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:
The Democratic Senate candidate from Maine told Heatmap that any ban on construction must be paired with policymaking.

We’re about to find out whether progressive energy populism can flip control of Congress.
Graham Platner, the presumptive Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate from Maine, released an energy plan on Friday calling for a “national electricity rate freeze” to deal with high power prices, which many fear is in no small part from the scramble to build out new generation to meet new demand from data centers. Notably, however, the plan did not address data centers themselves.
In an interview the next day, the candidate revealed more of his views about the controversial technology, and told me his campaign is working on an artificial intelligence and data center-specific policy plan.
“I am extremely worried about, one, just AI as a general concept — the impact it’s going to have on the labor force, its impact on things like mass surveillance and manipulation of people and markets. Those things terrify me,” Platner told me. “We are dealing with a technology and a reality that we have done absolutely no regulatory preparation for, and that is utterly terrifying with something that seems to be as big and expensive and impactful as AI and the infrastructure necessary to power it.”
While he was careful in our conversation not to explicitly back a nationwide data center moratorium, he has previously given the idea his full-throated support. During a March 6 interview with environmental activists considering whether to endorse the candidate, Platner was asked whether he supports a “halt” to the fast-paced buildout of data centers. He was also queried on whether he would cosponsor legislation authored by Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that would temporarily ban new data center projects. (The interview occurred before the bill was introduced.)
“Yes and yes. That’s probably the easiest question I’m going to get asked today,” Platner replied, according to a recording of the internal conversation shared with me by Food and Water Action. FWA was one of the four organizations involved in the call, all of which endorsed his campaign Tuesday morning. Platner’s camp declined to comment on the video.
The stakes of Platner’s campaign couldn’t be higher for Democrats. The seat is one of a handful that will determine control of the U.S. Senate. Platner, a 41-year-old oyster farmer and first-time politician, is fighting against 73-year-old five-term incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins. While Maine voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 by about seven points and early polls indicate a competitive race that Platner could win, Collins has lasted this long in office for a reason.
Maine is a frontline battleground for modern energy politics in many ways. The northernmost New England state suffers some of the highest electricity rates in the country. The state has also seen some of the country’s steepest yearly cost increases; bills there have risen at least 8.3% just in the past year, according to Heatmap and MIT’s Electricity Price Hub. And prices are only expected to go higher.
Though the state has seen far less data center development than, say, Virginia or Indiana, the facilities have nevertheless become a hot issue for Mainers. Multiple towns have rejected large AI infrastructure projects over the past year. Earlier this year, the Democratically-controlled state legislature passed a statewide moratorium on new data center development. Governor Janet Mills — who was at the time vying with Platner for the Senate nomination — vetoed the moratorium, arguing for protections so one former mill town could still build a data center. She suspended her campaign soon after, conspicuous timing she blamed on dwindling finances.
“Her veto of the bill that was going to put stringent limits on AI centers was something that bothered a lot of people in the Democratic Party,” Jim Melcher, a political science professor at the University of Maine at Farmington, told me.
Meanwhile, Platner supporters “are the kind of people that are nervous about the effects on the environment from data centers, particularly electricity usage and the water usage,” he said. “It’s something Susan Collins hasn’t made much of.”
In addition to the activist groups, leading climate and labor organizations have also endorsed Platner, including Sierra Club’s Maine chapter and the AFL-CIO. (LCV Action Fund, the campaign finance arm of the League of Conservation Voters, told me it hasn’t formally endorsed Platner but is “working with his campaign” and “excited about the opportunity to elect a clean energy champion in Maine this year.”)
Some of the policies in the energy plan were table-stakes bipartisan stuff, like repealing the gas tax to deal with higher gas prices from the Iran War — something Trump says he wants to do, too. Other ideas were quintessential Maine, like a “strategic marine fuel reserve” to quell price increases during fishing season. Unsurprisingly for a Democrat, Platner supports permitting reform for renewable energy projects including solar and offshore wind.
But one big proposal caught my eye — a so-called “national electricity rate freeze.” According to the plan, a combination of “repurposed” fossil fuel funding and a new oil industry “windfall tax” would fund “low-cost energy infrastructure financing to any state that freezes or lowers electricity rates for four years.”
“Not only would this relieve Americans of the burden of Trump’s war,” the document stated, “but it would also reduce the political impetus on the part of Big Oil to continue to push America into costly Middle East interventions that just so happen to reap them billions in profit.”
Though it did not mention data centers explicitly, the proposal echoed a similar policy from New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, whose campaign pledge last year to freeze electricity rates was a direct response to data center impacts.
A moratorium on data center development would be a step far beyond taking action on electricity prices. When I asked about the Sanders proposal in our interview, Platner told me he supports “anything” that would slow down data center development. But on the general idea of temporarily banning these projects, he clarified, it “can’t be a moratorium for the sake of being a moratorium.”
“If we’re just slowing it down to assuage people’s fears but we’re not also building legislation at the exact same time, that kind of defeats the point,” he said. “What might be — I’m still a little skeptical — but what might be the single most transformational technology around productivity of our time, the idea that’s just going to happen and we don’t have any regulatory structures around it and we’re not even having the time to have the conversation while it gets built and utilized? That’s insane. Except that’s exactly what’s happening right now.”
Platner’s plainclothes populism came through when I asked why he thinks energy prices are going up. On the one hand, he said, “People need more energy and we’re not producing enough of it.” But he added: “It’s that, connected with corporate consolidation and greed. These two things together [are] what’s primarily driving how expensive energy is.”
Collins, meanwhile, has started sketching her own approach to energy in campaign season — promoting domestic natural gas. Speaking at a manufacturing business summit on Friday, Collins countermessaged with support for new pipeline infrastructure to carry gas from Pennsylvania up north to increase supply and hopefully lower prices. “We have the highest dependence in the country on home heating oil for our homes. Natural gas is cleaner, it’s cheaper, and it should be more available in our state,” she told reporters.
Collins has pursued her own reform efforts around AI, including a call to ban AI-generated depictions of candidates in election ads. Mainers haven’t gotten much from Collins about data centers, though. Neither her campaign nor her Senate office responded to requests for comment. “She really hasn't talked much about it,” Melcher said of Collins’ approach to energy and data centers.
Prior to releasing his energy plan, Platner took a Zohran Mamdani-like approach to climate and energy, focusing primarily on cost of living issues.
When he did speak on those subjects, it was with the same unapologetically anti-corporate approach that leads him to say companies like Google and Palantir “shouldn’t exist.” In a clip posted to YouTube in February, Platner outlines his position on fossil fuels, arguing that the federal government must “pull back” on financing for the industry in order to “buy us the future we need to deal with the problems of climate change.” The responsibility for addressing climate change rests not at the feet of individual citizens, he says, but rather with “the structures and the corporations that have made an immense amount of money out of destroying the planet.”
It remains to be seen whether Platner’s populist pugilism will prove successful for Democrats in a crucial race. Collins has a powerful perch atop the Senate Appropriations Committee, which allows her to argue on the trail that she’ll bring Mainers home more bacon.
Both Melcher and Mark Brewer, a political science professor at the University of Maine, told me they’re confident Platner is relying on the support of voters who want him to support a blanket data center ban. They each told me Collins’ relative silence on this topic is something Platner could use to his advantage, especially as energy prices continue to rise.
“They’ll probably both try to stake out a position that says we're clearly concerned about environmental issues and the cost of electricity,” Brewer said. “I don’t know if it’ll be at the top of the agenda, but at some point in this campaign, we’ll all be talking about AI data centers.”
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct the name of Food and Water Action.
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 founder of one-time sustainable apparel company Zady argues that policy is the only that can push the industry toward more responsible practices.
Everlane’s reported sale to Shein has left many shocked and saddened. How could the millennial “radical transparency” fashion brand be absorbed by the company that has become shorthand for ultra-fast fashion? While I feel for the team within the company that cares about impact reduction, I am not surprised by the news.
Everlane was built around a theory of change that was always too small for the problem it claimed to address — that better brands and more conscientious consumers could redirect a coal-powered, chemically intensive, globally fragmented industry.
The theory had real appeal, but it was wrong. Yes, it created some better products, but it was never going to remake the fashion industry on its own.
This is the tension at the center of sustainable fashion: Consumer demand can create a niche, even a meaningful one, but it cannot reconfigure the economics of global supply chains. What is needed are common sense laws that require all significant players to play by the same basic rules: reduce emissions, ban toxic chemicals, and maintain basic labor standards.
A company I used to run, Zady, was an early competitor to Everlane, and we were part of the same cultural and commercial moment. When we raised money, we told investors that while our Boomer parents may have thought that changing the world meant marching on the streets, we knew better. Change was going to happen through business.
The problem was that, while our market was growing, fast fashion was growing faster. There was a small but passionate group of consumers trying to buy better, but the overall system drove companies to produce more — more units, more emissions, more chemicals, and more waste.
The truth is that brands do not have direct control over the environmental impacts of their products. Most of the emissions and applications of chemicals are not happening at the brand level, but are instead in fiber production, textile mills, dyehouses, finishing facilities, and laundries, all of which the brands do not own. These factories operate on the thinnest of margins, and the open secret is that brands share these suppliers. No one brand wants to pay the cost for their shared factories to make the necessary upgrades to address their impacts. It’s a classic collective action problem.
Everlane’s capital story matters here, too. Unless a founder arrives with substantial personal wealth, outside investment is often the only path to scale. A company can remain small, independent, and slow-growing, but then it will likely be more expensive, more limited in reach, and less able to influence factories.
Everlane chose the other path. It took institutional growth capital from storied venture firms more closely associated with the digital revolution (including some that also fund clean energy technologies) and became a recognizable national brand. This obligated the company to operate inside a financial structure that leads inexorably toward some kind of exit, whether through a sale, an initial public offering, or some other liquidity event. Once that is the operating system, sustainability can remain a real and important goal, but it is not the final governing logic — investor return is.
“Radical transparency” was never enough to solve the fashion industry’s or venture capital model’s structural problems. Naming a factory is not the same as knowing what happens inside it. Publishing a supplier list does not tell us whether the facility runs on coal, whether wastewater is treated before being released back into the ecosystem, or whether restricted substances are present in dyes, finishes, trims, or coatings.
We already have many forms of transparency in American capitalism. Public companies, for example, are required to disclose executive compensation and the average pay of their workers; this transparency has done exactly nothing to close the pay gap. A disclosure is not the same thing as a legal standard.
So what does this mean for all of us? We don’t know exactly how Shein will absorb Everlane. I could guess that this is a Quince play for Shein, a way to access higher-end consumers that would otherwise never go on the Shein site.
What this tragicomedy reveals is that the idea born from Obama-era optimism, that the arc of history naturally bends toward justice and sustainability, was ephemeral.
The work to make this coal-powered industry sustainable will come from regulation. The technology to decarbonize is there, and unlike with aviation, for instance, it would cost the apparel industry a mere 2 cents per cotton t-shirt to get it done. But unlike with aviation, there are no requirements or incentives that these investments be made, so they are not.
The electric vehicle industry got a head start through direct subsidies and fuel efficiency standards. Apparel needs the same.
If you’re disappointed or angry about this turn of events, I ask you to channel those feelings into citizenship. Help pass the New York or California Fashion Acts that would require all large fashion companies that sell into the states to reduce their emissions and ban toxic chemicals. It’s currently legal to have lead on adult clothing, and Shein is consistently found to have it on their products. The industry is pushing back through their trade associations, so people power is needed so that legislators know it needs to be their priority.
But if you want to shop sustainably, you don’t need a brand. What is most helpful is understanding your own style and lifestyle — that’s how we know what we actually need and what we don’t. There are apps to help on that front. (I love Indyx, for instance, but there are others.)
The only way forward is together, and that means political solutions — emissions requirements, chemical requirements, labor requirements — not just consumer ones.
On Tesla’s solar factory, Bolivia’s protests, and China’s hydrogen motorcycle
Current conditions: The East Coast heat wave is exposing more than 80 million Americans to temperatures near or above 90 degrees Fahrenheit through at least the end of today, putting grid operators who run PJM Interconnection and the New York electrical systems on high alert • Thunderstorms are drenching the United States’ southernmost capital city, Pago Pago, American Samoa, and driving temperatures up near 90 degrees • Some 3,600 miles north in the Pacific, Guam’s capital city of Hagåtña is in the midst of a week of even worse lightning storms.
American investment in low-carbon energy and transportation has fallen for a second consecutive quarter, ending an unbroken growth trend stretching back to 2019. In the first three months of 2026, total investment in those green sectors reached $61 billion, according to a Rhodium Group analysis published this morning. That’s a 3% drop from the previous quarter — and a 9% decline from the first three months of 2025. Contrary to the Trump administration’s claims to be overseeing a resounding revival of U.S. manufacturing, investments in clean technologies fell for a sixth consecutive quarter to $8 billion, down a whopping 34% from the first quarter of 2025. With federal tax credits for electric vehicles eliminated, investments into battery manufacturing plunged 47% year over year. At the state level, there’s been some progress. Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Michigan, and New York all recorded their largest year-over-year increases over the past four quarters as clean electricity investments at least doubled in each state. “Wind was the primary driver in Virginia, New Mexico, New York, and Colorado; and solar in Michigan and Oklahoma,” the report noted. Sales of electric vehicles, at least on a worldwide level, are also gaining momentum: the International Energy Agency released a report this morning that forecast 30% of global new car sales will be battery electric this year.
The Tuesday night primary elections in six U.S. states, meanwhile, offered mixed results for clean energy supporters. Representative Thomas Massie, the dissident Republican from northern Kentucky who repeatedly broke with his party to criticize President Donald Trump and boasted of his off-grid home’s solar and battery system, lost by double digits to his White House-backed rival. Pennsylvania’s state Representative Chris Rabb, a progressive would-be “Squad” member whose platform mirrors the Green New Deal movement’s key policy demands, won the Democratic primary for the 3rd Congressional District spanning parts of Philadelphia.

During an appearance on Fox News last week, investor and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary vowed to release documents showing that opponents of the data center complex he proposed building in the Utah desert received funding from China, suggesting the protesters seeking to thwart his $100 billion megaproject were useful idiots in Beijing’s bid to hamper America’s technological progress. Now Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is echoing those claims. “It’s not organic and local,” he said Thursday on stage at the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference in Anchorage, where he was the keynote speaker. “Some of this is foreign-sourced dark money coming in.” The link between rising electricity prices and data centers, he said, was “specious.” He went on to cite a specific example of a small town in North Dakota, from when he served as the state’s governor, where a billion-dollar data center project ended up reducing costs for ratepayers by paying a premium to “buy down” the price households paid. It wasn’t immediately obvious which project he was referring to. But my best guess from some cursory research is that he may have meant the Applied Digital data center in Ellendale, along the southeastern border with South Dakota. In 2023, Prairie Public reported that the facility helped bring down transmission costs, reducing ratepayers’ bills by as much as $61 per year.
Burgum also suggested that Democrats were inflaming the data center issue for political gain. But opposition spans the political spectrum. Tom Steyer, the billionaire progressive running for governor of California, on Monday walked back a response to a candidate questionnaire published by Greenpeace, in which he said he supported a pause on data center development. In a statement to Politico, campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said that while Steyer wants to ensure protections for electricity prices and water resources, he does not support a temporary ban.
It appears Elon Musk is more likely to follow through on his promise to build enough manufacturing capacity to churn out 100 gigawatts of solar panels in the U.S. than to sell 500,000 Cybertrucks a year. Tesla has selected a site just outside Houston for a new factory that will expand the company’s capacity to churn out panels in its home market. That’s according to Electrek, which said it had independently confirmed a tip from a source pointing the publication to the Brookshire, Texas, site. The plant will be co-located with a battery factory that is already under construction at the same site.
“Any level of commitment to onshore the entire supply chain is a positive sign for American solar manufacturing and supply chain security,” Yogin Kothari, the chief strategy officer at the SEMA Coalition trade group that advocates for U.S. solar manufacturers against cheap Chinese imports, told me in a text message Tuesday night. “We can make solar panels here — we just have to have the commitment to do it.”
Sign up to receive Heatmap AM in your inbox every morning:
New Yorkers could receive $200 rebates from the state as part of Albany’s effort to soothe the pinch of rising electricity prices. On Tuesday, Newsday reported that the program would be part of the state budget agreement, which Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul and the Democrat-led legislature are still working to finalize. It wouldn’t be the first check the Hochul administration is sending out to voters as the former lieutenant governor, who initially came to power when former Governor Andrew Cuomo resigned over alleged sexual misconduct, runs for reelection in November. Last year, in a bid to combat the sting of inflation, the state issued rebates ranging from $150 to $400 depending on filing status and adjusted gross income in 2023.
Though it’s home to the world’s largest known reserves of lithium, landlocked Bolivia’s vast resources have largely remained undeveloped after two decades of rule by a left-wing government leery of foreign investment. The right-wing government that finally broke the Movimiento al Socialismo party’s grip on power in La Paz last year has sought to tap the so-called white gold in its salt flats, particularly as Washington looks for new sources of metals outside of supply chains China largely controls. New documents published Tuesday by the left-wing journalist Ollie Vargas appear to show the Bolivia’s Public Prosecutors Office’s warrants to arrest protesters and labor leaders connected to recent nationwide strikes on charges that include terrorism. “Bolivia’s government has ordered the arrest of all the main leaders of the indigenous movements and mineworkers unions,” Vargas wrote in a post on X. “They’re being charged for Terrorism for having organised the general strike against hunger. Strike continues regardless, now in day 7.” Clashes between law enforcement and protesters started last week.
China’s hydrogen industry is booming. Its sales of electrolyzers are beating out domestic manufacturers in Europe. Fuel cell vehicles are hitting the roads. Hydrogen refueling stations are opening. But the Chinese hydrogen sector with the highest volume of orders coming from overseas is for something simpler: Two-wheeled, hydrogen-powered motorcycles. That’s according to the latest China Hydrogen Bulletin, in which analyst Jian Wu reported from the 6th China International Consumer Products Expo on the island province of Hainan that a maker of the motorcycles had secured $300 million in overseas orders.
The maker of smart panels is tapping into unused grid capacity to help power the AI boom.
The race for artificial intelligence is a race for electricity. Data centers are scrambling to find enough power to run their servers, and when they do, they often face long waits while utilities upgrade the grid to accommodate the added demand.
In the eyes of Arch Rao, the CEO and founder of the smart electrical panel company Span, however, there is a glut of electricity waiting to be exploited. That’s because the electric grid is already oversized, designed to satisfy spikes in demand that occur for just a few hours each year. By shifting when and where different users consume power, it’s possible to squeeze far more juice out of the existing system, faster, and for a lot less money, than it takes to make it bigger.
This is what Span’s smart panel does — it manages the energy drawn by household appliances to help homeowners integrate electric vehicle chargers and heat pumps without triggering the need for electrical upgrades.
Now the age of AI has opened up new opportunities for the company. Last month, Span announced the launch of XFRA, a device that works with Span’s smart panel to power AI applications by tapping into the unused electrical capacity available to homes and businesses.
The company refers to XFRA as a “distributed data center.” It’s sort of like if you chopped up a full-scale data center into washing machine-sized boxes and plugged them into peoples’ homes; Span’s smart panel then acts as a conductor, orchestrating XFRA’s energy consumption to take advantage of unused power capacity without stepping on the home’s other energy needs. In exchange for hosting one of these XFRA “nodes,” Span will offer homeowners and tenants deeply discounted, if not free electricity and internet service.
The idea sounded audacious, verging on fantastical, until I watched the economics play out in real time at one of Span’s labs in a warehouse south of San Francisco. Ryan Harris, the company’s chief revenue officer, showed me an XFRA prototype — a metal box about the size of a freezer chest stuffed with Dell servers and Nvidia liquid-cooled GPUs. Span was renting out the processing power from this node and six others to AI users through an online marketplace. On a computer screen next to the unit, a dashboard showed the revenue flowing in from the fleet — $500 over the past 24 hours, and more than $21,000 in the previous three weeks. The numbers continued to tick up as I stood there.
When I first planned to write about Span, XFRA was still a secret. I reached out because its smart panel business, which debuted in 2019, seemed to suddenly take off.
In February, Span announced that PG&E, the largest utility in California, would be installing its devices in thousands of homes beginning this summer. Then in March, the company revealed a partnership with Eaton, one of the biggest legacy electrical equipment companies in the world. Eaton is investing $75 million in Span and will begin selling co-branded electrical panels to its extensive network of distributors, installers, and homebuilders later this year. With the launch of XFRA, Span is becoming something like a utility itself. To date, the company has raised more than $400 million, and will soon close a nearly $200 million Series C.
Of course it will take more than smart electrical panels to serve data centers’ soaring power needs. In this era of unprecedented energy demand growth, building a bigger electrical system is unavoidable — but the size of the investment, and the cost impacts on everyday electricity customers, are malleable. Several recent studies have shown just how big the opportunity is to get more energy out of our existing infrastructure if the entire system can become a bit more flexible.
Last year, Duke University researchers found that on average, the U.S. is utilizing only about half of our electricity generation capacity. Nationwide, they estimated, the grid could accommodate at least 76 gigawatts of new load — close to the total generation capacity installed in California — without having to upgrade the electrical system or build new power plants, so long as those new end-users were somewhat flexible with when and how much electricity they used.
More recently, in a report commissioned by a coalition called Utilize, of which Span is a member, the Brattle Group found that milking just 10% more from our existing grid infrastructure on an annual basis could reduce electricity rates for all end users by 3.4%. Utilities can sell more energy, faster, and spread the fixed costs of running the system across more customers.
What all this meant in practice did not fully click for me until I saw a demonstration of Span’s panel at the lab a few weeks ago. Harris, the CRO, led me to a free-standing wall lined with household appliances, a stripped-down version of an all-electric home. A minisplit heat pump whirred while a high-speed electric vehicle charger was juicing up a Rivian parked on the warehouse floor. A TV screen displayed the amount of power going to each device, as measured by Span’s electric panel.
Together, the heat pump and charger were using about two-thirds of the electric capacity of this demonstration home, which was running on a 100-amp utility service connection. The charger alone was using 48 amps.
The owner of this theoretical home would typically not have been allowed to install such an energy-intensive EV charger without upgrading to 200-amp service. Electric codes require that residential electrical systems have room for the rare scenario that a home’s major appliances all run at once, for safety reasons. Otherwise, the occupants might accidentally try to draw more power than their utility connection can deliver, overheat their wires, and start a fire. 100-amp connections are exceedingly common in homes designed to use gas or propane for cooking and heating, but once you replace those appliances with electric versions, or add an EV charger, you start to push the limit.
A service upgrade to 200 amps can take many months and cost several thousands of dollars. The utility typically has to run new wiring to the house, and might even have to augment the grid infrastructure serving the neighborhood.
Span’s smart panel offers an alternative.
“Shall we turn on some load?” Harris said. An engineer on Span’s product team turned on the demo home’s electric water heater, and I watched as the chart on the screen adjusted. The water heater jumped from zero to 22 amps, while the EV charger’s amperage decreased from 48 to 33. When the engineer switched on the clothes dryer, drawing 24 amps, the EV charger’s amperage dropped further.
The electrical panel was tracking how much power was flowing to each of its circuits and throttling the EV charger in response. When the team dialed up the electric stove to heat a pot of water, the EV charger shut off altogether.
Next, Harris requested a boost to the “garage” sub-panel, simulating a hot tub or some power tools kicking on. Soon, the water heater shut off, too. “You have 50 gallons of hot water, so it’s not going to have any negative impact on the customer in that moment,” Harris told me. He showed me an alert that appeared on the Span phone app notifying the homeowner that the system was temporarily limiting power to the EV charger and water heater in order to power other devices.
Users can choose which appliances the system bumps first. While some devices, such as EV chargers, water heaters, and heat pumps, have the ability to be ramped up and down, others will simply shut off.
At $2,550 excluding labor for the smallest, most basic smart panel, and just over $4,000 for the biggest one, Span is more expensive than the average dumb panel, which can come in under $1,000. Depending on the home and the complexity of a service upgrade, however, it’s often cheaper to install Span than to move to 200 amps. It’s also almost certainly faster.
Span’s first generation product couldn’t do any of this. Initially, the company’s value proposition was just to give people more control over their energy usage. The original Span panel gave homeowners with batteries the ability to select which devices they wanted to power during an outage and ensure they didn’t accidentally lose charge on non-essentials. The company had to build an initial customer base and validate the technology in the real world, Rao told me, before it could earn the credibility (and the capital) to deploy the fully realized version of the product.
In 2023, Span debuted “PowerUp,” the software that makes what I witnessed at the lab possible. With PowerUp, Span’s smart panel went from being a cool gadget to a money-saver, helping homeowners skip utility service upgrades. The success of PowerUp opened the door for Span to engage with larger partners, starting with homebuilders.
“We had to demonstrate that we were safe and scalable in the home retrofit category to then get homebuilders — who are typically very, very cost sensitive, are not often at the tip of the spear in terms of technology adoption — to say, this is a proven technology, and it saves you money,” said Rao.
Residential developers face similar problems as homeowners, but on a bigger scale. While 200-amp connections have become more standard over the past few decades, new electrical codes that require either fully electric or electric-ready construction are pushing the limits.
“Now the load calculations will put them at 300 or 400 amps of service per home,” Rao told me. “Multiply that by a community of 500 homes, and suddenly you’ve doubled the amount of interconnection you need to bring from the utility.”
This raises the cost of development, and it can also increase the wait time — potentially by years — to get hooked up to the grid. Again, Span offers an alternative. To date, nearly half of the top 20 homebuilders across the U.S. have used the company’s technology, Rao told me. More broadly, its electrical panels have been installed in tens of thousands of homes in all 50 states.
I should note that Span is not the only solution on the market for homeowners or homebuilders to avoid service upgrades — the main alternative is just choosing appliances that don’t use so much power. There are water heaters, clothes dryers, and EV chargers on the market that run on lower amperage, and startups like Copper and Impulse Labs are making stoves with integrated batteries that enable them to do the same. There are also Span-adjacent technologies such as smart circuit splitters that let you plug two power-hungry devices, like an EV charger and a clothes dryer, into the same circuit, and the device will safely modulate power between the two.
“You can hack your way around both problems — one, of a panel upgrade, and two, a Span upgrade, which is also expensive — with cheaper solutions,” Brian Stewart, the co-founder of Electrify Now, a group that provides education and advocacy on home electrification, told me. “But it’s less elegant, let’s just say, than the Span solution.”
Though he started at the home level, Rao has always had his sights set on a much bigger customer — utilities. Several Span executives I spoke to referenced an “infamous” Powerpoint slide from the early days of the company with a bar chart that showed how the company would scale in three phases. First came “back-up,” referring to Span’s initial home battery management product. Next was “power-up,” the software that enabled electrification by avoiding service upgrades. The third was “fleet.”
The same safety principles that trigger service upgrades at individual homes also apply upstream at the neighborhood level. For example, the size of a neighborhood’s transformer, the equipment that changes the voltage of the electricity as it moves along the grid, depends on the combined amperage of the homes it serves. If all those homes are installing EV chargers or heat pumps or whatever else and starting to use more electricity, the utility will have to upgrade the transformer — a cost that gets spread across all of its customers. If a critical mass of the homes have Span panels, however, they can avoid this.
Partnering with major homebuilders earned Span “the right to sit at the table with utilities,” Rao told me, “and say, look, we’ve done this at the home level, at the community level. Imagine if you could do this at the grid level, where the benefit doesn’t just accrue to individual customers or home builders, it can accrue to all rate payers?”
I got a taste of what this looks like back at the lab, where Harris showed me Span’s “fleet capability.” There were actually three demonstration homes set up on the warehouse floor, and Harris showed me how a utility could coordinate a response across multiple Span panels to keep a neighborhood within its safe energy limits.
Imagine it’s a really hot day, and the utility is on the verge of having to institute rolling blackouts. Instead, it can implement what’s called a dynamic service rating event, sending a signal out to the Span panels served by a given transformer to reduce their electrical limit from 100 amps to 60, for example. Rather than the entire neighborhood losing power, a few homes would see their EV charging cut back or their thermostats go up by a few degrees. Of course, not everybody will want to give this kind of control to the utility; customers often cite concerns about comfort and convenience as reasons they are skeptical of these kinds of programs. When I asked Harris whether participating would require that Span customers opt in, he said it was more likely to be opt-out.
Span has done several pilot projects testing this capability. Installing electrical panels is too complex for utilities to do en masse, though. So the company developed Span Edge, a smaller version of its panel that can be installed at a building’s electricity meter. It does all the same things the larger electrical panel does, without needing to serve as the home’s central nervous system. It still enables homeowners to avoid service upgrades by throttling EV chargers or whatever other devices are hooked up to it, but it’s much simpler to install.
This is the device that the California utility PG&E will begin deploying in homes later this summer. The company will offer Span Edge to homeowners who are installing appliances that might trigger an electrical upgrade, or are considering doing so in the future, through a program called PanelBoost. It’s entirely voluntary, and while participants will have to pay for installation, the panel itself comes gratis.
“This is the first time that there’s a large-scale direct purchase of Span equipment by a utility,” Alex Pratt, Span’s vice president of business development, told me. “This has long been the North Star for the company.”
Paul Doherty, the manager for clean energy and innovation communications at PG&E, told me the company saw Span Edge as a “win, win, win for PG&E, for our customers, and for the environment.” It enables customers to electrify their homes more quickly and affordably, and for PG&E to sell more electrons without raising rates.
“We’re very bullish about the opportunity for this technology and the benefit that it will bring for the grid and for our customers here in California,” Doherty told me.
Rao sees XFRA as a natural evolution of Span’s basic premise. The company has found that 98% of its customers that have 200-amp service connections have about 80 amps available at any given time, Harris told me. Hosting an XFRA node enables homeowners to monetize that unused capacity.
To start, Span is prioritizing getting XFRA into newly built homes, where the developer handles customer acquisition and installing at scale is straightforward since every home is roughly the same. The company has partnered with the developer PulteGroup to roll out a 100-home pilot program for a total of over 1.2 megawatts of compute capacity. The partners have not specified where it will be yet or whether there will be a single offtaker for the compute.
In the longer term, Rao told me, XFRA could be the “unlock” that makes electrification more affordable for people. “There is a utopian end state in my mind where XFRA allows more of our customers to get free energy, free backup, and free internet,” he said.
First, the company will have to find out if anyone is actually willing to let XFRA into their home. During my final conversation with the CEO, after my lab visit, he showed me the infamous slide forecasting the company’s growth from “back-up to power-up to fleet.” The y-axis on the chart showed the number of homes per year the company could address at each stage. The bar for back-up systems landed at 5,000 per year, Power-up came to nearly 100,000. Suffice it to say, Span hasn’t hit these numbers.
“Are you where you want to be today?” I asked him.
Of course, he wasn’t going to say no. “We have contracts in place for hundreds of thousands of homes already with utilities,” he said. “Right now our focus is on execution — delivering on that scale, as opposed to finding that scale. It’s a deployed product, it’s not a downloadable app, so it takes time to physically deploy hundreds of thousands of endpoints. So I think that scale is coming.”