You’re out of free articles.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Electricity Price Hub data helps explain why prices are — and aren’t — increasing in various parts of the PJM Interconnection territory.

Some parts of the country — California, New England — have high electricity prices but not many large-scale artificial intelligence data centers. Some places — Texas — have artificial intelligence data centers and relatively low prices.
The area spanned by PJM Interconnection — the country’s largest electricity market, which covers some or all of 13 states and 67 million people from Richmond to Chicago — has both.
Virginia’s “data center alley,” around Ashburn in Loudon County, is perhaps the hottest AI hotspot in the country. Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania are also attracting substantial interest from hyperscalers.
Meanwhile, electricity prices in the PJM territory have turned into a political crisis that transcends party ideology. New Jersey’s new governor, Democrat Mikie Sherrill, centered her campaign around a pledge to freeze prices. Pennsylvania’s governor, Democrat Josh Shapiro, reached an agreement with electricity producers at the beginning of last year to cap capacity prices — payments made to generators to be available during times of grid stress — at a level the system’s capacity auctions now regularly hit. And Indiana’s governor, Republican Mike Braun, has been on the warpath against high utility bills, declaring in September of last year, “Hoosiers have been burdened with utility rate increase after increase. We can’t take it anymore.”
A review of electricity price increases from 2019 to 2024 and from 2024 to 2025 released by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory just this week found that “increases in capacity prices in the PJM region in 2025 were a significant contributor to the rise in year-over-year retail prices in many mid-Atlantic states.” The researchers found that “many PJM states saw large price increases in 2025 vs. 2024,” calling out Washington, D.C., New Jersey , and Maryland specifically. Overall in PJM, the LBNL review found that capacity costs drove up the wholesale price of electricity in PJM by $0.09 per kilowatt-hour from 2024 to 2025, and projects another $0.06 hike in 2026.
On the surface, the coinciding phenomena of increased data center activity and rising electricity prices seem like a clear case of cause and effect. A closer look at utility price and rate data from Heatmap and MIT’s Electricity Price Hub, however, reveals a more nuanced story.
First, the big picture: In the past year, the 12-month rolling average of electricity prices have grown 10% in PJM, compared to 4.5% nationally, while average bills in PJM have risen by $14.83 compared to $5.47 nationally. In the past five years, prices have gone up 48.9% in PJM versus 33.2% nationally, while bills in PJM have risen by $49.50 compared to $35.21 nationally.
Across the PJM territory, some 63% of utilities in the Heatmap-MIT dataset have seen prices grow faster than the national average over the past year, and 72% have seen their prices grow faster than average in the past five years.
But there are stark distinctions at the regional and state levels. To get a better sense of these differences, we looked at the components of electricity bills and price growth in different parts of the PJM territory, including the utility territories with the fastest growing prices and the ones with the most data center growth.
Many of the fastest-growing utility bills in PJM are on the East Coast, particularly in the Mid-Atlantic, where prices for Pepco in Maryland and Washington, D.C. have gone up by 21.4% and 25.2%, respectively, in just the past year. In the case of D.C., the largest source of that price growth was electricity generation, the cost of which rose 32.5% in the past 12 months.
The D.C. Public Service Commission approved a rate hike last May citing a recent PJM capacity auction and tacking on a “Capacity Price Adder” to account for high prices. (For more on “adders,” “riders,” and other more obscure bill charges, see the explainer from my colleague Jeva Lange.) The average bill hike in the May 2025 order was almost $21, or 17.7%, the order said.
“Generation rates have risen substantially, primarily due to capacity price increases,” the commission wrote, which it attributed to a litany of factors. These included growing demand from data centers, but also the “retirement of generating facilities across the regional electric wholesale market” and “increasing mandates from the District’s Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard.”
This helps explain why the cluster of states around D.C. have seen outsize generation price hikes: They tend to rely on gas from others states, and have also decided, as a matter of public policy, to institute substantial additional charges to meet public policy goals such as boosting the share of renewable energy in the state’s generation mix, which often means buying certificates for electricity produced out of state.
Next door to D.C., Maryland utilities have also had to deal with high capacity prices — some $14 of bill increases for Pepco, according to the Maryland Office of People’s Counsel, can be traced back to higher capacity payments. Maryland ratepayers specifically must also pay for “reliability must run” service: four coal-and-oil-fired units that operate outside PJM’s wholesale system and are instead funded directly through customer rates in a particular geographic area.
Maryland’s Office of the People’s Counsel argued in a brief explaining why rates were rising that not only did “RMR” payments lead to higher bills directly, they also helped push capacity market costs in Maryland up against the statutory cap. Because the capacity from those generators isn’t included in the wholesale market (they’re compensated directly), supply is artificially limited and thus “likely had spillover effects into the RTO as a whole, increasing the RTO-wide clearing price and impacting customers throughout the region.”
But what about utilities in PJM where rate hikes were more restrained?
In Virginia, the epicenter of data center growth in PJM, customers of the Dominion Energy utility Virginia Electric and Power Co. saw their prices grow 11.6% over the last year, with the generation portion of the bill growing 16.8% in the past 12 months. That’s higher growth than average for PJM, but lower than New Jersey and Maryland, which do not serve the same concentration of AI facilities.
For another Virginia utility, Appalachian Power, prices actually dropped slightly in the past 12 months, by 1.6%, with the generation portion falling 5.2%. Appalachian Power announced a rate cut averaging $10 per household last fall, which it said came out of the “fuel factor,” or the raw material costs that are passed on to customers.
Despite its crush of data center development, Virginia still has electricity rates below the national average, and much lower than some other PJM states. Natural gas and nuclear dominate the state’s generation mix, according to data from the Energy Information Administration, and that nuclear power especially is cheap on a kilowatt-for-kilowatt basis.
Virginia also has fewer worries about grid congestion because much more of its generation is local, whereas in other places (namely Maryland), that’s been a major cost driver. Virginia’s $15.27 per kilowatt-hour average electricity price is about in line with the “South Atlantic” average according to the Energy Information Administration, but still lower than Delaware, D.C., Maryland, or New Jersey.
To the extent that Dominion has raised prices, it has attributed the increases to inflation, not to increased demand. In Richmond specifically, it chalked up higher prices to bouts of cold weather.
That said, Dominion’s base rate — the core cost of service in a regulated, vertically integrated utility system like Virginia’s — is rising for the first time since 1992. Going forward, Dominion ratepayers will see another rate hike of around $11 per month this year, and around $2.35 in 2027.
Dominion had also asked to recategorize its capacity purchases from the base rate to the fuel charge, which it said would “promote rate stability.” A typical average customer would face a fuel factor expense hike of $10.92 per month for typical electricity use, Dominion said in a filing, which would include $1.98 of capacity expenses. But the SCC ended up rejecting that request, arguing that it was not “reasonable at this time not to shift cost recovery of purchased capacity expenses from base rates to the fuel factor,” which could mean that rates do not adjust smoothly with the changes in capacity payments.
Virginia’s success in avoiding higher costs may be a matter of timing as much as anything else. Virginia fits awkwardly into the PJM system, with the state still dominated by vertically integrated utilities such as Dominion, as opposed to the restructured electricity markets in much of the rest of the system.
Pro-utility groups and Dominion itself have pointed to Virginia as an example of how the regulated electricity model can protect consumers compared to the restructured one. But whether ratepayers will be convinced remains to be seen. Complaints about eye-popping bills are a mainstay of local — and social — media in the state, especially after base rate hikes kicked in.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
A new front opens in the data center wars.
A series of lawsuits filed in federal court asks a big question – are data center moratoria constitutional?
In early August, data center developer DC Blox sued the city of Nashville in federal court to overturn a zoning moratorium stopping them from building a hyperscale facility adjacent to the city zoo. “The Data Center Moratorium, moreover, is a targeted attack against DC BLOX, in violation of federal constitutional protections,” the suit argued, claiming that it defied the corporation’s due process and equal protection rights.
Around the same time, another developer – Wixom Industrial One – filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Wixom, Michigan, to try and “invalidate the city’s illegal police power moratorium” blocking their data center.
These two cases were far from novel or the first of their kind, and they’re now a fresh front in the battle over hyperscale data centers. At least that’s what some who work on these cases say: In April, attorneys with the law firm Vorys published a “client alert” asserting “many moratoria may be vulnerable to statutory, procedural, and constitutional challenges.” The attorneys advised that constitutional arguments against moratoria “may be stronger where a government singles out data centers without a sound factual basis, treats similar land uses differently without a reasonable basis, or adopts a restriction driven more by political pressure than by defensible planning or regulatory objectives.”
Months later, according to court documents, the Vorys attorneys who authored the alert now represent real estate firm Thor Equities in a federal case against the Ohio city of Urbana, arguing the city’s decision to reject their data center project broke “fundamental protections” under the U.S. Constitution. (Vorys and Thor Equities did not respond to requests for comment.)
It’s unclear how many of these kinds of cases have been filed to date. Data on federal court cases is quite opaque. But legal experts and industry attorneys tell me we should expect them to be on the rise as developers seek whatever tools they can find to get projects built.
“Bringing a lawsuit like this is fairly cheap, something they can do at a relatively low cost, and imposes a real cost on local governments to defend themselves,” said Daniel Metzger, director of the Cities Climate Law Initiative at Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center. “The cases out there will be bellwethers. And if successful, there’ll be a lot more of them.”
What developers probably want looks a lot like Hill County, Texas, where an LLC proposing an $80 million data center project was stymied in May by the state’s first countywide moratorium. (It predated Governor Greg Abbott’s temporary freeze of data center development in Texas by three months.) Within a period of only a few weeks, the LLC sued and the county rescinded the pause on approvals. The case was dropped a month later. Local reports state the county had to afterwards pay the corporation $100,000 in legal fees – a drop in the bucket compared to what a drawn-out court battle would have cost the rural county.
Metzger said whether the companies will win these cases is ultimately not the point – their goal is to win a finished data center, not a judicial ruling. By filing expansive litigation in the national court system, a hypothetical developer can exhaust the coffers of a city or county with legal expenses that are chump change compared to would-be billions in private financing for compute infrastructure.
“These lawsuits may deter some local governments from taking steps to oppose data center development, just because of the cost it would impose on them to defend a lawsuit, even if they know they have a strong legal basis for the action they want to take.”
Those I spoke to in private practice about data center developers’ constitutional arguments agreed with Metzger’s assessment that it’s too early to tell whether the companies will win. Generally, they said, a city or county will win this kind of case if it demonstrates a rational basis for its decision-making and courts typically want to defer to governmental autonomy. The onus will be on the developers to prove a moratorium was meritless – that’s the due process challenge – or unfairly targeted their industry in a way other sectors don’t face, which is the basis of the equal protection claim.
“What they’re saying is in essence that these actions the municipality is taking are arbitrary and capricious, which is one of the sort of catch-all standards,” Thomas Allen, a partner at K&L Gates, told me. “They say the laws lack a rational basis. And then they make equal protection claims, saying data centers are being singled out because of political concerns as opposed to actual things relevant to the legislature’s directive. They’re not basing their decisions on the underlying merits of the project but reacting to political pressure.”
“It’s a reliance question and it’s about the treatment of their projects,” added Laura Morton, an attorney with Ashurst Perkins Coie. “It’s always been important to talk about and engage with communities where your infrastructure is planned. Here, I think this is the developers going in, maybe having conversations, and then suddenly they’re getting a reversal after already receiving these approvals and making investments based off of what the conversations and rules were.”
The likelihood of these constitutional challenges reaching higher courts anytime soon is quite low. It’ll be a long time before we see one of these cases reach a verdict, let alone some kind of appeals process come to fruition. Nevertheless, the new legal ambiguity around these local restrictions is an important new facet of the data center wars, including for developers.
“Companies want to act within the law to get [things] done, so whatever tactics they can do to help get the project over the line that are legal and ethical, they may try those,” Allen told me. “And if that includes the pressure of a lawsuit, that’s a judgment they’ll have to make.”
And more on this week’s conflicts around project development.
1. Montgomery County, Pennsylvania – We reached a new normal in the data center backlash, and it all seems to have started in King of Prussia.
2. Columbia County, Wisconsin – The gubernatorial race in this state is transforming local fights over wind projects into must-watch popcorn fodder for anyone obsessed with the state of the energy transition, or national politics for that matter.
3. Shelby County, Alabama – One quick update on the intervention of John Rich, the country star turned Trump’s “special envoy for American landowners,” in an Alabama Power transmission project: it’s getting a lot more elected officials involved.
4. New Jersey – We try to conclude every Hotspots on a positive note. So this week’s silver lining comes to you from the Garden State, where state regulators have approved more than a dozen agrivoltaics projects.
A conversation with Ella Nilsen — formerly of CNN, now with Echo Communications — about where we stand in the fight over the energy transition.
This week’s conversation is with Ella Nilsen, who recently left CNN as a climate reporter and is now a new vice president at energy and cleantech PR firm Echo Communications. Having worked on Capitol Hill alongside Nilsen, I knew her to be an exceptional reporter who asked hard questions of those in power on all sides. So when I found out she was taking her journalism hat off and putting the comms cap on, I wanted to do something you rarely get to do with one of your reporting peers: ask for her own opinion about where we stand in the fight over the energy transition.
Our chat was lightly edited for clarity.
What’s it like going from CNN and climate journalism to advising on communications in the energy sector, especially when it comes to clean tech in this fraught moment?
So before I covered climate and clean energy, I was a political reporter who covered campaign cycles and Capitol Hill for a while, and I was always interested in the nexus of politics and politics. I tried to make as much of my coverage about that. Politics is policy, and the other way around.
Being on the other side of it is, well, I know from my experience as a reporter what interests them. I’m trying to figure out ways to make sure when I’m bugging you all that the pitch lands, because hopefully it’ll be something people are interested in. Things are changing so fast. It’s a really fascinating time to be a reporter and be in the clean energy comms space.
Okay, but now that you’re in clean energy comms, how do you handicap the fight over developing these technologies? Who is winning, who is losing, and why?
I think it’s tough to call exact winners and losers right now because over the last few months, there have been so many new and interesting developments.
Look at the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition, which has been getting involved in Republican primaries for Freedom Caucus members. There’s been this perception for a long time that the clean energy industry didn’t fare well in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act fight. They had important wins while losing pretty key stuff. But there’s been this interesting reckoning within the industry, and even this last summer, where people are moving the ball forward in interesting ways. They’re trying to get involved in political fights with direct results.
What messages do these primaries send? On the one hand I can see there being political consequences but also, now, more solar energy money going into Republican politics has the anti-renewable folks saying they need to go harder at them. I’m curious how you see the energy fight landscape changing in light of these election results.
I think it shows the industry has some fight in it. What the Coalition would probably say is, they want to be lethal and this is political warfare. They’re trying to be taken seriously.
There is sort of this two-pronged strategy happening right now. Obviously Invest in Tomorrow has gotten a lot of press attention for their track record. There’s also within the industry an attempt to shape a public narrative around wind, solar, battery storage to combat misinformation, both through conventional media and social media. They’re happening in tandem and it's a reflection of the results.
How is the backlash over data center development affecting the work you’re now doing?
Well, I’m still early, but I think the data center question is a fascinating one. Conversations around policy and where we go from here really seem to me to be happening in the state realm. Not a lot of policy happening at the federal level. There’s New York State’s data center pause, which is leading to lawmakers trying to get more leverage.
It’s in the backdrop, where projects are being announced with massive power plants to supply new data center demand, and at the same time there’s a conversation around virtual power plants, DERs. Another phrase emerging for it is “community power.”
It’s starting to be a fascinating conversation around community benefits. There are tax benefits when a data center comes to town but when it comes to energy use, what can communities actually leverage out of this? I know former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has been arguing for strong community benefit agreements, getting big tech companies to pay for solar and EVs and then using all of that to create a virtual power plant. Getting that to be flexible for data centers. That’s only one part of the pie but it’s fascinating to have this conversation about what forms of energy we need for all this demand happening.
What do you foresee about the impact of the backlash, given that land use, visuals, air, and water – its all being swept up in the same conversation?
I don’t have a crystal ball and have the same questions.
It’s all happening so quickly and it’s all playing out in so many different states. There are really important questions here and there are people smarter than I am on this, talking about how we meet this demand in the short term and long term or whether this is an opportunity for getting clean energy onto the grid. But it’s a delicate dance.