders Fund’s distinctive philosophy, rooted in contrarianism, ideology, and deep founder conviction, has redefined the intersection of tech, power, and politics.

3. AI Adoption In Healthcare Is Surging: What A New Report Reveals - Healthcare surprisingly is the quickest to adopt AI. Sales cycles have shortened, and most funding from healthcare systems has gone to startups instead of incumbents.

4. The State of Pets - Stats behind the Pawrent mentality.