Research report

# Lightning Round — Test 1: Research Report

Blind side-by-side. Same prompt to both models. Judged on: quality of the research,
quality of the writing, and quality of the document design.

---

Research and write a complete, publication-quality report answering the question:
**"Are data centers bad for the environment?"** — with a particular focus on **water
consumption** alongside energy use and emissions.

Deliver it as a **single self-contained HTML document** that is designed, not just
formatted — this should look like something a serious publication would put its name
on.

## The research
- Do real research. Use actual figures — water withdrawal vs. consumption, gallons per
  megawatt-hour, energy draw, PUE and WUE, regional water stress where major data
  centers sit, and the AI-driven growth curve.
- **Cite every number** with a linked source. Do not invent or estimate statistics — if
  you can't source it, leave it out.
- Present the honest picture, including the counterarguments (efficiency gains,
  renewable siting, closed-loop cooling, how data center use compares to agriculture
  and other industries). Do not write an advocacy piece in either direction.

## The writing
- Lead with a clear, direct answer, then support it.
- Plain, confident prose — no hedging filler, no marketing language.
- Structure it so a smart non-expert can follow: what the concern is, what the data
  actually shows, where it's genuinely bad, where it's overstated, what happens next.

## The design
- Treat typography as the foundation: a considered type scale, generous measure, real
  hierarchy.
- Include **data visualizations you build yourself** (inline SVG or canvas) for the key
  figures — no image files, no chart libraries pulled from a CDN.
- Considered color palette, well-set tables, pull quotes, footnotes/citations styled
  properly.
- Fully responsive and printable.

## Iteration
Before you call it done, do **at least three iteration passes**: go back through the
report with a fine-toothed comb looking for weak sourcing, flabby writing, design
problems, and opportunities to improve it. Fix what you find.

Return the complete HTML document, ready to open.