You’ve reached your free article limit
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:
Utilities are bending over backward to convince even their own investors that ratepayers won’t be on the hook for the cost of AI.

Utilities want you to know how little data centers will cost anyone.
With electricity prices rising faster than inflation and public backlash against data centers brewing, developers and the utilities that serve them are trying to convince the public that increasing numbers of gargantuan new projects won’t lead to higher bills. Case in point is the latest project from OpenAI’s Stargate, a $7-plus-billion, more-than-1-gigawatt data center due to be built outside Detroit.
The project was announced Thursday by Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who focused heavily on the projected economic benefits of the projects while attempting to head off criticism that it would lead to higher costs. In the first sentence of her press release, she said that the project will “create more than 2,500 union construction jobs, more than 450 jobs on site and 1,500 more across the county.” Also, it “will be one of the most advanced AI infrastructure facilities in the U.S., especially when it comes to its efficient use of land, water, and power.” Oh, and it “will not require any additional power generation to operate.”
The utility set to power the project, DTE Energy, released its quarterly earnings Thursday, as well, which described a 1.4-gigawatt project it had already executed. In a presentation for analysts and investors, DTE said that the new data center would pay for “required storage through a 15-year energy storage contract,” and that it would “support affordability for existing customers as excess capacity is sold.”
On a call with analysts, DTE Energy chief executive Joi Harris further asserted that the project has “meaningful affordability benefits to our existing customers.” As the data center ramps up, she explained, it can use existing excess capacity on the grid. By the time it reaches full strength, it will enjoy the benefits of “nearly $2 billion of incremental energy storage investments and additional tolling agreements to support this data center load.”
Who will pay for energy storage and tolling agreements? A DTE spokesperson, Jill Wilmot, clarified in an email that “DTE will meet the 1.4 gigawatts of demand from the data center with existing capacity,” and that “new energy storage will be built — and paid for by the customer” — that is, Stargate — “to help augment times of peak demand, ensuring continued reliability for all customers.”
Data centers help spread out the fixed costs of the grid more widely, Wilmot went on. “Data center development in DTE’s electric service territory will not increase customer rates,” she said, adding that “DTE is ensuring the data center will absorb all new costs required to serve them — in this case, battery storage. Our customers will not pay.”
That said, Wilmot did not answer a question about whether there would be any network or transmission upgrades necessary. She told me that she expected DTE would make a filing for the project with Michigan regulators later Friday.
Consumer advocates were skeptical of the utility’s claims. “When you are talking about new demand as massive as what would be created by this data center, we can’t afford to just take DTE at its word that other customers won’t be affected,” Amy Bandyk, the executive director of the Citizens Utility Board of Michigan, told me in an email. She called for Michigan regulators “to require DTE and the data center customer to agree on a tariff specific to that customer that includes robust protections against cost-shifting and provisions that any incremental costs will be solely covered by this new customer.”
More utilities and data center developers are trying to explicitly head off claims that data centers are driving up electricity rates. In another recent data center announcement for a multi-billion-dollar project in West Memphis, Arkansas, Google and the Arkansas Economic Development Commission said that “Google will be covering the full energy costs for the West Memphis facility and will be ramping up new solar energy and battery storage resources for the facility.”
Drew Marsh, the chief executive of Entergy, the utility serving the project, confirmed on an earnings call earlier this week that Google “will protect energy affordability for existing customers by covering the full cost of powering the data center in West Memphis.” He also said that in Mississippi, where Amazon has announced a $16 billion project, “customer rates would be 16% lower than they otherwise would have been due to these large customers.”
So why are utilities — which, after all, get paid by ratepayers for the investments they make in their systems — telling their investors about all the money they’re not charging ratepayers?
In short, utilities and developers know they’re on political thin ice, and they don’t want to kill the golden goose of data center development by stoking a populist backlash to rising electricity prices that could result in either government-mandated slashing of their investment plans, caps on the rates they can charge, or both.
“Looking ahead, we anticipate the central issue will be how utilities protect residential customers from costs associated with large-load customers, or else face potential consequences from regulators,” Mizuho analyst Anthony Crowdell said in a note to clients earlier this week. “Data centers, and their associated load, have the potential” to “cause political push-back.”
This is already happening across the country. The frontrunner in the New Jersey gubernatorial race, Democrat Mikie Sherrill, for example, has promised to freeze electricity rates, which have seen a sharp runup in recent years. Indiana Governor Mike Braun, a Republican, said in a recent statement that “we can’t take it anymore,” in reference to rate hikes. Indiana has also rejected a number of proposed data centers, as I covered earlier this year.
This means that utilities will have to think carefully about how and to whom they allocate costs arising from data center development and operation.
“Allocation of cost will be pivotal as the current ’pocketbook issues driving a lot of the U.S. political debate could create some challenging regulatory outcomes should data centers put pressure on customer bills,” Crowdell wrote.
But what’s said in an announcement to the media or to investors may not always reflect the reality of utility cost allocation, Harvard Law School professor Ari Peskoe told me.
“Don’t trust a utility press release or comment from a CEO of a monopoly that says Hey, these rates are good for you,” he told me.
Peskoe told me to pay close attention to the regulatory fillings utilities make for their data center projects, not just what they tell the press or investors. “Are the utilities themselves actually making these claims as strongly as their CEOs are making them in investor calls? And then once we do have a regulatory process about it, are they being transparent in that regulatory process? Are they hiding a lot of details behind the confidentiality claims so that only the participants in that proceeding actually get to see the details?”
Peskoe also pointed to other costs that might be incurred in the course of data center development that get socialized across the rate base but aren’t necessarily directly tied to any one development, like the transmission and network upgrades, that have contributed to large price increases in the PJM Interconnection territory.
“What you’re looking for is a firm contract that ensures the data center is going to be paying for every penny that the utility is incurring to provide service, so that it’s paying for all the new infrastructure that’s serving it,” Peskoe said. Without that, all you have is a press release.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
Hint: It’s one that tends to align with utilities.
Building trades want to build.
This desire for more and better big projects has meant that unions representing construction workers, utility linemen, operating engineers, plumbers, pipefitters, and so on have spent past decade-plus ping-ponging between praise and exasperation toward major Democratic priorities, especially when it comes to climate and energy policy.
Now, with a permitting bill negotiated by two Democrats and two Republicans in the Senate, much of the hardhat union sector is signing on as eager supporters. If the rest of the Democratic coalition can sign on to the bill, it may go some way to repairing a breach that has been widening since the Obama administration.
The modern fight over U.S. energy infrastructure began with a Canadian pipeline project.
Building trades were some of the most fervent advocates for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought oil from the tar sands of Canada’s Alberta province into the continental United States — a project that Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden both opposed and which the latter finally canceled in 2021.
In the interim, the first Trump administration tested these unions’ historic allegiance with Democrats as the left became more vocal on climate policy. After Senator Ed Markey and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released their Green New Deal outline in 2019, the AFL-CIO sent the two progressives a letter saying their plan “makes promises that are not achievable or realistic.” The signatories also included the United Mine Workers, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and eight more building trades, hardhat unions and federations that would be threatened by a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy. The signatory unions represented a little under 3 million of the AFL-CIO’s then roughly 12.5 million members.
“The broad trajectory is that the building trades unions have been supportive of building pretty much anything, whether it’s fossil, whether it’s data centers, whether it’s clean energy,” Todd Tucker, director of the industrial policy and trade program at the Roosevelt Institute, told me.
Actual Democratic policymaking turned out to be more favorable to unions, with infrastructure spending, money for domestic manufacturing, prevailing wage requirements, and subsidies for nuclear power and carbon capture all spurring infrastructure work during the Biden years. North America’s Building Trades Unions described the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law as the “single greatest infrastructure investment in our nation’s history,” while the Laborers’ International Union of North America, a.k.a. LIUNA, praised the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act for “taking a commonsense approach to our energy needs.”
Now, it’s environmental groups that are either opposed to or mum on a piece of infrastructure legislation — the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act — while most of the building trades support it.
The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, otherwise known as the UA, signed the anti-Green New Deal letter and had a project labor agreement with the developer of the Keystone XL pipeline, but came out in support of the permitting deal. So did LIUNA and the International Union of Operating Engineers.
“In our industry, uncertainty means one thing: unemployment,” UA General President Mark McManus said in a statement. “It is long past time that Congress enacts meaningful permitting reform to put UA members to work faster.”
LIUNA’s president Brent Booker described BAAJA in a statement as a “monumental bipartisan permitting reform bill,” and urged “lawmakers in both parties to seize this moment, pass the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, and finally deliver meaningful permitting reform.”
John Downey, the president of the Operating Engineers union, which signed a letter imploring the Biden-Harris transition team to maintain the Keystone pipeline’s permits, said in a statement that the union “applauds the bipartisan effort” on BAAJA, and that the “Operating Engineers look forward to working with Congress to pass this critical bipartisan bill.” Other Keystone XL supporters including the National Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of Commerce have also come out in support of BAAJA.
There are a few industry and union players, however, that have been notably more circumspect: groups representing utilities and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
The Edison Electric Institute, the trade group for investor-owned utilities, has in the past supported overhauling the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act, which the bill would do. The group’s chief executive, Drew Maloney, told reporters after the release of the bill text that it was “encouraged” by the permitting provisions in BAAJA and was “reviewing” the transmission provisions.
The transmission provisions are largely seen as hostile to incumbent utilities. Many in Washington — especially Republicans — see them as a sign of decreasing utility clout. The bill would encourage and enable greater state and federal oversight of utilities’ infrastructure buildouts and would restrict the utilities’ “right of first refusal” on building new transmission lines. Many ratepayer advocates argue that these projects do more to build out the utility rate base than to increase grid reliability
This stance — supportive of permitting reforms, wary of grid provisions — puts utilities in a kind of mirror image with big environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is friendly to the transmission portions of the bill but skeptical of the permitting portions.
Senator Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican and himself a former utility regulator, warned utilities to “not get carried away” in trying to push for changes to the deal, Punchbowl News reported.
“What I’m really watching these days around the Senate BAAJA bill is where does the IBEW end up,” Tucker told me.
An IBEW spokesperson told me the union is “reviewing the language and holding discussions with stakeholders across our industries. We represent workers across affected industries (utilities, transmission, construction, etc.), so the details are very important.”
The IBEW has just over 900,000 members, including construction electricians, utility linemen, technicians, and operators, with particularly strong representation within utilities. The union also has special political influence due to its large and widespread membership — anywhere there’s a power line, there’s likely one of the IBEW’s more than 800 locals.
Utility watchdogs like David Pomerantz, executive director of the Energy and Policy Institute, are not surprised to see utilities and the IBEW taking similar (non-)stances toward the bill.
He told me the IBEW is a particularly potent force on issues affecting utilities because “they’re a more acceptable face to the Democratic electorate,” referring to their lobbying in blue states and of Democratic politicians. “Among Democrats, the IBEW right now is much more palatable than the utilities.” The IBEW has been a counterweight to the Democrats’ and the public’s increasingly harsh turn against data centers, for instance, opposing moratoria in New England, the Mountain West, New York, and the Kansas City area.
The IBEW has also weighed in on more fine-grained utility policy, including right-of-first-refusal, well before the release of BAAJA. A union policy brief describes these as policies that “prioritize unionized utilities for critical projects, safeguarding labor standards and ensuring safe and efficient energy infrastructure development.” In Illinois, an IBEW local intervened in a rate case to oppose a proposed cut in the return on equity for local utility ComEd.
But the IBEW has also won project labor agreements for the type of long distance, high-voltage transmission projects that many climate and clean energy advocates hope the bill encourages.
“Some of their members work for the utilities and the utilities are getting rolled by this legislation, but some of the members work in construction and building,” Tucker told me.
The question going forward for the union, he said, is “do you align your union strategy with the current business model of your current employers? Or do you make a bet that these new jobs that are getting created and new builds are going to net out positive?”
On Indonesia’s climate win, hacking renewables, and John Cena’s ad
Current conditions: A tropical rainstorm in the southwestern Gulf of Mexico, likely strengthening into what would become Tropical Storm Isaias, is poised to dump rain on the southeastern United States and may become the Atlantic’s first major hurricane of the year • Italy is bracing for a type of heavy rainstorm known as a nubifragio, set to soak Naples and Rome later this week • The Dome Fire in Yosemite National Park has burned about 7,000 acres, and officials determined it was sparked by humans.
If you can’t wait a decade or more for a new Westinghouse AP1000 or one of the small modular reactors under development, your best bet to get more nuclear electricity is probably to upgrade an existing reactor to squeeze more power out of it, a process known as “uprating.” In February, the Department of Energy gave out its largest-ever loan to Southern Company to fund up to 6 gigawatts of uprates across the utility’s nuclear fleet. Last week, Amazon inked a 20-year deal with Constellation, the nation’s largest operator of nuclear reactors, to buy power from and uprate the Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland. Google has now signed a deal with Constellation aimed at wringing out 890 megawatts of new power from 11 reactors across PJM Interconnection, the nation’s second-largest and arguably most stressed grid system. Asked whether the uprates are a sufficient replacement for building new reactors, Raiford Smith, Google’s head of power and energy for the cloud, said there was plenty of demand to go around. “New data centers are coming on at a gigawatt a clip,” he told me yesterday. “That means even with all the uprates, there’s still more to come.” Software giant Oracle also announced a deal last week to buy $300 million of nuclear power from a NextEra nuclear plant in Wisconsin to help fund its increased fuel costs.
In a sign of progress on the country’s leading SMR design, the Texas grid has officially received an application for one of GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy’s BWRX-300 reactors. The 300-megawatt unit borrows from GE’s decades-long history of building boiling water reactors, and has a leg up on other SMRs given that Ontario Power Generation and the Tennessee Valley Authority, two of the continent’s biggest state-owned utilities, are building the first and second BWRX-300s, respectively. But the application to connect to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas’ power lines comes, per Bloomberg, from Blue Energy Global, a developer that has promised to build out modular power stations that convert seamlessly from gas to nuclear. While the company considers itself “reactor-agnostic,” it’s first focused on building out plants with the BWRX-300.
The Indonesian government has halted the clearing of an area of rainforest in Papua roughly the size of Maryland to make way for farmland to grow crops for food and biofuels. In twin announcements at a sustainability forum in Jakarta, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, President Prabowo Subianto’s special envoy for climate and energy, said the government would shift rice and sugarcane projects to degraded land, delivering a victory to both conservationists who sought to preserve vital habitats and carbon sinks and activists who sought to preserve indigenous cultures who depend on the forests. “This decision renews Indonesia’s leadership in showing how to expand agriculture while protecting nature,” Glenn Hurowitz, the founder and chief executive of the advocacy group Mighty Earth, said in a statement. In a post on X, journalist Michael Grunwald, who authored a landmark book about the climate impact of food production, called the news “a massive victory for the planet.”
For the past 18 years, John Murdock, an attorney and self-described conservative Christian, has served in the legal division at the Department of the Interior. But he resigned abruptly last month over what he called the Trump administration’s “deeply troubling assault on the rule of law.” Under the administration, he wrote in a blistering resignation letter obtained by the investigative site Public Domain, the “all of the above” energy strategy “has seemingly morphed into ‘one of the above,’ solely focused on fossil fuels.” Murdock highlighted “recent decisions to shutter nearly complete offshore wind projects and to pay TotalEnergies hundreds of millions of dollars to renounce wind leases” as examples of “an assault on logic and the American taxpayer.” He added: “We are headed in the wrong direction.
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
About a week ago, I told you the European Union was considering delaying implementation of its methane rule by a year to avoid jacking up prices on imported gas even higher when exporters inevitably fell short of the bloc’s strict reporting requirements for emissions throughout the fossil fuel supply chain. Well, it’s happened. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told EU lawmakers the postponement would save money. Her energy minister, Dan Jørgensen, cautioned that “we do not foresee this to be more than one year,” Reuters reported.
Meanwhile, Dutch researchers at the internet-scanning firm Modat told Reuters that hackers could seize full control of roughly 181 wind and solar sites around Europe and tamper with the administrative systems of thousands more. One wind turbine’s web page showed live data, “start,” “stop,” and “reset” buttons, and the turbine locations. “What we can map in hours, an attacker can map in hours too,” the report said. The researchers encouraged operators to take admin interfaces off the internet immediately.
Japanese automakers may be notoriously behind China on making electric vehicle batteries. But Suzuki has just released its first electric kei car — that beloved category of ulta-compact Japanese vehicles — using BYD’s batteries but undercutting the Chinese auto giant’s cheapest EV. The new Suzuki e-SKY will beat out BYD’s Racco as Japan’s cheapest mini EV, starting at about $13,500, according to Electrek.

The renewables industry is tapping in a WWE champion to make its case. John Cena stars in a new ad series backed by a consortium of wind and solar companies. “How powerful is clean energy?” he asks. “Pretend this is solar,” he says, flexing his right bicep. Flexing the left, he says: “And this is wind.” He then proceeds to obliterate a boulder by punching it into a statue of himself. It’s funny and charming.
Rob talks with the U.S. auto giant”s VP of batteries and sustainability, Kurt Kelty.
There are two big trends in the American battery sector at the moment. The first is that the electric vehicle market is deteriorating. GM, for instance, sold just 25,000 EVs in the third quarter of this year. Ford sold 6,000 EVs. Even the long-awaited return of the Chevy Bolt sold just 8,000 units — a small fraction of the vehicle’s already-limited production run. At the same time, the data center boom and the return of electricity growth is boosting batteries of all kinds not designed to power EVs.
Our guest today is in charge of navigating those opposing trends and figuring out what comes next. Kurt Kelty started his career at Panasonic in 1993, where he led the company’s battery research lab. He then went on to Tesla, helping to build the first Gigafactory. Since February 2024, he’s been vice president of battery and sustainability at GM. We talked about manufacturing generally, how the U.S. battery manufacturing sector should look, and how companies should be structured to compete globally, even though they’re making batteries for a mostly U.S. audience.
Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.
Subscribe to “Shift Key” and find this episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can also add the show’s RSS feed to your podcast app to follow us directly.
Here is an excerpt from their conversation:
Robinson Meyer: In 2024, GM retired the Ultium brand, except for the Ultium cells. And I would say that as an outsider, unlike other domestic automakers, the whole GM stack — where you have a single battery design that you then slot into different vehicles — seems to be working, and certainly seems to be producing profitable vehicles in a way that other automakers’ approaches were not.
So why retire the Ultium name? In traditional automakers, you talk about platforms and different cars designed on the same platform. But are there going to be a few platforms at GM, each with their own chemistry, and then you design different vehicles on top of that? Why get rid of Ultium when it seemed to be working?
Kurt Kelty: Yeah, so the way I look at the future when EV volumes really start to ramp up, we’re going to need prismatic form factor, pouch form factor, cylindrical form factor. We’re going to need nickel cell, high-nickel cells. We’re going to need some LMR cells. We’re going to need some LFP cells. We’re going to need it all. What we do here at GM is we design the right battery for the right application. And generally, depending on the need, you may need high-nickel. You may need LFP. Most likely, you’re going to need LMR in most of our applications. That’s what we think. And in some cases, the prismatic form factor will work best. In other cases, the cylindrical form factor will work best.
I do not see a future where we’re standardizing on a single chemistry or a single form factor. We tried to do that in the battery industry in the late ’90s when I was in the business, and all the laptop companies got together and said, we’re going to make a standard form factor, so we’re going to drive down costs. We made the form factor. Everybody signed up for it. Nobody used it. And nobody used it because it was ... The way to really customize your laptop was the battery. Everything else had been standardized.
At that point they had the hard drive, you had the floppy and the screen, and all those were standard components. The battery was the way you made it custom. And with EVs, it’s the same thing. The battery is going to decide your driving range, your acceleration, your space in the car, your safety of the car. I mean, it just determines so much about how fast you can charge it. All these things are determined by the battery. And so you’re not going to see a standard.
And so at GM, we are preparing for that by having this battery innovation center, this electrification powerhouse that we’ve got. It’s something that we’re really proud of. And in the future, we’re going to really take advantage of this.
You can find a full transcript of the episode here.
Mentioned:
The Senate’s Big Bipartisan Permitting Deal, Explained
On Rivian’s record-setting Q3
Previously on Shift Key: Data Centers Are Creating a New Kind of Battery Monster
This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by ...
RE+ 26 is the largest clean energy event in North America, happening November 16th through 19th at the Las Vegas Convention Center. Register at re-plus.com and use code SHIFTKEY20 to save 20% off a Full Conference pass.
Every year Giving Green researches the top climate nonprofits and sends 100% of every dollar donated to its Giving Green Fund straight to them. Make your first gift before the new year, and it will be matched up to $500. Go to GivingGreen.earth/Shift.
Formed through a joint venture between Wärtsilä and RCT Solutions, Valo helps utilities, independent power producers, and developers navigate market and grid complexity without sacrificing system performance. Learn more at valoenergy.com.