> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.aixenergy.io/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# How Data Center Deals Allocate Delay Risk
- URL: https://www.aixenergy.io/carrying-the-bill-how-data-center-deals-allocate-infrastructure-delay-risk/
- Published: 2026-10-25T19:35:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-25T21:56:19.000Z
- Description: Tracing the physical dependencies of data center projects and the contract structures that leave developers, tenants, or capital carrying the cost of delay.
- Author: Morgan Bazilian
- Tags: Business & Finance, Policy & Regulation, Map Insights

## I. Introduction

In the race to build gigawatt-scale artificial intelligence campuses in the United States, electricity has been the primary focus. More recently, attention has widened to include the ability to secure local permitting and community approvals. Both hurdles are significant and can take years to overcome.

Article Summary

0:00

/31.242449

1×

Billions of dollars of private credit, infrastructure equity, and speculative land options have pursued onsite gas turbines, [interconnection queue positions](https://monitor.aixenergy.io/?ref=aixenergy.io), and utility will-serve letters. Across North America, however, a more sobering reality is setting in. The recent Oracle force majeure notice suggests that the true constraint on data center deployment lies less in soaring rhetoric than in surviving the multi-year friction of executing it.[1](#fn-1)

As examples, lead times for high-voltage generator step-up (GSU) transformers stretch to nearly three years.[2](#fn-2) Interstate natural gas pipeline expansions face protracted disputes over FERC and state certificates.[3](#fn-3) Many regulated electric utilities are approaching the limits of regional transmission headroom.[4](#fn-4) At the same time, municipal zoning boards, county commissioners, and community coalitions are imposing moratoria and environmental lawsuits.[5](#fn-5) Material supply chain obstacles are apparent in many other aspects of building data centers, but apart from power equipment we do not focus on them in this brief.

When a 500-megawatt campus misses its scheduled energization date, the economic damage builds quickly as debt service, committed capital charges, supply-chain carrying interest, and utility reservation fees continue to accrue, at a rate that we estimate in Section III at millions of dollars per month.

A data center project’s credibility depends heavily on its contract structure and on which counterparty bears the cost of delays, whether they originate in the bulk power system or in wider permitting and community disputes, and on whether that party has the balance-sheet capacity to absorb them over an extended period.

Section II describes the two principal sources of delay. Section III examines how contracts allocate the resulting costs, and Section IV reviews evidence from regulatory proceedings. Section V considers counterparty carrying capacity and its implications for underwriting. Section VI describes the data and methods, and Section VII concludes.

## II. Two Sources of Delay

Delays in hyperscale data center development arise primarily from two sources: power system infrastructure, and wider permitting and community approvals. Figure 1 compares the lead times associated with each against compute cycles.[6](#fn-6)

### Power system infrastructure and supply chains

On a typical 500 MW campus there is a high-voltage substation containing large power transformers and autotransformers (and GSU transformers where onsite generation is connected), typically stepping down from 345 kV, 500 kV, or 765 kV to 34.5 kV distribution. Average lead times reached 128 weeks for power transformers and 143 weeks for GSU transformers in the second quarter of 2025, or roughly 2.5 to 2.75 years.[7](#fn-7) AIxEnergy’s OEM Equipment Opportunity Index (EOI-1.0.0) records select ultra-high-voltage classes quoted into 2030.[8](#fn-8) Domestic production of grain-oriented electrical steel (GOES) remains constrained,[9](#fn-9) and major OEMs, including Hitachi Energy and Siemens Energy, report full factories and record order backlogs.[10](#fn-10) There is little secondary-market supply to fall back on.

Transmission headroom often imposes an even longer delay. AIxEnergy’s Substation Capacity Intelligence (SCI-1.1.0) indicates that bulk transmission systems in several major data center corridors have little remaining thermal or stability headroom.[11](#fn-11) These corridors include PJM in Northern Virginia and Central Ohio, MISO in Wisconsin and Illinois, ERCOT in Texas, and Southern Company in Georgia. Even when a developer secures a utility will-serve letter, the physical cut-in can require regional transmission upgrades, such as reconductoring, circuit breaker replacements, or new high-voltage lines. New transmission takes around 10 years on average to permit and construct, and some projects take 15 years or more.[12](#fn-12)

Pipeline and fuel infrastructure has lead times that we estimate at 36 to 60 months. Developers who try to avoid this by using behind-the-meter generation (simple-cycle gas turbines, reciprocating engines, or fuel cells) exchange electric queue delays for fuel delivery risk. A 300 MW gas plant running around the clock consumes about 54,000 MMBtu of natural gas per day at the average combined-cycle heat rate, and about 79,000 MMBtu per day at the average heat rate of simple-cycle gas turbines.[13](#fn-13) Connecting to an interstate pipeline requires dedicated lateral taps, compressor upgrades, and meter stations, which are subject to state commission certificates or FERC Section 7(c) review.[14](#fn-14) In winter-peaking markets, interruptible gas contracts also face mandatory curtailment, which can lead developers to add dual-fuel backup storage (ultra-low sulfur diesel or LNG).[15](#fn-15)

### Permitting, environmental standards, and community opposition

Under Clean Air Act New Source Review (NSR) and Title V permitting, large gas turbine and reciprocating engine installations are evaluated for nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter.[16](#fn-16) In nonattainment zones, which AIxEnergy tracks in its [EPA Nonattainment overlay](https://map.aixenergy.io/?ref=aixenergy.io), securing emission reduction credits (ERCs) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) equipment can add, in our estimate, 18 to 36 months of regulatory lead time and expose projects to public appeals.[17](#fn-17)

Water rights and cooling are yet another constraint. Large data centers that use evaporative cooling can consume up to 5 million gallons of water per day.[18](#fn-18) In water-stressed basins across the American West, Southwest, and Southeast, obtaining consumptive water rights from municipal authorities or groundwater conservation districts can be contested, as a 2026 lawsuit in California’s Imperial Valley shows.[19](#fn-19) Where water is scarce, operators may turn to air-cooled chillers, which increase parasitic electrical load.

Local opposition has become a major reason projects are delayed or cancelled. Heatmap News reported in October 2026 that data center cancellations in 2026 had topped $260 billion, with about half of that total in the third quarter.[20](#fn-20) High-density data centers can generate continuous low-frequency noise from rooftop chiller banks, cooling towers, and backup generators.[21](#fn-21) Local governments in Georgia, New Mexico, and the Carolinas have adopted [moratoria](https://www.aixenergy.io/the-moratorium-map-how-the-ai-boom-is-redrawing-the-geography-of-power-and-permission/). In September 2026, Loudoun County, Virginia, paused its consideration of certain data center applications; Virginia law does not allow a blanket moratorium. Virginia counties have also set decibel limits (for example, 55 dBA at residential property lines in Loudoun County, and 73 dBA by day and 68 dBA at night in industrial areas of Prince William County), and at least one Georgia county has revoked a data center’s conditional use permit (CUP).[22](#fn-22)

![Figure 1. Horizontal bar chart of execution lead times in months: new high-voltage transmission about 10 years on average and 15 years or more for some projects; high-voltage power and GSU transformers 128 to 143 weeks (about 30 to 33 months); interstate gas pipeline laterals and compressors 36 to 60 months (authors’ estimate); nonattainment-area emission reduction credits and SCR 18 to 36 months (authors’ estimate); local data center moratoria 6 to 18 months; compared with an annual AI compute platform cycle of about 12 months.](https://storage.ghost.io/c/e3/c9/e3c9e740-20f7-4e9c-9a31-131fc1166819/content/images/2026/10/fig1-aix-v11.png)

Figure 1\. Power infrastructure takes years longer to deliver than the compute it serves. Infrastructure and permitting lead times compared with the AI compute platform cycle; the arrow marks the gap of 9 to 14 years between the compute cycle and new transmission. The transmission bar spans the average of about 10 years to the 15 years or more that some projects require. Hatched bars are the authors’ estimates. Sources: transformers, Wood Mackenzie (note 7); transmission, U.S. Department of Energy (note 12); moratoria, note 22; compute cycle, NVIDIA (note 6).

## III. Contract Allocation and the Developer Squeeze

In standard commercial contracts, risk is ostensibly assigned to the party best positioned to manage it. In modern data center infrastructure, risk tends to be dictated by structural asymmetries in bargaining power.

The result is what AIxEnergy terms the “developer squeeze,” in which wholesale developers are caught between exculpatory utility tariffs, capped OEM supply terms, and tough tenant lease mechanisms. Figure 2 traces how delay costs flow under four common deal structures. In a programmatic joint venture, partners share the cost of delay, while a behind-the-meter microgrid places the capital burden on the owner of the onsite generation.

![Figure 2. Flowchart: an infrastructure or permitting execution delay (including HV and GSU transformer lead times of 128 to 143 weeks) passes through the development structure into four paths: direct self-build, wholesale lease (with or without tenant force majeure relief), programmatic joint venture, and behind-the-meter microgrid or IPP. The wholesale lease path with force majeure relief leads to the developer squeeze: zero utility delay damages and minimum-demand charges (e.g., AEP Ohio 85% floor), OEM delay damages capped at 5 to 10%, tenant rent deferral of up to three years if force majeure is agreed, with Oracle still paying debt costs at Project Jupiter and the capital partner’s higher rent delayed. Five outcomes: hyperscaler balance sheet; developer and sponsor carry (authors’ estimates of USD 135 to 250 million over 18 months, USD 7 to 9 million per month of interest on USD 1 billion, and a USD 50 to 200 million liquidity need); anchor tenant capitalized carry; shared JV rate-base pass-through; and microgrid IPP capital burden.](https://storage.ghost.io/c/e3/c9/e3c9e740-20f7-4e9c-9a31-131fc1166819/content/images/2026/10/fig2-aix-v11.png)

Figure 2\. In a wholesale lease, delay costs land on the developer and its capital sponsor. Who carries the cost of delay under four deal structures. Utility tariffs and capped OEM supply terms limit upstream recovery (notes 30 and 33). In a wholesale lease with tenant force majeure (FM) relief, as at Oracle’s Project Jupiter, Oracle still pays debt costs while the capital partner’s higher rent is delayed, so the developer and its capital sponsor carry the cost: the developer squeeze (notes 25 and 26).

### Force majeure and the Oracle precedent

Oracle’s invocation of force majeure on Project Jupiter (CVP0593) in New Mexico may mark a turning point for the underwriting of AI infrastructure. The project is a planned 2.45 GW, $165 billion AI campus developed by STACK Infrastructure (backed by Blue Owl Capital) for the OpenAI/SoftBank Stargate initiative, and it features an onsite 2.45 GW Bloom Energy fuel-cell microgrid and a dedicated gas pipeline.[23](#fn-23) It encountered permitting delays concerning air quality authorization for the fuel-cell array and approvals for the pipeline that would supply natural gas to the site.[24](#fn-24)

Oracle invoked its *force majeure* clause to protect its contractual position. Under the lease terms as reported by Bloomberg Law, a *force majeure* event that both parties agree has occurred allows the anchor tenant to defer the start of rent payments by up to three years if the target 2028 commercial operation date is missed.[25](#fn-25) According to a person familiar with the matter cited by Reuters, Oracle cannot terminate the lease and remains responsible for debt costs, while Blue Owl’s higher operating-stage rent is delayed rather than reduced.[26](#fn-26) On these terms, the force majeure clause shields the tenant from paying full rent before power arrives, while the developer and its capital sponsor carry the cost of delayed returns on their equity.

### Utility tariffs and supply contracts

Upstream, regulated utilities operate under Electric Service Regulations (ESRs) approved by state commissions. State-approved tariffs typically contain limitation-of-liability provisions that shield the utility from liability for construction delays, energization slips, or interrupted service, and courts have generally enforced them.[27](#fn-27) A developer therefore has little practical recourse to recover delay damages from a regulated utility.

Commissions also mandate contributions in aid of construction (CIAC). In Virginia, the State Corporation Commission’s 2026 Rider T-1 order requires new large-load customers to pay, through a mandatory CIAC, for the substations and transmission lines that directly connect them, with the details of Dominion’s amended line-extension policy pending in Case PUR-2026-00131.[28](#fn-28) In Wisconsin, the Public Service Commission’s decision in Docket 6630-TE-113 required revisions to We Energies’ large-customer tariff to address the risk of transmission costs shifting from data centers to existing customers.[29](#fn-29)

Regulators are also requiring utilities to [insulate other ratepayers](https://www.aixenergy.io/how-artificial-intelligence-data-centers-are-reshaping-the-regulatory-architecture-of-u-s-electricity/) from the risk of stranded assets built for large loads. Under AEP Ohio’s Data Center Tariff (PUCO Case 24-508-EL-ATA), customers demanding more than 25 MW are billed each month for no less than the greater of 85% of their highest billing demand in the prior 11 months or a minimum share of contract capacity, capped at 85% of the total, under contracts that run for a load ramp of up to four years plus eight years.[30](#fn-30) Under Dominion Virginia’s GS-5 tariff (Docket PUR-2025-00058), customers must commit to 14-year agreements and pay 85% of transmission and distribution demand and 60% of generation demand.[31](#fn-31) Across the Dominion GS-5 and Wisconsin Electric large-load tariffs, minimum contract commitments of 14 to 15 years are required to protect retail ratepayers.[32](#fn-32)

These provisions leave developers in a difficult financial position. If substation construction or transformer delivery slips by 18 months, the utility typically pays no damages. Once the scheduled contract start date arrives, it instead begins billing the developer the tariff’s minimum demand charges. In one publicly filed OEM supply contract, delay damages are capped at 5% of the contract price, within a 10% aggregate cap, which can leave most of the financial cost of delay uncovered.[33](#fn-33)

### Carrying costs

Construction debt and private credit facilities, which we assume are priced at SOFR plus 350 to 550 basis points (about 8.5% to 11.0% all-in), continue to accrue interest. We examine who supplies this credit, and where its risk is going, in our companion article, “[The AI Boom Is Becoming a Credit Bet](https://www.aixenergy.io/who-is-financing-the-ai-buildout-and-where-is-the-risk-going/).” On a $1.0 billion debt package, that is roughly $7 to $9 million per month by our calculation. We define total carrying cost as:

*Total Carrying Cost = Σ \[Debt Servicet \+ Utility Ratchett \+ Supply-Chain Interestt \+ Fixed O&Mt\]*

For a 500 MW campus delayed by 18 months and financed with an assumed $1.0 billion of private credit (65% leverage), we estimate that carrying costs accumulate to between $135 million and $250 million (Figure 3).[34](#fn-34) In this hypothetical case, losses of that size could impair or eliminate developer equity and could trigger DSCR covenant defaults or sponsor capital calls.

![Figure 3. Stacked area chart of cumulative carrying cost for an unenergized 500 MW campus by month of delay, divided into private credit debt service, the utility minimum-demand charges, OEM storage and reservation, and fixed site O&M and standby fuel, reaching about USD 174.6 million at month 18, carried by the developer and sponsor.](https://storage.ghost.io/c/e3/c9/e3c9e740-20f7-4e9c-9a31-131fc1166819/content/images/2026/10/fig3-aix-v11.png)

Figure 3\. An 18-month delay can cost $135 million to $250 million before the campus earns revenue. Cumulative carrying cost of an unenergized 500 MW campus over an 18-month delay (authors’ estimates). Dashed lines show interest alone on an assumed $1.0 billion of debt at 8.5% to 11.0% (about $7 million to $9 million per month). The shaded band is the estimated total of $135 million to $250 million, which adds minimum-demand charges, supply-chain carrying costs, and fixed O&M. Costs are shown accruing evenly by month for illustration (note 34).

## IV. Evidence from Regulatory Proceedings

Infrastructure delays, permitting friction, and contract risk allocation are documented across North America in the [AIxEnergy Utility Delivery Risk (UDR-1.0.0) layer](https://map.aixenergy.io/?scene=private-equity-investor&ref=aixenergy.io). The dataset tracks 53 located proceedings (active regulatory complaints, tariff disputes, and delay investigations) across 21 utilities.[35](#fn-35) Table 1 summarizes seven of them.[36](#fn-36)

Table 1\. Selected projects in the AIxEnergy Utility Delivery Risk (UDR-1.0.0) layer: governing venue, sources of delay and contract friction, and allocation of risk.

| Project & Location                            | Governing Docket / Venue                                 | Delay & Contract Friction                                                                | Allocation & Risk Carrier                                                                                                  |
| --------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Stargate Jupiter (CVP0593)Doña Ana County, NM | State Air Quality Bureau &Natural Gas Pipeline Review    | Air permits for 2.45 GW Bloom microgrid;Gas pipeline certificate delays                  | Oracle force majeure invoked;Rent deferral up to 3 years if agreed;Oracle pays debt costs; Blue Owl’s higher rent delayed. |
| Amazon ADS CampusesMorrow / Umatilla, OR      | Oregon PUC Docket UM 2410(Stayed for settlement 2026)    | Alleged power under-delivery to 4 sites;PacifiCorp 32.6% tax gross-up demand             | Contested proceeding;Customer challenged tax shift;Procedural stay for settlement.                                         |
| PORTS-Pike Campus (CVP0700)Pike County, OH    | PUCO Case 24-508-EL-ATA(Approved Data Center Tariff)     | Minimum-demand charges (85% floor);8–12 yr contracts (ramp ≤ 4 yrs + 8 yrs) + collateral | Developer / Tenant carries capacity costs;OMA dispute over 3.3 GW forecast shift.                                          |
| PowerHouse Joliet CampusWill County, IL       | FERC ER26-3257 / ER26-1032 &U.S. Dist. Court (N.D. Ill.) | ComEd sought to cancel 1.8 GW TSAover disputed $1 letter of credit                       | Transmission collateral litigation;FERC rejected cancellation; in federal court.                                           |
| Dominion Data Center ClassNorthern Virginia   | Virginia SCC Docket PUR-2025-00058(GS-5 Rate Schedule)   | 85% T&D / 60% generation ratchets;Mandatory 14-year contracts                            | Ratepayer protective tariff;Rider T-1 mandatory CIAC for direct-connect facilities.                                        |
| Meta Hyperion & EvestRichland Parish, LA      | Louisiana PSC DocketsU-37425 & U-37882                   | Phase 1 (3 CCCTs) approved;Phase 2 (5.3 GW) pending                                      | Customer-funded generation framework;Intervenors sought discovery from Meta.                                               |
| Microsoft Fairwater 1 & 2Racine County, WI    | PSCW 6630-TE-113 &FERC Transmission Protest              | Large-customer tariff, 15-year minimum term;Minimum transmission charges                 | Microsoft FERC protest against We Energies/ATCover early termination fee liabilities.                                      |

## V. Counterparty Carrying Capacity and Underwriting

Assessing a project’s credibility requires evaluating its counterparty carrying capacity with respect to both power delivery and wider permitting delays.

In practice, due diligence can be organized around five questions:

1. Host utility delivery tariff. Does the utility impose minimum-demand charges (e.g., AEP Ohio’s floor of the greater of 85% of the highest demand in the prior 11 months or a contract-capacity share capped at 85%, or Dominion GS-5)?[37](#fn-37) Is the project required to fund a CIAC for direct-connect substations and lines (e.g., Dominion under Rider T-1)?
2. Offtake lease and force majeure terms. Does the tenant hold a force majeure rent-deferral right (e.g., Oracle at Project Jupiter)? What is the longstop cancellation window, and how soon after a missed date can either party exit?
3. Onsite generation and fuel delivery. If behind-the-meter turbines or fuel cells are used, have Title V air permits been secured? Is natural gas transportation firm or interruptible?
4. Municipal and community standing. Is the parcel properly zoned, or does it require a discretionary CUP? Have acoustic studies verified compliance with nighttime decibel limits?
5. Counterparty carrying capacity. If energization slips 18 months, what is the monthly carrying cost (debt plus ratchet)? Does the developer or its sponsor have the liquid balance sheet to fund that cost, which we estimate at $50 million to $200 million?

## VI. Data and Methods

The analysis draws on scenes and project dossiers in the AIxEnergy Map. The [Private Equity and Investor Underwriting scene](https://map.aixenergy.io/?scene=private-equity-investor&ref=aixenergy.io) renders global data center projects against the US high-voltage transmission grid and the Utility Delivery Risk layer, showing where transmission queues, regulatory complaints, and minimum-demand charges coincide. Campus dossiers are available for the following projects:

1. [Stargate Jupiter](https://map.aixenergy.io/?view=campus-ttp-dossier&project=CVP0593&ref=aixenergy.io) (CVP0593), the 2,450 MW Doña Ana County campus, covering the Bloom Energy microgrid, pipeline approvals, and Oracle’s force majeure rent deferral.
2. [PORTS Technology Campus](https://map.aixenergy.io/?view=campus-ttp-dossier&project=CVP0700&ref=aixenergy.io) (CVP0700), the SB Energy campus planned for 8 GW of IT capacity, evaluated against the 85% minimum-demand floor in AEP Ohio’s PUCO-mandated Data Center Tariff (Case 24-508-EL-ATA).[38](#fn-38)
3. [Amazon Umatilla cluster](https://map.aixenergy.io/?view=campus-ttp-dossier&project=CVP0737&ref=aixenergy.io) (CVP0737), covering PacifiCorp OPUC Docket UM 2410, the under-delivery allegations, a 32.6% tax gross-up dispute, and the late-2026 settlement stay.[39](#fn-39)
4. [Microsoft Mount Pleasant](https://map.aixenergy.io/?view=campus-ttp-dossier&project=P001&ref=aixenergy.io) (P001), covering the PSCW 6630-TE-113 large-customer tariff decision and Microsoft’s FERC protest over minimum transmission charges and early termination liabilities.[40](#fn-40)
5. [Meta Hyperion](https://map.aixenergy.io/?view=campus-ttp-dossier&project=hyperion-richland-parish&ref=aixenergy.io), covering Entergy Louisiana Dockets U-37425 (approved three gas CCCTs) and U-37882 (a pending expansion of about 5.3 GW, in which intervenors sought discovery from Meta).[41](#fn-41)

## VII. Conclusion

The first chapter of the generative AI boom was defined by land grabs and power announcements. The second will be defined by the ability to execute despite delays in supply chains and in permitting and the community “license to operate.”

Oracle’s force majeure notice in New Mexico illustrates that a multi-gigawatt will-serve letter or an ambitious microgrid partnership does not by itself protect a development from the realities of air permitting, pipeline construction, and utility ratchets. The winners of the AI infrastructure cycle are unlikely to be the developers with the most gigawatts on a spreadsheet. They are more likely to be well-capitalized platforms whose power and permitting plans are realistic, and whose contract counterparties have the balance-sheet capacity to absorb the friction and carry the bill. Other infrastructure developers learned long ago that community engagement is slow, and that it cannot be wished away with old tools or approaches.

## Sign up for AIxEnergy Journal

The AIxEnergy Journal provides executive intelligence on AI infrastructure, data centers, electricity demand, electric grids, utilities, power markets, reliability, investment, and policy.

Subscribe 

Email sent! Check your inbox to complete your signup. 

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

## Notes

1. Sridhar Natarajan, Brody Ford, and Paula Seligson, “Oracle Cites Force Majeure to Shield Itself on Data Center,” *Bloomberg Law*, September 24, 2026, [https://news.bloomberglaw.com/artificial-intelligence/oracle-cites-force-majeure-to-shield-itself-on-big-data-center](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/artificial-intelligence/oracle-cites-force-majeure-to-shield-itself-on-big-data-center?ref=aixenergy.io); Reuters, “Oracle Triggers ‘Force Majeure’ on Data Center Project over Power Delays, Source Says,” CNA, September 24, 2026, [https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/oracle-triggers-force-majeure-data-center-project-over-power-delays-source-says-6408541](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/oracle-triggers-force-majeure-data-center-project-over-power-delays-source-says-6408541?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-1)
2. Benjamin Boucher, “Mind the Gap: Tackling Supply-Chain Challenges in the Electric T&D Sector,” Wood Mackenzie, October 15, 2025, [https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/mind-the-gap-tackling-supply-chain-challenges-in-the-electric-td-sector](https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/mind-the-gap-tackling-supply-chain-challenges-in-the-electric-td-sector?ref=aixenergy.io) (reporting an average of 143 weeks for GSU transformers in the second quarter of 2025). [↩︎](#fnref-2)
3. Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. § 717f(c), [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/717f](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/717f?ref=aixenergy.io); Natarajan, Ford, and Seligson, “Oracle Cites Force Majeure” (reporting a pipeline in-service date pushed to February 1, 2027, after repeated permit denials by the New Mexico State Land Office). [↩︎](#fnref-3)
4. Ryan Wiser et al., *Transmission Impact Assessment: Power Sector Infrastructure Deployment to Reduce Costs, Improve Reliability, and Lower Pollution* (Washington, DC: US Department of Energy, October 2024), [https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/DOE\_OP\_2024\_Report-Transmission\_Impact\_Assessment.pdf](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/DOE%5FOP%5F2024%5FReport-Transmission%5FImpact%5FAssessment.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-4)
5. Data Center Watch, “Q2 2026: Data Center Watch Report,” accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.datacenterwatch.org/q2-2026](https://www.datacenterwatch.org/q2-2026?ref=aixenergy.io); Sasha Jones, “U.S. Data Center Opposition Blocks $68B in Q2 Projects,” *Bisnow*, September 21, 2026, [https://www.bisnow.com/news/national/data-center-community-relations/community-backlash-upends-billions-of-dollars-in-new-data-center-projects](https://www.bisnow.com/news/national/data-center-community-relations/community-backlash-upends-billions-of-dollars-in-new-data-center-projects?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-5)
6. NVIDIA, “GTC 2025 – Announcements and Live Updates,” *NVIDIA Blog*, March 25, 2025, [https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-keynote-at-gtc-2025-ai-news-live-updates/](https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-keynote-at-gtc-2025-ai-news-live-updates/?ref=aixenergy.io) (stating that NVIDIA “will follow an annual rhythm for the buildout of AI infrastructure,” with new GPUs, CPUs, and accelerated computing advances each year). [↩︎](#fnref-6)
7. Boucher, “Mind the Gap.” [↩︎](#fnref-7)
8. AIxEnergy, *AIxEnergy Map*, accessed October 9, 2026, [https://map.aixenergy.io/](https://map.aixenergy.io/?ref=aixenergy.io) (OEM Equipment Opportunity Index, EOI-1.0.0). [↩︎](#fnref-8)
9. US Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, “Industrial Demonstrations Program: Steel Slab Electrified Induction Reheat Furnace Upgrade,” project fact sheet, August 2024, [https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/IDP%20Little%20Cliffs%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet20240822.pdf](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/IDP%20Little%20Cliffs%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet20240822.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io) (describing the Cleveland-Cliffs facility as “the only production facility for high-silicon grain oriented electrical steel (GOES) in the United States”). [↩︎](#fnref-9)
10. Wood Mackenzie, “Power Transformers and Distribution Transformers Will Face Supply Deficits of 30% and 10% in 2025, According to Wood Mackenzie,” press release, August 14, 2025, [https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/power-transformers-and-distribution-transformers-will-face-supply-deficits-of-30-and-10-in-2025](https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/power-transformers-and-distribution-transformers-will-face-supply-deficits-of-30-and-10-in-2025?ref=aixenergy.io) (projecting a 30 percent supply deficit for power transformers in 2025, with imports meeting an estimated 80 percent of US power transformer supply); “Nobody Saw It Coming: The Energy Boom Reshaping Hitachi,” interview with Andreas Schierenbeck, *The Oriental Economist* (Toyo Keizai), March 17, 2026, [https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/937520](https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/937520?ref=aixenergy.io) (Hitachi Energy chief executive: “Our factories are full”); Siemens Energy, “Earnings Release Q3 FY 2026,” August 5, 2026, [https://assets.siemens-energy.com/dam/30018eed-275d-4e73-811e-b49d004cdc3d/2026-08-05-Earnings\_Release\_Q3\_FY26\_EN-pdf\_Original%20file.pdf](https://assets.siemens-energy.com/dam/30018eed-275d-4e73-811e-b49d004cdc3d/2026-08-05-Earnings%5FRelease%5FQ3%5FFY26%5FEN-pdf%5FOriginal%20file.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io) (reporting a record Grid Technologies order backlog of €51 billion, driven by transformers, including for data center projects). [↩︎](#fnref-10)
11. AIxEnergy, *AIxEnergy Map* (Substation Capacity Intelligence, SCI-1.1.0). [↩︎](#fnref-11)
12. Wiser et al., *Transmission Impact Assessment* (finding that new transmission “takes, on average, around 10 years to complete, with some projects requiring 15 years or more to complete”). [↩︎](#fnref-12)
13. US Energy Information Administration, “Table 8.2\. Average Tested Heat Rates by Prime Mover and Energy Source, 2014–2024,” *Electric Power Annual*, accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa\_08\_02.html](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa%5F08%5F02.html?ref=aixenergy.io) (2024 average tested heat rates of 7,548 Btu/kWh for natural gas combined-cycle units and 10,999 Btu/kWh for gas turbines). At 7,548 Btu/kWh, 300 MW operated for 24 hours consumes about 54,000 MMBtu; at 10,999 Btu/kWh, about 79,000 MMBtu. Authors’ calculation. [↩︎](#fnref-13)
14. 15 U.S.C. § 717f(c). [↩︎](#fnref-14)
15. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and North American Electric Reliability Corporation, *Inquiry into Bulk-Power System Operations during December 2022 Winter Storm Elliott* (Washington, DC: FERC, October 2023), [https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-11/24\_Winter-Storm\_Elliot\_1107\_1300.pdf](https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-11/24%5FWinter-Storm%5FElliot%5F1107%5F1300.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-15)
16. US Environmental Protection Agency, “Basic Information about Operating Permits,” accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/basic-information-about-operating-permits](https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/basic-information-about-operating-permits?ref=aixenergy.io); US Environmental Protection Agency, “Nonattainment NSR Basic Information,” accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.epa.gov/nsr/nonattainment-nsr-basic-information](https://www.epa.gov/nsr/nonattainment-nsr-basic-information?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-16)
17. EPA, “Nonattainment NSR” (nonattainment NSR requires the lowest achievable emission rate, emission offsets, and an opportunity for public involvement). On current nonattainment designations, see US Environmental Protection Agency, “Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book),” last updated September 30, 2026, [https://www.epa.gov/green-book](https://www.epa.gov/green-book?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-17)
18. Miguel Yañez-Barnuevo, “Data Centers and Water Consumption,” Environmental and Energy Study Institute, June 25, 2025, [https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption](https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-18)
19. Kori Suzuki, “Imperial Valley Data Center Developer Files Lawsuit Seeking Access to Colorado River Water,” KPBS, June 15, 2026, [https://www.kpbs.org/news/environment/2026/06/15/imperial-valley-data-center-developer-files-lawsuit-seeking-access-to-colorado-river-water](https://www.kpbs.org/news/environment/2026/06/15/imperial-valley-data-center-developer-files-lawsuit-seeking-access-to-colorado-river-water?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-19)
20. Robinson Meyer, “Exclusive: Data Center Cancellations Top $260 Billion in 2026,” *Heatmap News*, October 6, 2026, [https://heatmap.news/daily/260-billion-data-center-opposition](https://heatmap.news/daily/260-billion-data-center-opposition?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-20)
21. Loudoun County, Virginia, “Data Centers: Noise & Air Quality Concerns,” accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.loudoun.gov/6405/Noise-Air-Quality-Concerns](https://www.loudoun.gov/6405/Noise-Air-Quality-Concerns?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-21)
22. On moratoria, see Data Center Watch, “Q2 2026”; Jones, “Data Center Opposition”; Office of Supervisor Juli E. Briskman, “Loudoun Board Enacts Pause on Data Centers,” news release, Loudoun County, Virginia, September 16, 2026, [https://www.loudoun.gov/DocumentCenter/View/222331/Statement—Loudoun-Board-Enacts-Pause-on-Data-Centers](https://www.loudoun.gov/DocumentCenter/View/222331/Statement---Loudoun-Board-Enacts-Pause-on-Data-Centers?ref=aixenergy.io) (Loudoun County); Newton County Board of Commissioners, Resolution R-040726b, “A Resolution . . . Enacting a Limited Moratorium on the Acceptance of Applications, Requests, or Submissions That Propose the Development of Data Centers,” April 7, 2026, [https://www.newtoncountyga.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7830/Resolution-R-040726b](https://www.newtoncountyga.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7830/Resolution-R-040726b?ref=aixenergy.io) (Georgia); Santa Fe County, “Santa Fe County Approves 18-Month Moratorium on Data Centers,” news release, July 2, 2026, [https://www.santafecountynm.gov/news/detail/santa-fe-county-approves-18-month-moratorium-on-data-centers](https://www.santafecountynm.gov/news/detail/santa-fe-county-approves-18-month-moratorium-on-data-centers?ref=aixenergy.io) (New Mexico); A. P. Dillon, “Data Center Moratorium Count Rises Again,” *North State Journal*, September 4, 2026, [https://nsjonline.com/article/2026/09/data-center-moratorium-count-rises-again/](https://nsjonline.com/article/2026/09/data-center-moratorium-count-rises-again/?ref=aixenergy.io) (North Carolina); Maayan Schechter, “Gov. McMaster Declines Calling for SC-Wide Data Center Moratorium as More Counties Pass Their Own,” South Carolina Public Radio, September 25, 2026, [https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/sc-news/2026-09-25/gov-mcmaster-declines-calling-for-sc-wide-data-center-moratorium-as-more-counties-pass-their-own](https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/sc-news/2026-09-25/gov-mcmaster-declines-calling-for-sc-wide-data-center-moratorium-as-more-counties-pass-their-own?ref=aixenergy.io) (South Carolina). On the decibel limits, see Loudoun County, “Noise & Air Quality Concerns”; Evelyn Mejia, “Supervisors OK Compromise Noise Ordinance Aimed at Data Centers,” *Prince William Times*, October 30, 2025, [https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/supervisors-ok-compromise-noise-ordinance-aimed-at-data-centers/article\_1288e464-5559-4c12-ab8f-2a28ca28d819.html](https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/supervisors-ok-compromise-noise-ordinance-aimed-at-data-centers/article%5F1288e464-5559-4c12-ab8f-2a28ca28d819.html?ref=aixenergy.io). On a revoked conditional use permit, see Grace Drawdy, “Commissioners Revoke Data Center Permit in North Forsyth County,” *Forsyth County News*, July 10, 2026, [https://www.forsythnews.com/news/government/commissioners-revoke-data-center-permit-in-north-forsyth-county/](https://www.forsythnews.com/news/government/commissioners-revoke-data-center-permit-in-north-forsyth-county/?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-22)
23. Oracle, “Oracle, BorderPlex, and Bloom Energy to Power Project Jupiter with Cleaner, Water-Efficient Fuel Cell Technology,” press release, April 27, 2026, [https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-borderplex-and-bloom-energy-to-power-project-jupiter-with-fuel-cell-technology-2026-04-27/](https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-borderplex-and-bloom-energy-to-power-project-jupiter-with-fuel-cell-technology-2026-04-27/?ref=aixenergy.io); Saf Malik, “$165bn Project Jupiter: What Oracle’s Force Majeure Notice Means for AI Data Centre Risk,” *Capacity*, October 2, 2026, [https://capacityglobal.com/news/165bn-project-jupiter-what-oracles-force-majeure-notice-means-for-ai-data-centre-risk/](https://capacityglobal.com/news/165bn-project-jupiter-what-oracles-force-majeure-notice-means-for-ai-data-centre-risk/?ref=aixenergy.io) (giving the campus value as $165 billion). [↩︎](#fnref-23)
24. Bryan Gottlieb, “Oracle Invokes Force Majeure as New Mexico Project Jupiter Power Work Faces Hurdles,” *Engineering News-Record*, September 28, 2026, [https://www.enr.com/articles/63720-oracle-invokes-force-majeure-as-new-mexico-project-jupiter-power-work-faces-hurdles](https://www.enr.com/articles/63720-oracle-invokes-force-majeure-as-new-mexico-project-jupiter-power-work-faces-hurdles?ref=aixenergy.io); Diego Mendoza-Moyers, “Oracle Says Project Jupiter Remains on Track despite Power Supply Concerns,” *El Paso Matters*, September 24, 2026, [https://elpasomatters.org/2026/09/24/project-jupiter-rent-force-majeure-new-mexico-oracle-ai-el-paso-data-center/](https://elpasomatters.org/2026/09/24/project-jupiter-rent-force-majeure-new-mexico-oracle-ai-el-paso-data-center/?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-24)
25. Natarajan, Ford, and Seligson, “Oracle Cites Force Majeure” (reporting that Oracle “could win a three-year delay on rent when those payments commence” “if the two sides agree that a force majeure event tied to meeting power commitments has occurred”); Reuters, “Oracle Triggers ‘Force Majeure.’” [↩︎](#fnref-25)
26. Reuters, “Oracle Triggers ‘Force Majeure’” (citing a person familiar with the matter: “Oracle cannot terminate the lease under any circumstances,” and Oracle is “responsible for paying the debt costs”). [↩︎](#fnref-26)
27. *Maryland Casualty Co. v. NSTAR Electric Co.*, 471 Mass. 416 (2015), [https://openjurist.org/471/mass/416/maryland-casualty-co-v-nstar-electric-co](https://openjurist.org/471/mass/416/maryland-casualty-co-v-nstar-electric-co?ref=aixenergy.io) (holding that “a properly approved tariff may so limit a public utility’s liability” for special, indirect, or consequential damages). [↩︎](#fnref-27)
28. Diana DiGangi, “Dominion Ordered to Directly Assign Some Transmission Costs to Data Centers,” *Utility Dive*, August 12, 2026, [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/dominion-energy-scc-transmission-costs-data-center/827693/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/dominion-energy-scc-transmission-costs-data-center/827693/?ref=aixenergy.io); Virginia State Corporation Commission, “Fact Sheet: How the SCC’s Rider T1 Decision Protects Ratepayers,” September 3, 2026, [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/media/sccvirginiagov-home/about-the-scc/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-how-the-scc-rider-t1-decision-protects-ratepayers.pdf](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/media/sccvirginiagov-home/about-the-scc/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-how-the-scc-rider-t1-decision-protects-ratepayers.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-28)
29. Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, “PSC Overhauls We Energies’ Data Center Tariff, Makes Improvements to Protect Existing Customers,” press release, April 24, 2026, [https://psc.wi.gov/Documents/PressReleases/04.24.2026PressRelease.PDF](https://psc.wi.gov/Documents/PressReleases/04.24.2026PressRelease.PDF?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-29)
30. AEP Ohio, “Data Center Tariff,” accessed October 9, 2026, [https://www.aepohio.com/company/about/rates/data-center-tariff/](https://www.aepohio.com/company/about/rates/data-center-tariff/?ref=aixenergy.io); Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, “PUCO Orders AEP Ohio to Create Data Center Specific Tariff,” news release, July 9, 2025, [https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHPUC/bulletins/3e8bb79](https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHPUC/bulletins/3e8bb79?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-30)
31. Virginia State Corporation Commission, *Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 Biennial Review*, Case No. PUR-2025-00058, Final Order (November 25, 2025), [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/89g601!.PDF](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/89g601!.PDF?ref=aixenergy.io); Virginia State Corporation Commission, “SCC Rules in Dominion Biennial Review Case,” news release, November 25, 2025, [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/about-the-scc/newsreleases/release/scc-issues-order-on-dev-biennial-review-2025/scc-rules-in-dev-biennial-review-case.html](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/about-the-scc/newsreleases/release/scc-issues-order-on-dev-biennial-review-2025/scc-rules-in-dev-biennial-review-case.html?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-31)
32. Virginia SCC, Final Order, PUR-2025-00058; PSC of Wisconsin, “PSC Overhauls We Energies’ Data Center Tariff.” [↩︎](#fnref-32)
33. Siemens Energy AB and Firebird LNG LLC, “Contract for the Supply of SCC-800 6x1 Combined-Cycle Power Island Equipment,” Contract No. 2022-01, July 14, 2022, exhibit 10.14 to Fermi LLC, Form S-11, filed September 24, 2025, [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2071778/000121390025090891/ea025233304ex10-14\_fermi.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2071778/000121390025090891/ea025233304ex10-14%5Ffermi.htm?ref=aixenergy.io) (delay liquidated damages of 0.5 percent of the price of the delayed supplies per completed week, which “shall not exceed 5% of the total Contract Price”; and an “aggregate overall cap of liquidated damages for delay and performance shortfall” of 10 percent of the contract price). [↩︎](#fnref-33)
34. Authors’ estimate; the inputs are described in the text and in Figure 3\. The SOFR spread, all-in interest rate, 65% leverage, monthly interest, and $50 million to $200 million liquidity range are the authors’ assumptions and calculations. [↩︎](#fnref-34)
35. AIxEnergy, *AIxEnergy Map*. [↩︎](#fnref-35)
36. Sources for Table 1: Natarajan, Ford, and Seligson, “Oracle Cites Force Majeure”; Reuters, “Oracle Triggers ‘Force Majeure’”; *Amazon Data Services, Inc. v. PacifiCorp, d/b/a Pacific Power*, Docket No. UM 2410, Complaint (Public Utility Commission of Oregon, served October 30, 2025), [https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAA/um2410haa341355036.pdf](https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAA/um2410haa341355036.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io); PacifiCorp and Amazon Data Services, Inc., Joint Status Report, Docket No. UM 2410 (Public Utility Commission of Oregon, September 18, 2026), [https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAO/um2410hao349464029.pdf](https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAO/um2410hao349464029.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io); AEP Ohio, “Data Center Tariff”; Ohio Manufacturers’ Association, “Inflated Utility Forecasts—Not Data Centers—Driving Customer Power Bill Spikes,” *Retooling Ohio*, February 2026, [https://www.ohiomfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RetoolingOhio\_AEP\_Feb.pdf](https://www.ohiomfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RetoolingOhio%5FAEP%5FFeb.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io); Ethan Howland, “Manufacturers Say AEP Ohio Still Inflating Data Center Demand after Halving Forecast,” *Utility Dive*, February 6, 2026, [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/aep-ohio-data-center-load-tariff-oma-manufacturers/811583/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/aep-ohio-data-center-load-tariff-oma-manufacturers/811583/?ref=aixenergy.io); Ethan Howland, “FERC Rejects ComEd’s Cancellation of PowerHouse Hillwood Data Center Contract,” *Utility Dive*, September 23, 2026, [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-exelon-comed-powerhouse-hillwood-data-center/831127/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-exelon-comed-powerhouse-hillwood-data-center/831127/?ref=aixenergy.io); David Rosner, “Commissioner Rosner’s Concurrence on Consumer Protection and Cost Recovery Agreements under ER26-3257,” Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, September 22, 2026, [https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/commissioner-rosners-concurrence-consumer-protection-and-cost-recovery-agreements](https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/commissioner-rosners-concurrence-consumer-protection-and-cost-recovery-agreements?ref=aixenergy.io); Virginia SCC, Final Order, PUR-2025-00058; DiGangi, “Dominion Ordered to Directly Assign”; Louisiana Public Service Commission, *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*, Docket No. U-37425, Order No. U-37425 (decided August 20, 2025), [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=nDWn%2Fjuc2+A%3D](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=nDWn%2Fjuc2+A%3D&ref=aixenergy.io); Louisiana Public Service Commission, *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*, Docket No. U-37882, Order No. U-37882-A (September 17, 2026), [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=6PaAyqAncwA%3d](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=6PaAyqAncwA%3d&ref=aixenergy.io); Microsoft Corporation, Protest and Motion of Microsoft Corporation for Hearing and Settlement Judge Procedures, *American Transmission Co. LLC*, FERC Docket No. ER26-3265-000 (August 21, 2026), eLibrary accession no. 20260821-5282, [https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/docinfo?accession\_Number=20260821-5282](https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/docinfo?accession%5FNumber=20260821-5282&ref=aixenergy.io); PSC of Wisconsin, “PSC Overhauls We Energies’ Data Center Tariff.” [↩︎](#fnref-36)
37. AEP Ohio, “Data Center Tariff”; Virginia SCC, Final Order, PUR-2025-00058\. [↩︎](#fnref-37)
38. NVIDIA, “NVIDIA Guarantees SB Energy’s PORTS-Pike Technology Campus in Ohio to Exclusively Host NVIDIA AI Compute,” press release, exhibit 99.1 to NVIDIA Corp., Form 8-K, filed August 17, 2026, [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581026000069/sbeoainvidia-portsrelease.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581026000069/sbeoainvidia-portsrelease.htm?ref=aixenergy.io); AEP Ohio, “Data Center Tariff.” [↩︎](#fnref-38)
39. *Amazon Data Services v. PacifiCorp*, Complaint; PacifiCorp and Amazon Data Services, Joint Status Report. [↩︎](#fnref-39)
40. PSC of Wisconsin, “PSC Overhauls We Energies’ Data Center Tariff”; Microsoft, Protest, ER26-3265-000\. [↩︎](#fnref-40)
41. LPSC, Order No. U-37425; Louisiana Public Service Commission, *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*, Docket No. U-37882, Order No. U-37882 (decided April 15, 2026), [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=vuPR4bwXjsw%3D](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=vuPR4bwXjsw%3D&ref=aixenergy.io); LPSC, Order No. U-37882-A; Meta, “Meta Announces Joint Venture with Funds Managed by Blue Owl Capital to Develop Hyperion Data Center,” press release, October 21, 2025, [https://about.fb.com/news/2025/10/meta-blue-owl-capital-develop-hyperion-data-center/](https://about.fb.com/news/2025/10/meta-blue-owl-capital-develop-hyperion-data-center/?ref=aixenergy.io). [↩︎](#fnref-41)

## References

AEP Ohio. “Data Center Tariff.” Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.aepohio.com/company/about/rates/data-center-tariff/](https://www.aepohio.com/company/about/rates/data-center-tariff/?ref=aixenergy.io).

AIxEnergy. *AIxEnergy Map*. Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://map.aixenergy.io/](https://map.aixenergy.io/?ref=aixenergy.io).

*Amazon Data Services, Inc. v. PacifiCorp, d/b/a Pacific Power*. Docket No. UM 2410, Complaint. Public Utility Commission of Oregon, served October 30, 2025\. [https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAA/um2410haa341355036.pdf](https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAA/um2410haa341355036.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Boucher, Benjamin. “Mind the Gap: Tackling Supply-Chain Challenges in the Electric T&D Sector.” Wood Mackenzie, October 15, 2025\. [https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/mind-the-gap-tackling-supply-chain-challenges-in-the-electric-td-sector](https://www.woodmac.com/news/opinion/mind-the-gap-tackling-supply-chain-challenges-in-the-electric-td-sector?ref=aixenergy.io).

Data Center Watch. “Q2 2026: Data Center Watch Report.” Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.datacenterwatch.org/q2-2026](https://www.datacenterwatch.org/q2-2026?ref=aixenergy.io).

DiGangi, Diana. “Dominion Ordered to Directly Assign Some Transmission Costs to Data Centers.” *Utility Dive*, August 12, 2026\. [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/dominion-energy-scc-transmission-costs-data-center/827693/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/dominion-energy-scc-transmission-costs-data-center/827693/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Dillon, A. P. “Data Center Moratorium Count Rises Again.” *North State Journal*, September 4, 2026\. [https://nsjonline.com/article/2026/09/data-center-moratorium-count-rises-again/](https://nsjonline.com/article/2026/09/data-center-moratorium-count-rises-again/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Drawdy, Grace. “Commissioners Revoke Data Center Permit in North Forsyth County.” *Forsyth County News*, July 10, 2026\. [https://www.forsythnews.com/news/government/commissioners-revoke-data-center-permit-in-north-forsyth-county/](https://www.forsythnews.com/news/government/commissioners-revoke-data-center-permit-in-north-forsyth-county/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and North American Electric Reliability Corporation. *Inquiry into Bulk-Power System Operations during December 2022 Winter Storm Elliott*. Washington, DC: FERC, October 2023\. [https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-11/24\_Winter-Storm\_Elliot\_1107\_1300.pdf](https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-11/24%5FWinter-Storm%5FElliot%5F1107%5F1300.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Gottlieb, Bryan. “Oracle Invokes Force Majeure as New Mexico Project Jupiter Power Work Faces Hurdles.” *Engineering News-Record*, September 28, 2026\. [https://www.enr.com/articles/63720-oracle-invokes-force-majeure-as-new-mexico-project-jupiter-power-work-faces-hurdles](https://www.enr.com/articles/63720-oracle-invokes-force-majeure-as-new-mexico-project-jupiter-power-work-faces-hurdles?ref=aixenergy.io).

Howland, Ethan. “FERC Rejects ComEd’s Cancellation of PowerHouse Hillwood Data Center Contract.” *Utility Dive*, September 23, 2026\. [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-exelon-comed-powerhouse-hillwood-data-center/831127/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/ferc-exelon-comed-powerhouse-hillwood-data-center/831127/?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “Manufacturers Say AEP Ohio Still Inflating Data Center Demand after Halving Forecast.” *Utility Dive*, February 6, 2026\. [https://www.utilitydive.com/news/aep-ohio-data-center-load-tariff-oma-manufacturers/811583/](https://www.utilitydive.com/news/aep-ohio-data-center-load-tariff-oma-manufacturers/811583/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Jones, Sasha. “U.S. Data Center Opposition Blocks $68B in Q2 Projects.” *Bisnow*, September 21, 2026\. [https://www.bisnow.com/news/national/data-center-community-relations/community-backlash-upends-billions-of-dollars-in-new-data-center-projects](https://www.bisnow.com/news/national/data-center-community-relations/community-backlash-upends-billions-of-dollars-in-new-data-center-projects?ref=aixenergy.io).

Loudoun County, Virginia. Office of Supervisor Juli E. Briskman. “Loudoun Board Enacts Pause on Data Centers.” News release, September 16, 2026\. [https://www.loudoun.gov/DocumentCenter/View/222331/Statement—Loudoun-Board-Enacts-Pause-on-Data-Centers](https://www.loudoun.gov/DocumentCenter/View/222331/Statement---Loudoun-Board-Enacts-Pause-on-Data-Centers?ref=aixenergy.io).

Loudoun County, Virginia. “Data Centers: Noise & Air Quality Concerns.” Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.loudoun.gov/6405/Noise-Air-Quality-Concerns](https://www.loudoun.gov/6405/Noise-Air-Quality-Concerns?ref=aixenergy.io).

Louisiana Public Service Commission. *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*. Docket No. U-37425, Order No. U-37425\. Decided August 20, 2025\. [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=nDWn%2Fjuc2+A%3D](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=nDWn%2Fjuc2+A%3D&ref=aixenergy.io).

———. *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*. Docket No. U-37882, Order No. U-37882\. Decided April 15, 2026\. [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=vuPR4bwXjsw%3D](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=vuPR4bwXjsw%3D&ref=aixenergy.io).

———. *Entergy Louisiana, LLC, ex parte*. Docket No. U-37882, Order No. U-37882-A. September 17, 2026\. [https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=6PaAyqAncwA%3d](https://lpscpubvalence.lpsc.louisiana.gov/portal/PSC/ViewFile?fileId=6PaAyqAncwA%3d&ref=aixenergy.io).

Malik, Saf. “$165bn Project Jupiter: What Oracle’s Force Majeure Notice Means for AI Data Centre Risk.” *Capacity*, October 2, 2026\. [https://capacityglobal.com/news/165bn-project-jupiter-what-oracles-force-majeure-notice-means-for-ai-data-centre-risk/](https://capacityglobal.com/news/165bn-project-jupiter-what-oracles-force-majeure-notice-means-for-ai-data-centre-risk/?ref=aixenergy.io).

*Maryland Casualty Co. v. NSTAR Electric Co.*, 471 Mass. 416 (2015). [https://openjurist.org/471/mass/416/maryland-casualty-co-v-nstar-electric-co](https://openjurist.org/471/mass/416/maryland-casualty-co-v-nstar-electric-co?ref=aixenergy.io).

Mejia, Evelyn. “Supervisors OK Compromise Noise Ordinance Aimed at Data Centers.” *Prince William Times*, October 30, 2025\. [https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/supervisors-ok-compromise-noise-ordinance-aimed-at-data-centers/article\_1288e464-5559-4c12-ab8f-2a28ca28d819.html](https://www.princewilliamtimes.com/news/supervisors-ok-compromise-noise-ordinance-aimed-at-data-centers/article%5F1288e464-5559-4c12-ab8f-2a28ca28d819.html?ref=aixenergy.io).

Mendoza-Moyers, Diego. “Oracle Says Project Jupiter Remains on Track despite Power Supply Concerns.” *El Paso Matters*, September 24, 2026\. [https://elpasomatters.org/2026/09/24/project-jupiter-rent-force-majeure-new-mexico-oracle-ai-el-paso-data-center/](https://elpasomatters.org/2026/09/24/project-jupiter-rent-force-majeure-new-mexico-oracle-ai-el-paso-data-center/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Meta. “Meta Announces Joint Venture with Funds Managed by Blue Owl Capital to Develop Hyperion Data Center.” Press release, October 21, 2025\. [https://about.fb.com/news/2025/10/meta-blue-owl-capital-develop-hyperion-data-center/](https://about.fb.com/news/2025/10/meta-blue-owl-capital-develop-hyperion-data-center/?ref=aixenergy.io).

Meyer, Robinson. “Exclusive: Data Center Cancellations Top $260 Billion in 2026.” *Heatmap News*, October 6, 2026\. [https://heatmap.news/daily/260-billion-data-center-opposition](https://heatmap.news/daily/260-billion-data-center-opposition?ref=aixenergy.io).

Microsoft Corporation. Protest and Motion of Microsoft Corporation for Hearing and Settlement Judge Procedures. *American Transmission Co. LLC*, FERC Docket No. ER26-3265-000, August 21, 2026\. eLibrary accession no. 20260821-5282\. [https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/docinfo?accession\_Number=20260821-5282](https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/docinfo?accession%5FNumber=20260821-5282&ref=aixenergy.io).

Natarajan, Sridhar, Brody Ford, and Paula Seligson. “Oracle Cites Force Majeure to Shield Itself on Data Center.” *Bloomberg Law*, September 24, 2026\. [https://news.bloomberglaw.com/artificial-intelligence/oracle-cites-force-majeure-to-shield-itself-on-big-data-center](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/artificial-intelligence/oracle-cites-force-majeure-to-shield-itself-on-big-data-center?ref=aixenergy.io).

Natural Gas Act. 15 U.S.C. § 717f. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/717f](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/717f?ref=aixenergy.io).

Newton County Board of Commissioners (Georgia). Resolution R-040726b, “A Resolution . . . Enacting a Limited Moratorium on the Acceptance of Applications, Requests, or Submissions That Propose the Development of Data Centers.” April 7, 2026\. [https://www.newtoncountyga.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7830/Resolution-R-040726b](https://www.newtoncountyga.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7830/Resolution-R-040726b?ref=aixenergy.io).

“Nobody Saw It Coming: The Energy Boom Reshaping Hitachi.” Interview with Andreas Schierenbeck. *The Oriental Economist* (Toyo Keizai), March 17, 2026\. [https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/937520](https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/937520?ref=aixenergy.io).

NVIDIA. “GTC 2025 – Announcements and Live Updates.” *NVIDIA Blog*, March 25, 2025\. [https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-keynote-at-gtc-2025-ai-news-live-updates/](https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-keynote-at-gtc-2025-ai-news-live-updates/?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “NVIDIA Guarantees SB Energy’s PORTS-Pike Technology Campus in Ohio to Exclusively Host NVIDIA AI Compute.” Press release. Exhibit 99.1 to NVIDIA Corp., Form 8-K, filed August 17, 2026\. [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581026000069/sbeoainvidia-portsrelease.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1045810/000104581026000069/sbeoainvidia-portsrelease.htm?ref=aixenergy.io).

Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “Inflated Utility Forecasts—Not Data Centers—Driving Customer Power Bill Spikes.” *Retooling Ohio*, February 2026\. [https://www.ohiomfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RetoolingOhio\_AEP\_Feb.pdf](https://www.ohiomfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/RetoolingOhio%5FAEP%5FFeb.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Oracle. “Oracle, BorderPlex, and Bloom Energy to Power Project Jupiter with Cleaner, Water-Efficient Fuel Cell Technology.” Press release, April 27, 2026\. [https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-borderplex-and-bloom-energy-to-power-project-jupiter-with-fuel-cell-technology-2026-04-27/](https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-borderplex-and-bloom-energy-to-power-project-jupiter-with-fuel-cell-technology-2026-04-27/?ref=aixenergy.io).

PacifiCorp and Amazon Data Services, Inc. Joint Status Report, Docket No. UM 2410\. Public Utility Commission of Oregon, September 18, 2026\. [https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAO/um2410hao349464029.pdf](https://edocs.puc.state.or.us/efdocs/HAO/um2410hao349464029.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Public Service Commission of Wisconsin. “PSC Overhauls We Energies’ Data Center Tariff, Makes Improvements to Protect Existing Customers.” Press release, April 24, 2026\. [https://psc.wi.gov/Documents/PressReleases/04.24.2026PressRelease.PDF](https://psc.wi.gov/Documents/PressReleases/04.24.2026PressRelease.PDF?ref=aixenergy.io).

Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. “PUCO Orders AEP Ohio to Create Data Center Specific Tariff.” News release, July 9, 2025\. [https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHPUC/bulletins/3e8bb79](https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OHPUC/bulletins/3e8bb79?ref=aixenergy.io).

Reuters. “Oracle Triggers ‘Force Majeure’ on Data Center Project over Power Delays, Source Says.” CNA, September 24, 2026\. [https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/oracle-triggers-force-majeure-data-center-project-over-power-delays-source-says-6408541](https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/oracle-triggers-force-majeure-data-center-project-over-power-delays-source-says-6408541?ref=aixenergy.io).

Rosner, David. “Commissioner Rosner’s Concurrence on Consumer Protection and Cost Recovery Agreements under ER26-3257.” Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, September 22, 2026\. [https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/commissioner-rosners-concurrence-consumer-protection-and-cost-recovery-agreements](https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/commissioner-rosners-concurrence-consumer-protection-and-cost-recovery-agreements?ref=aixenergy.io).

Santa Fe County (New Mexico). “Santa Fe County Approves 18-Month Moratorium on Data Centers.” News release, July 2, 2026\. [https://www.santafecountynm.gov/news/detail/santa-fe-county-approves-18-month-moratorium-on-data-centers](https://www.santafecountynm.gov/news/detail/santa-fe-county-approves-18-month-moratorium-on-data-centers?ref=aixenergy.io).

Schechter, Maayan. “Gov. McMaster Declines Calling for SC-Wide Data Center Moratorium as More Counties Pass Their Own.” South Carolina Public Radio, September 25, 2026\. [https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/sc-news/2026-09-25/gov-mcmaster-declines-calling-for-sc-wide-data-center-moratorium-as-more-counties-pass-their-own](https://www.southcarolinapublicradio.org/sc-news/2026-09-25/gov-mcmaster-declines-calling-for-sc-wide-data-center-moratorium-as-more-counties-pass-their-own?ref=aixenergy.io).

Siemens Energy AB and Firebird LNG LLC. “Contract for the Supply of SCC-800 6x1 Combined-Cycle Power Island Equipment.” Contract No. 2022-01, July 14, 2022\. Exhibit 10.14 to Fermi LLC, Form S-11, filed September 24, 2025\. [https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2071778/000121390025090891/ea025233304ex10-14\_fermi.htm](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2071778/000121390025090891/ea025233304ex10-14%5Ffermi.htm?ref=aixenergy.io).

Siemens Energy. “Earnings Release Q3 FY 2026.” August 5, 2026\. [https://assets.siemens-energy.com/dam/30018eed-275d-4e73-811e-b49d004cdc3d/2026-08-05-Earnings\_Release\_Q3\_FY26\_EN-pdf\_Original%20file.pdf](https://assets.siemens-energy.com/dam/30018eed-275d-4e73-811e-b49d004cdc3d/2026-08-05-Earnings%5FRelease%5FQ3%5FFY26%5FEN-pdf%5FOriginal%20file.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Suzuki, Kori. “Imperial Valley Data Center Developer Files Lawsuit Seeking Access to Colorado River Water.” KPBS, June 15, 2026\. [https://www.kpbs.org/news/environment/2026/06/15/imperial-valley-data-center-developer-files-lawsuit-seeking-access-to-colorado-river-water](https://www.kpbs.org/news/environment/2026/06/15/imperial-valley-data-center-developer-files-lawsuit-seeking-access-to-colorado-river-water?ref=aixenergy.io).

US Department of Energy, Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations. “Industrial Demonstrations Program: Steel Slab Electrified Induction Reheat Furnace Upgrade.” Project fact sheet, August 2024\. [https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/IDP%20Little%20Cliffs%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet20240822.pdf](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-08/IDP%20Little%20Cliffs%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet20240822.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

US Energy Information Administration. “Table 8.2\. Average Tested Heat Rates by Prime Mover and Energy Source, 2014–2024.” *Electric Power Annual*. Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa\_08\_02.html](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa%5F08%5F02.html?ref=aixenergy.io).

US Environmental Protection Agency. “Basic Information about Operating Permits.” Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/basic-information-about-operating-permits](https://www.epa.gov/title-v-operating-permits/basic-information-about-operating-permits?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book).” Last updated September 30, 2026\. [https://www.epa.gov/green-book](https://www.epa.gov/green-book?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “Nonattainment NSR Basic Information.” Accessed October 9, 2026\. [https://www.epa.gov/nsr/nonattainment-nsr-basic-information](https://www.epa.gov/nsr/nonattainment-nsr-basic-information?ref=aixenergy.io).

Virginia State Corporation Commission. *Application of Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 2025 Biennial Review*. Case No. PUR-2025-00058, Final Order, November 25, 2025\. [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/89g601!.PDF](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/89g601!.PDF?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “Fact Sheet: How the SCC’s Rider T1 Decision Protects Ratepayers.” September 3, 2026\. [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/media/sccvirginiagov-home/about-the-scc/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-how-the-scc-rider-t1-decision-protects-ratepayers.pdf](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/media/sccvirginiagov-home/about-the-scc/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-how-the-scc-rider-t1-decision-protects-ratepayers.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

———. “SCC Rules in Dominion Biennial Review Case.” News release, November 25, 2025\. [https://www.scc.virginia.gov/about-the-scc/newsreleases/release/scc-issues-order-on-dev-biennial-review-2025/scc-rules-in-dev-biennial-review-case.html](https://www.scc.virginia.gov/about-the-scc/newsreleases/release/scc-issues-order-on-dev-biennial-review-2025/scc-rules-in-dev-biennial-review-case.html?ref=aixenergy.io).

Wiser, Ryan, Adria Brooks, Paul Donohoo-Vallett, Glenda Oskar, Jason Frost, Patrick Brown, and Trieu Mai. *Transmission Impact Assessment: Power Sector Infrastructure Deployment to Reduce Costs, Improve Reliability, and Lower Pollution*. Washington, DC: US Department of Energy, October 2024\. [https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/DOE\_OP\_2024\_Report-Transmission\_Impact\_Assessment.pdf](https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-10/DOE%5FOP%5F2024%5FReport-Transmission%5FImpact%5FAssessment.pdf?ref=aixenergy.io).

Wood Mackenzie. “Power Transformers and Distribution Transformers Will Face Supply Deficits of 30% and 10% in 2025, According to Wood Mackenzie.” Press release, August 14, 2025\. [https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/power-transformers-and-distribution-transformers-will-face-supply-deficits-of-30-and-10-in-2025](https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/power-transformers-and-distribution-transformers-will-face-supply-deficits-of-30-and-10-in-2025?ref=aixenergy.io).

Yañez-Barnuevo, Miguel. “Data Centers and Water Consumption.” Environmental and Energy Study Institute, June 25, 2025\. [https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption](https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption?ref=aixenergy.io).