|
| Fifteen billion dollars and 16 buildings on a brownfield site in Lawrence County served by Penn Power is a serious PJM load event, not a press release. Stonebridge has filed for preliminary planning consent with two townships and the county, which means the local entitlement process is real and moving. The Penn Power service territory sits in the western end of PJM, where transmission constraints and queue depth are different animals than northern Virginia, and that is both the opportunity and the risk: fewer competing interconnection requests, but also thinner transmission infrastructure and a utility with limited large-load precedent at this scale. The missing disclosure is IT capacity, which means the actual MW ask has not been filed with PJM yet. Watch for the interconnection filing, because that is where the project becomes real or stalls. Remediation of the former American Cyanamid site adds a timeline risk that most greenfield campus projects do not carry. |
| Pennsylvania requiring annual energy usage reports from data centers and directing PJM to give state regulators additional demand forecast visibility is the beginning of a regulatory feedback loop that will slow approvals over time. It does not stop projects already in the queue, but it creates a new disclosure burden and, more importantly, it gives state officials the data infrastructure to justify future constraints. Developers filing in Penn Power and PPL territory should expect this reporting requirement to become a negotiating lever in local political approvals within the next two years. |
| The largest solar-plus-storage project to break ground in the US carries a Google VPPA for 100 percent of initial output, and the scale matters: 1.6 GW of solar and 2 GWh of storage at first phase, scaling to 2.5 GW and 2.9 GWh. The VPPA structure means Google is not taking delivery directly; it is buying environmental attributes and synthetic fixed-price exposure while the electrons go to the broader MISO market. Hyperscaler procurement pressure at this scale is not abating, and this will not be the last gigawatt-class VPPA out of the sector this year. |
| A Mississippi PSC commissioner publicly questioning whether Entergy Mississippi should remain in MISO is a credible policy threat, not a fringe position, and it is directly tied to MISO's pending transmission cost-sharing reforms. Entergy Mississippi's load sits in MISO South, which has long been a net importer of costs from MISO Midwest's build-out, and the Midwest-South transfer constraint makes the value proposition of MISO membership genuinely complicated for southern utilities. If this gets traction at the commission level, the consequences for MISO's footprint and transmission planning assumptions would be significant. Watch whether Entergy Mississippi's management responds formally, because that response will tell you whether this is a negotiating posture or a serious exit inquiry. |
| A 20-year PPA with Clean Power Alliance for 200 MW solar plus 800 MWh of storage, targeting May 2029 commercial operations, is routine contract execution in the CAISO market. The domestically manufactured storage component choice is worth tracking for ITC adder exposure, but nothing about this deal changes the California storage procurement picture. Avantus continues to execute, and CPA continues to lock fixed-price offtake. |
| When DataBank is reportedly being shopped at a price approaching $25 billion for a majority stake and EdgeCore is simultaneously in market, you are watching the private infrastructure capital cycle crest. DigitalBridge and Partners Group are not selling because demand is weak; they are selling because valuations are at levels where the exit math works for their fund cycles. The more important signal for developers and IPPs is what these transactions imply about the buyer pool: pension funds, sovereign wealth, and large infrastructure funds absorbing data center operating companies at these multiples means the capital markets are still wide open for the sector, and that keeps development pipelines funded. The question that will determine whether these deals close at headline prices is power certainty: how much of each portfolio's forward capacity is contracted, and how much depends on interconnection positions that have not yet cleared. |
| One hundred and four large-load tariffs across 37 states means the era of a data center negotiating bespoke service agreements with each utility is effectively over. The tariff is now the instrument, and the tariff terms, cost allocation methodology, minimum load factors, and curtailment rights are where the real negotiation happens. Developers who are still focused on the headline rate and not the tariff structure are leaving risk on the table. |
EL26-67-000 · PJM · cost allocation · 3 filings FERC initiates Section 206 proceeding against PJM, all commissioners concurring separately |
ER26-1323-002 · SPP · large load SPP compliance filing for conditional high-impact large load service tariff provisions Filed 2026-07-06 20260706-5174 › |
ER26-2698-000 · NYISO · queue reform NYISO supplemental filing on interconnection process improvements affecting queue procedures Filed 2026-07-08 20260708-5191 › |
EL25-49-002 · PJM · large load FERC issues rehearing/clarification order on PJM proceeding, likely large-load or cost policy matter. Filed 2026-06-18 20260618-3103 › |
ER26-2514-000 · SPP · queue reform FERC accepts SPP generator interconnection procedure revisions to Attachment V tariff. Filed 2026-06-29 20260629-3054 › |
ER26-2771-000 · PJM · queue reform FERC denied Chestnut Run Energy LLC's waiver request in PJM (ER26-2771), a process-integrity ruling on interconnection queue timing. Filed 2026-07-02 20260702-3059 › |
EL26-68-000 · n/a · large load Data Center Coalition intervenes, signaling major data center power policy proceeding. Filed 2026-07-09 20260709-5248 › |
EL26-69-000 · n/a · large load Data Center Coalition intervenes, signaling large-load policy dispute at FERC. Filed 2026-07-09 20260709-5275 › |