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:
With historic lows projected for the next two weeks — and more snow potentially on the way — the big strain may be yet to come.

Winter Storm Fern made the final stand of its 2,300-mile arc across the United States on Monday as it finished dumping 17 inches of “light, fluffy” snow over parts of Maine. In its wake, the storm has left hundreds of thousands without power, killed more than a dozen people, and driven temperatures to historic lows.
The grid largely held up over the weekend, but the bigger challenge may still be to come. That’s because prolonged low temperatures are forecasted across much of the country this week and next, piling strain onto heating and electricity systems already operating at or close to their limits.
What issues there have been were largely due to damage in the transmission and distribution system, i.e. power lines freezing or being brought down by errant branches.
The outages or blackouts that have occurred have been the result of either operational issues with plants, scheduled maintenance, or issues specifically with snow affecting the distribution system. As yet there’s been no need for rolling blackouts to relieve grid congestion and preserve the system as a whole. Speaking about the country’s largest electrical grid, Jon Gordon, a director at Advanced Energy United, told Heatmap: “So far, so good.”
But this is all assuming we just get more cold weather. We could be in for another storm. Since late last week, the forecasting model maintained by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts — one of the two primary computer forecasting models, and generally considered more accurate than its analogue, the American model — has suggested there could be another major winter storm headed toward the Eastern U.S. next weekend. Whether it hits the Eastern Seaboard, clips it, or stays offshore, it’s still early to say with any confidence.
Should that storm hit, here’s what it’ll be barreling into.
Temperatures will likely remain below 0 degrees Fahrenheit across swaths of PJM Interconnection — the country’s largest regional transmission organization, covering the Mid-Atlantic through portions of the Midwest — with parts of Pennsylvania and Ohio not expected to see a day above freezing for the next two weeks.
Put simply, cold temperatures stress the grid. That’s because cold can affect the performance of electricity generators as well as the distribution and production of natural gas, the most commonly used grid fuel. And the longer the grid has to operate under these difficult conditions, the more fragile it gets. And this is all happening while demand for electricity and natural gas is rising.
Forced outages — which happen when power is pulled offline due to some kind of unexpected event or emergency — peaked on Sunday in PJM at just over 17,000 megawatts, while total outages were over 22 gigawatts on Monday, according to Grid Status’s Tim Ennis, who said some of them may have been due to ice “ice accumulation across Virginia.”
The market has also been serving more than its own 13-state territory. Already on Saturday — after the fierce cold had set in across its territory but before snow arrived — PJM noted to the Department of Energy that it had been asked to provide up to 3,000 megawatts to neighboring grids, and that it had already seen outages of around 20,000 megawatts — enough to serve 16 million people.
Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia reported the highest number of customers without power in the PJM region as of Monday afternoon, largely due to ice and snow that brought down tree branches on power lines or toppled utility poles.
Meanwhile, snow was still falling across New England on Monday afternoon, where parts of Massachusetts have received up to 20 inches. Another 8 inches could still accumulate on the Atlantic coast due to the ongoing lake effect, a common winter pattern in which cold Canadian air picks up moisture over the warmer Great Lakes, resulting in heavy snow downwind.
Though there were minimal blackouts in New England’s electricity market as of Monday morning, natural gas has fallen to just 30% of the grid’s fuel supply, from more than half at the same time a week earlier, with nearly 40% of its electricity output coming from oil-fired plants, Reuters reports. Solar generation peaked at less than a gigawatt on Sunday due to cloud cover, compared to over 4 gigawatts on Saturday and over 3 gigawatts on Friday. During the summer, ISO-NE’s combined behind-the-meter and utility-scale solar production can get as high as eight gigawatts.
The Department of Energy granted ISO New England, emergency permission to operate generators at maximum capacity, regardless of air quality and environmental standards. (It also granted the same dispensation to PJM and Texas’ grid operator, ERCOT.)
The most widespread outages in the country were concentrated in Tennessee, with some 230,000 customers in Nashville Electric Service’s area without power at one point. The disruptions were largely caused not by grid demands, but rather by nearly 100 broken utility poles and more than 70 distribution circuits taken down by the snow and ice, Utility Dive reported.
Mississippi and Louisiana also had outages, with around 4% of Energy customers offline according to Jefferies data, and around 10% of Entergy customers in Mississippi being affected by blackouts. By contrast, Jefferies data shows, less than 1% of Texas electricity customers were offline.
Typically, cold weather means higher natural gas prices, as the demand for home heating goes up alongside demand for electricity. The 44.2 billion cubic feet of natural gas forecast to be burned today would be the fifth highest January burn of all time in the U.S., according to Matthew Palmer, executive director at S&P Global Energy, in an email. The extended cold weather is expected to push natural gas stockpiles to their lowest since the winter of 2021 to 2022, according to S&P data.
Benchmark natural gas prices have shot up to $6.50 per million British thermal units, up from $5.28 on Friday. Crude oil prices by contrast were down slightly today, while heating oil prices were up around 5%.
High natural prices means that power markets are also expecting higher prices. Day-ahead average wholesale prices in Texas for 9 a.m. were almost $1,500 per megawatt-hour, compared to just $100 in the real-time market. In PJM, average real-time prices were around $270 at 9 a.m. compared to $482 in the day-ahead market.
“The worst is over, but we are expecting bitterly cold temperatures throughout the week. Please continue to avoid unnecessary travel and be vigilant about ice.” New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, who had made electricity prices the centerpoint of her election campaign as well as her early days in office, said in a statement.
“While the worst of the snow is over, prolonged cold is still expected,” Jefferies analyst Julien Dumoulin-Smith wrote in a note to clients Monday. That can lead to “resource adequacy events,” i.e. blackouts, “as fuel supplies get strained and plants face operational strains from more significant run-time.”
There’s particular pressure and attention during this cold snap on ERCOT, the Texas grid operator, after 2021’s Winter Storm Uri, which brought ice, snow, and below-0 temperatures to much of the state. Natural gas wellheads froze up as much of the system for pumping and distributing natural gas lost power. Power plants were “unprepared for cold weather,” a report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission found, “and thus failed in large numbers.”
Faced with power plants going offline and the entire system potentially collapsing, ERCOT had to order 20,000 megawatts of load offline — i.e. force blackouts — which FERC described as “the largest controlled firm load shed event in U.S. history.” Around 60% of the state’s households rely on electricity for heating, and the long freeze-out left 4 million homes and businesses without power. More than 200 people died.
In the intervening years, Texas has introduced new capacity and reforms meant to prevent a similar tragedy. While ERCOT “does not anticipate any reliability issues on the statewide electric grid,” per a spokesperson, the operator flagged for the DOE that low temperatures in the week ahead could raise demand to an “extreme level” that poses “significant risk of emergency conditions that could jeopardize electric reliability and public safety.” So far, though, it’s been holding up, with peak demand expected Monday morning and outages mostly limited to East Texas due to downed power lines.
The Tennessee Valley Authority, which operates a vertically integrated grid centered in Tennessee and spanning several neighboring states, warned of “extreme cold” in the coming days, but said that its generation fleet — which includes coal, natural gas, and nuclear power plants — was “positioned to meet rising demand.” As of Monday morning, TVA said that 12 of the 153 power companies it serves had “distribution issues” related to the storm.
One Mississippi power company in the TVA system said that it had “suffered catastrophic damage” to its distribution system, specifically a 161 kilovolt transmission line operated by the TVA. The cold weather has dealt a double blow to the system, with TVA officials reporting ice on transmission and distribution lines as well as icy conditions making it difficult to service lines in need of repair.
Currently, TVA is forecasting that demand will peak Tuesday at just over 33,000 megawatts, according to EIA data. The system’s all-time winter peak is 35,430 megawatts.
PJM also expects several more days of tight conditions on the grid thanks to forecasted cold weather. The grid operator issued a “maximum generation emergency/load management alert” on Monday morning through at least the end of the day Tuesday, indicating that it needed to maintain high levels of generation throughout the system. It also asked generators for specifics on when any scheduled maintenance would be over in order to more carefully schedule operations to maintain reliability.
Over the weekend, PJM told the Energy Department that peak demand could exceed 130,000 megawatts “for seven straight days, a winter streak that PJM has never experienced.” The grid operator expects project peak demand over 147,000 megawatts on Tuesday, exceeding the previous record of 143,700 megawatts set last January. Demand peaked at 135,000 megawatts on Saturday and 129,000 megawatts on Sunday.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct ERCOT’s actions to protect the grid during Winter Storm Uri.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
The state is poised to join a chorus of states with BYO energy policies.
With the backlash to data center development growing around the country, some states are launching a preemptive strike to shield residents from higher energy costs and environmental impacts.
A bill wending through the Washington State legislature would require data centers to pick up the tab for all of the costs associated with connecting them to the grid. It echoes laws passed in Oregon and Minnesota last year, and others currently under consideration in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, and Delaware.
Several of these bills, including Washington’s, also seek to protect state climate goals by ensuring that new or expanded data centers are powered by newly built, zero-emissions power plants. It’s a strategy that energy wonks have started referring to as BYONCE — bring your own new clean energy. Almost all of the bills also demand more transparency from data center companies about their energy and water use.
This list of state bills is by no means exhaustive. Governors in New York and Pennsylvania have declared their intent to enact similar policies this year. At least six states, including New York and Georgia, are also considering total moratoria on new data centers while regulators study the potential impacts of a computing boom.
“Potential” is a key word here. One of the main risks lawmakers are trying to circumvent is that utilities might pour money into new infrastructure to power data centers that are never built, built somewhere else, or don’t need as much energy as they initially thought.
“There’s a risk that there’s a lot of speculation driving the AI data center boom,” Emily Moore, the senior director of the climate and energy program at the nonprofit Sightline Institute, told me. “If the load growth projections — which really are projections at this point — don’t materialize, ratepayers could be stuck holding the bag for grid investments that utilities have made to serve data centers.”
Washington State, despite being in the top 10 states for data center concentration, has not exactly been a hotbed of opposition to the industry. According to Heatmap Pro data, there are no moratoria or restrictive ordinances on data centers in the state. Rural communities in Eastern Washington have also benefited enormously from hosting data centers from the earlier tech boom, using the tax revenue to fund schools, hospitals, municipal buildings, and recreation centers.
Still, concern has started to bubble up. A ProPublica report in 2024 suggested that data centers were slowing the state’s clean energy progress. It also described a contentious 2023 utility commission meeting in Grant County, which has the highest concentration of data centers in the state, where farmers and tech workers fought over rising energy costs.
But as with elsewhere in the country, it’s the eye-popping growth forecasts that are scaring people the most. Last year, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, a group that oversees electricity planning in the region, estimated that data centers and chip fabricators could add somewhere between 1,400 megawatts and 4,500 megawatts of demand by 2030. That’s similar to saying that between one and four cities the size of Seattle will hook up to the region’s grid in the next four years.
In the face of such intimidating demand growth, Washington Governor Bob Ferguson convened a Data Center Working Group last year — made up of state officials as well as advisors from electric utilities, environmental groups, labor, and industry — to help the state formulate a game plan. After meeting for six months, the group published a report in December finding that among other things, the data center boom will challenge the state’s efforts to decarbonize its energy systems.
A supplemental opinion provided by the Washington Department of Ecology also noted that multiple data center developers had submitted proposals to use fossil fuels as their main source of power. While the state’s clean energy law requires all electricity to be carbon neutral by 2030, “very few data center developers are proposing to use clean energy to meet their energy needs over the next five years,” the department said.
The report’s top three recommendations — to maintain the integrity of Washington’s climate laws, strengthen ratepayer protections, and incentivize load flexibility and best practices for energy efficiency — are all incorporated into the bill now under discussion in the legislature. The full list was not approved by unanimous vote, however, and many of the dissenting voices are now opposing the data center bill in the legislature or asking for significant revisions.
Dan Diorio, the vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, an industry trade group, warned lawmakers during a hearing on the bill that it would “significantly impact the competitiveness and viability of the Washington market,” putting jobs and tax revenue at risk. He argued that the bill inappropriately singles out data centers, when arguably any new facility with significant energy demand poses the same risks and infrastructure challenges. The onshoring of manufacturing facilities, hydrogen production, and the electrification of vehicles, buildings, and industry will have similar impacts. “It does not create a long-term durable policy to protect ratepayers from current and future sources of load growth,” he said.
Another point of contention is whether a top-down mandate from the state is necessary when utility regulators already have the authority to address the risks of growing energy demand through the ratemaking process.
Indeed, regulators all over the country are already working on it. The Smart Electric Power Alliance, a clean energy research and education nonprofit, has been tracking the special rate structures and rules that U.S. utilities have established for data centers, cryptocurrency mining facilities, and other customers with high-density energy needs, many of which are designed to protect other ratepayers from cost shifts. Its database, which was last updated in November, says that 36 such agreements have been approved by state utility regulators, mostly in the past three years, and that another 29 are proposed or pending.
Diario of the Data Center Coalition cited this trend as evidence that the Washington bill was unnecessary. “The data center industry has been an active party in many of those proceedings,” he told me in an email, and “remains committed to paying its full cost of service for the energy it uses.” (The Data Center Coalition opposed a recent utility decision in Ohio that will require data centers to pay for a minimum of 85% of their monthly energy forecast, even if they end up using less.)
One of the data center industry’s favorite counterarguments against the fear of rising electricity is that new large loads actually exert downward pressure on rates by spreading out fixed costs. Jeff Dennis, who is the executive director of the Electricity Customer Alliance and has worked for both the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, told me this is something he worries about — that these potential benefits could be forfeited if data centers are isolated into their own ratemaking class. But, he said, we’re only in “version 1.5 or 2.0” when it comes to special rate structures for big energy users, known as large load tariffs.
“I think they’re going to continue to evolve as everybody learns more about how to integrate large loads, and as the large load customers themselves evolve in their operations,” he said.
The Washington bill passed the Appropriations Committee on Monday and now heads to the Rules Committee for review. A companion bill is moving through the state senate.
Plus more of the week’s top fights in renewable energy.
1. Kent County, Michigan — Yet another Michigan municipality has banned data centers — for the second time in just a few months.
2. Pima County, Arizona — Opposition groups submitted twice the required number of signatures in a petition to put a rezoning proposal for a $3.6 billion data center project on the ballot in November.
3. Columbus, Ohio — A bill proposed in the Ohio Senate could severely restrict renewables throughout the state.
4. Converse and Niobrara Counties, Wyoming — The Wyoming State Board of Land Commissioners last week rescinded the leases for two wind projects in Wyoming after a district court judge ruled against their approval in December.
A conversation with Advanced Energy United’s Trish Demeter about a new report with Synapse Energy Economics.
This week’s conversation is with Trish Demeter, a senior managing director at Advanced Energy United, a national trade group representing energy and transportation businesses. I spoke with Demeter about the group’s new report, produced by Synapse Energy Economics, which found that failing to address local moratoria and restrictive siting ordinances in Indiana could hinder efforts to reduce electricity prices in the state. Given Indiana is one of the fastest growing hubs for data center development, I wanted to talk about what policymakers could do to address this problem — and what it could mean for the rest of the country. Our conversation was edited for length and clarity.
Can you walk readers through what you found in your report on energy development in Indiana?
We started with, “What is the affordability crisis in Indiana?” And we found that between 2024 and 2025, residential consumers paid on average $28 more per month on their electric bill. Depending on their location within the state, those prices could be as much as $49 higher per month. This was a range based on all the different electric utilities in the state and how much residents’ bills are increasing. It’s pretty significant: 18% average across the state, and in some places, as high as 27% higher year over year.
Then Synapse looked into trends of energy deployment and made some assumptions. They used modeling to project what “business as usual” would look like if we continue on our current path and the challenges energy resources face in being built in Indiana. What if those challenges were reduced, streamlined, or alleviated to some degree, and we saw an acceleration in the deployment of wind, solar, and battery energy storage?
They found that over the next nine years, between now and 2035, consumers could save a total of $3.6 billion on their energy bills. We are truly in a supply-and-demand crunch. In the state of Indiana, there is a lot more demand for electricity than there is available electricity supply. And demand — some of it will come online, some of it won’t, depending on whose projections you’re looking at. But suffice it to say, if we’re able to reduce barriers to build new generation in the state — and the most available generation is wind, solar, and batteries — then we can actually alleviate some of the cost concerns that are falling on consumers.
How do cost concerns become a factor in local siting decisions when it comes to developing renewable energy at the utility scale?
We are focused on state decisionmakers in the legislature, the governor’s administration, and at the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, and there’s absolutely a conversation going on there about affordability and the trends that they’re seeing across the state in terms of how much more people are paying on their bills month to month.
But here lies the challenge with a state like Indiana. There are 92 counties in the state, and each has a different set of rules, a different process, and potentially different ways for the local community to weigh in. If you’re a wind, solar, or battery storage developer, you are tracking 92 different sets of rules and regulations. From a state law perspective, there’s little recourse for developers or folks who are proposing projects to work through appeals if their projects are denied. It’s a very risky place to propose a project because there are so many ways it can be rejected or not see action on an application for years at a time. From a business perspective, it’s a challenging place to show that bringing in supply for Indiana’s energy needs can help affordability.
To what extent do you think data centers are playing a role in these local siting conflicts over renewable energy, if any?
There are a lot of similarities with regard to the way that Indiana law is set up. It’s very much a home rule state. When development occurs, there is a complex matrix of decision-making at the local level, between a county council and municipalities with jurisdiction over data centers, renewable energy, and residential development. You also have the land planning commissions that are in every county, and then the boards of zoning appeals.
So in any given county, you have anywhere between three and four different boards or commissions or bodies that have some level of decision-making power over ordinances, over project applications and approvals, over public hearings, over imposing or setting conditions. That gives a local community a lot of levers by which a proposal can get consideration, and also be derailed or rejected.
You even have, in one instance recently, a municipality that disagreed with the county government: The municipality really wanted a solar project, and the county did not. So there can be tension between the local jurisdictions. We’re seeing the same with data centers and other types of development as well — we’ve heard of proposals such as carbon capture and sequestration for wells or test wells, or demonstration projects that have gotten caught up in the same local decision-making matrix.
Where are we at with unifying siting policy in Indiana?
At this time there is no legislative proposal to reform the process for wind, solar, and battery storage developers in Indiana. In the current legislative session, there is what we’re calling an affordability bill, House Bill 1002, that deals with how utilities set rates and how they’re incentivized to address affordability and service restoration. That bill is very much at the center of the state energy debate, and it’s likely to pass.
The biggest feature of a sound siting and permitting policy is a clear, predictable process from the outset for all involved. So whether or not a permit application for a particular project gets reviewed at a local or a state level, or even a combination of both — there should be predictability in what is required of that applicant. What do they need to disclose? When do they need to disclose it? And what is the process for reviewing that? Is there a public hearing that occurs at a certain period of time? And then, when is a decision made within a reasonable timeframe after the application is filed?
I will also mention the appeals processes: What are the steps by which a decision can be appealed, and what are the criteria under which that appeal can occur? What parameters are there around an appeal process? That's what we advocate for.
In Indiana, a tremendous step in the right direction would be to ensure predictability in how this process is handled county to county. If there is greater consistency across those jurisdictions and a way for decisions to at least explain why a proposal is rejected, that would be a great step.
It sounds like the answer, on some level, is that we don’t yet know enough. Is that right?
For us, what we’re looking for is: Let’s come up with a process that seems like it could work in terms of knowing when a community can weigh in, what the different authorities are for who gets to say yes or no to a project, and under what conditions and on what timelines. That will be a huge step in the right direction.