AI Governance
Data Centers
Drones
Climate
Privacy
2026 Maine Senate
Bob Dylan
PJM Puts Large Data-Center Loads on a Reliability Track
Yesterday’s clearest development was not a new campus or a completed power deal, but a proposed change in what reliable service would mean for very large electricity users. PJM’s plan would make projects of 50 MW or more choose more explicitly between demonstrating capacity support and accepting greater exposure to emergency curtailment. In a constrained grid, an interconnection path may no longer be the final test of readiness.
At the same time, local resistance continued to become procedural rather than rhetorical. Oregon communities moved toward pauses with support from the governor, an Ohio court preserved a possible referendum route, and Iowa officials recommended time to examine water and power limits. The common thread is not a national shutdown of development. It is a more demanding question being put to projects: can their power, local costs, environmental effects, and public approvals withstand scrutiny?
PJM proposed an Interim Resource Adequacy Service for loads of at least 50 MW across its 13-state footprint. Capitol News Illinois reported that projects could avoid priority emergency curtailment by securing qualifying generation, storage, demand response, virtual power plants, or other resources. Beginning in June 2027, unsupported loads could face curtailment before broader demand-response measures, subject to the roles of state regulators. PJM also proposed a reliability backstop auction in response to a cited 6.8-GW capacity shortfall.
This is more consequential than another queue-management proposal because it reaches beyond the point of connection. A large data center could be connected yet still carry an operating obligation to bring credible supply or flexibility when the system is short. The proposal remains subject to stakeholder, regulatory, and implementation decisions, but it gives practical form to the growing expectation that large new loads should help protect system reliability.
Oregon added state-level political weight to local restraint. The Statesman Journal reported that Gov. Tina Kotek backed local moratoriums and ended a state land-sale process associated with a proposed Salem-area development. Salem advanced a temporary pause after receiving extensive opposing testimony, while Hillsboro and Woodburn have also acted to slow or review applications.
In Marshalltown, Iowa, the planning commission unanimously recommended a four-month moratorium while the city studies zoning, power, water, facility scale, and economic effects. The Times Republican reported that currently available water capacity is roughly 100,000 to 200,000 additional gallons a day, far below the capacity expected from a treatment-plant expansion planned for 2028. The recommendation does not itself stop development, but it shows how municipal utilities are becoming a first-order constraint rather than a technical afterthought.
The Ohio Supreme Court required Ashville to send referendum petitions challenging its agreement with EdgeConneX to county election officials. As Ideastream State News reported, the decision removes the village’s effort to block the petitions through emergency legislation, although the Board of Elections must still decide whether the agreement is subject to referendum. The project and its associated gas plant are not halted, but the ruling preserves a potentially important local check on negotiated development agreements.
Key Points
- PJM’s approach suggests that resource adequacy is moving from a background assumption into a condition of service for the largest new loads. For developers, dedicated generation is not the only possible answer: storage, demand response, and flexible-load arrangements could also matter. But the underlying requirement is becoming more concrete—large demand must be matched with a credible reliability contribution, not merely projected into a load forecast.
- The local disputes are converging around process as much as physical impacts. Salem’s testimony, Ashville’s referendum fight, and reporting by The Current on OpenAI’s proposed Georgia campus all center on whether power terms, tax arrangements, water and environmental commitments, and public notice are sufficiently visible. Secrecy can now become an execution risk in its own right, even where a project retains institutional support.
- Opposition is taking different legal forms in different places: temporary pauses in Oregon and Iowa, court-supervised referendum procedures in Ohio, environmental and noise litigation in Lowell, Massachusetts, and special-exception hearings in Plymouth Township, Pennsylvania. That variation matters. The risk is no longer simply whether a community objects, but whether its objection can alter the entitlement path, impose new conditions, or prolong review.
- Texas remains a contrasting case. Its large-load audit continues while President Donald Trump criticizes Gov. Greg Abbott’s pause on certain grid-connection approvals, according to Newsweek. The disagreement makes the political stakes more visible, but it does not resolve ERCOT’s review or restore certainty to projects seeking grid service.
Implications
For projects in PJM, firm service should increasingly be underwritten as an operating proposition, not just an interconnection milestone. Developers without a documented capacity or flexibility strategy could face a different reliability profile from projects that can support the system during tight conditions.
For site selection, a favorable land deal and a utility conversation are becoming insufficient evidence of executability. Water capacity, cooling design, onsite generation, tax treatment, notice practices, and the legal durability of local approvals can now determine whether a project stays on schedule.
For utilities and host governments, the pressure is toward more transparent answers to three linked questions: how will new load be served, who will fund the supporting infrastructure, and what protection exists for existing customers during shortages? PJM’s proposal addresses the first question at regional scale; local disputes show that the other two are increasingly unavoidable.
The day does not establish a uniform slowdown. OpenAI’s planned $20 billion, 1,400-acre Georgia campus continues to advance through negotiated arrangements, though construction is not scheduled to begin until 2028 and Georgia Power’s contract remains undisclosed. The divide is therefore not between growth and no growth, but between projects that can navigate increasingly conditional approval systems and those still relying on broad assurances.
Watchpoints
Watch
PJM stakeholder, state-regulator, and federal responses to the Interim Resource Adequacy Service proposal, especially the definition of qualifying project-backed resources and the scope of curtailment authority.
Watch
Whether Salem’s council adopts its moratorium, how Oregon develops possible statewide recommendations for 2027, and how pending or exempt applications are treated.
Watch
The Pickaway County Board of Elections’ decision on whether Ashville’s EdgeConneX agreement is referendable and whether a ballot measure proceeds.
Watch
Whether Texas completes its ERCOT large-load audit with a revised approval process, and whether federal political pressure changes the state’s approach.
Watch
Further disclosure around the Georgia project’s power supply, tax obligations, water arrangements, and environmental commitments as its long development timetable takes shape.
Fallout
Yesterday brought meaningful movement in two long-running subjects: the effort to make large data-center demand compatible with grid reliability, and the widening use of local legal and planning tools to test whether projects have earned public acceptance. Transparency around negotiated economic and utility arrangements also became more central to the local approval debate.
Large-Load Reliability and Power Responsibility
As AI-oriented data centers become large enough to affect reserve margins, transmission planning, and customer costs, grid operators and regulators are seeking ways to distinguish committed, supportable demand from speculative or unsupported load.
Fresh developments
PJM proposed a framework for loads of at least 50 MW that would allow projects to avoid priority emergency curtailment by securing qualifying resources or flexibility. The proposal, alongside a planned reliability backstop auction, places large-load growth directly inside PJM’s resource-adequacy response to a cited 6.8-GW shortfall.
Why we noticed
The proposal would make reliability exposure an ongoing operational consideration for major projects, not simply a matter of obtaining an interconnection agreement. It also creates an incentive for developers to document generation, storage, demand response, or flexible-compute capabilities early enough to matter in system planning.
Watch for:
- Definitions of qualifying generation, storage, demand response, and virtual power plant resources.
- Whether state regulators support PJM’s proposed treatment of emergency curtailment.
- How developers incorporate capacity support and flexibility into power-service agreements.
Local Control of Data-Center Siting
Communities are increasingly using moratoriums, planning reviews, court challenges, and electoral mechanisms to gain leverage over large projects whose power, water, emissions, and neighborhood effects were not anticipated by conventional industrial zoning.
Fresh developments
Oregon’s governor endorsed local moratoriums as Salem advanced a temporary pause, and Marshalltown’s planning commission recommended four months to assess water, power, zoning, and facility scale. In Ohio, the Supreme Court preserved residents’ path to seek a referendum on Ashville’s agreement with EdgeConneX, while leaving the final election-law determination to county officials.
Why we noticed
These moves do not produce the same outcome, but they show opposition becoming embedded in formal decision-making. A moratorium can slow an early pipeline; a referendum can test a negotiated agreement after approval; a hearing or lawsuit can reshape a project’s design and schedule. Developers increasingly need legally resilient approvals as well as technically viable sites.
Watch for:
- Salem’s final vote and the treatment of projects already in process.
- Marshalltown’s city council decision and its water-capacity findings.
- The Pickaway County Board of Elections’ referendum determination.
Transparency and Community Benefit Bargains
Large data-center projects often depend on negotiated tax, land, utility, and infrastructure arrangements. Their political durability increasingly depends on whether residents can see the terms and judge the promised benefits against local costs.
Fresh developments
The Current’s examination of OpenAI’s proposed Georgia campus clarified its phased 2028-34 timetable, discounted property-tax arrangement, and the continuing confidentiality of its Georgia Power contract. In Lowell, Massachusetts, residents are contesting a facility’s generator and cooling approvals, noise, and a long-running tax break, bringing environmental and fiscal concerns into the same dispute.
Why we noticed
The key vulnerability is not simply opposition to incentives or to infrastructure. It is the gap between negotiated commitments and public confidence that the commitments are understandable, enforceable, and proportionate to the project’s long-term demands. Where that gap persists, even major investments can acquire lasting permitting and political risk.
Watch for:
- Disclosure of Georgia Power’s service terms and the project’s water and environmental arrangements.
- Whether Georgia’s development agreement draws revisions or additional public conditions.
- Progress in Lowell’s environmental and noise litigation.
Final Thought
The practical definition of a viable data-center project is widening: it must now be credible not only on land and load, but in the reliability arrangements and public process needed to sustain both.