정책 입안자와 전력사들은 데이터센터가 전력망 비용의 적정 분담을 충당하도록 보장하는 프레임워크를 추진하고 있다.

Lynn LaMance, 49, turns off the air conditioning at night, unplugs appliances when not in use, and barbecues outdoors whenever possible to avoid running her electric stove. These habits are part of her personal effort to minimize monthly electricity costs despite rising per-unit rates. In recent years, LaMance paid roughly $200 for electricity during peak summer months. This year, her August bill reached $347. “It felt like I was paying another car payment,” said LaMance, who lives in Dayton, Ohio, with her daughter, their cat Pete, and an estimated 90 houseplants.

Many Americans share this financial strain. According to a Columbia University white paper, electricity rates increased twice as fast as inflation in 2025. Simultaneously, the development of large-scale data centers for training and running artificial intelligence systems has surged. These facilities, packed with computing hardware, can consume as much electricity as entire cities, prompting residents to question whether data centers are driving up their utility bills.

The Trump administration’s answer is no, citing the White House’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge. This agreement, signed by major technology companies, utilities, and state governments, aims to prevent residents from bearing higher costs due to data center expansion. However, implementing electric policy at the state level proves far more complex than the pledge’s straightforward language suggests. Straight Arrow analyzed filings with state utility regulatory bodies and interviewed consumer advocacy groups nationwide. In nearly every instance, we found significant gray areas regarding who funds new power infrastructure when a data center arrives.

In Arkansas, a 2025 state law introduced a dedicated line item on utility bills—approximately 4% of a typical customer’s total charge—to fund power plants under construction, coinciding with data centers’ growing demand for new generation capacity. In Mississippi, an Amazon data center led Entergy Mississippi customers to pay roughly $10 per month for new infrastructure, according to a May study by Synapse Energy Economics. In Virginia, a 2024 report from the state’s Joint Legislative and Audit Review Commission projected that Dominion Energy customers could face monthly increases of $14 to $37 by 2040 as Northern Virginia’s data center hub expands.

Nationwide, backlash against data centers and demands for consumer protection have intensified, culminating in the White House initiative earlier this year. Yet, how the pledge will be implemented remains uncertain. “By requiring data centers to pay for their own power, water and utilities, the President has ensured the American people never foot the bill for private companies’ profits,” White House spokesperson Davis Ingle told Straight Arrow.

The pledge outlines several commitments: data center developers must build and finance new power generation, pay for the transmission infrastructure to deliver that power, continue payments even if they do not utilize all initially planned electricity, invest in local jobs and workforce development, and strengthen the grid by sharing private backup power during periods of energy scarcity. Major tech firms including Meta, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Oracle, OpenAI, and Elon Musk’s xAI signed the pledge, alongside dozens of smaller data center operators. Twenty-three state governors and all of the largest investor-owned electric utilities in the U.S. also endorsed it.

Despite these signatures, the pledge carries no legal weight. It is not a congressional statute nor a binding contract. Even the White House acknowledges that enforcement falls to states, grid operators, and independent bodies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). “It’s just a promise,” said Tom Content, executive director of the Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin, the nation’s oldest consumer advocacy group established by a state legislature. “Listen to what they say, but always watch carefully what they put in writing and what they commit to in the fine print.”

“A promise is only as good as the details in the docket of a public service commission,” noted Daniel Tait, research and communications director at the Energy and Policy Institute, a nonprofit utility watchdog. When large utilities seek funding for major infrastructure projects like power plants or solar farms, they must obtain approval from state regulatory agencies—typically public service or public utilities commissions—to recover upfront investments through customer rates. As operating expenses shift, utilities must also secure state approval to adjust rates accordingly.

“In utility regulation, we have a very core principle, and that is that the cost causers are the cost bearers,” said David Lapp, Maryland’s People’s Counsel, a state-appointed attorney representing consumers. Utility dockets often span thousands of pages. Utilities present their case for new infrastructure, while interested parties may intervene with supporting or opposing testimony. Commissioners, who are either elected or appointed by state officials, ultimately determine whether projects serve the public interest.

“There are two important phases of a rate case,” Content explained. “One is how big is the pie, so how much is what they call the revenue requirement for the utility. But then the second phase of the case is always how do you divvy up the pie.” Each customer class—residential, commercial, and industrial—pays distinct rates based on how commissions allocate costs. Data centers are now testing a regulatory framework originally designed without Big Tech’s massive investment scale in mind.

This scrutiny arrives amid widespread rate hikes, though the Columbia paper attributes primary drivers to regional factors like storm preparedness and recovery, fuel costs, and regulatory mandates. Rate increases frequently appear on the distribution portion of bills—the cost to maintain lower-voltage, local power lines winding through cities. In November 2025, the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio approved a rate increase for AES Ohio customers, which includes LaMance’s provider, Dayton Power and Light Company. Consequently, the average customer’s bill rose by 9%, sparking neighborhood frustration. LaMance noted that regardless of individual conservation efforts, monthly payments continue climbing. She has already switched to energy-efficient bulbs and considered unplugging all devices except when actively in use.

This year, the commission is reviewing another rate increase proposal from AES Ohio. As president of Dayton’s Fairview Neighborhood Association, LaMance began emailing neighbors to guide them through submitting comments to state regulators. “I always think things should be better, and I try to encourage people to also speak up,” she said. She expressed particular concern for retired neighbors living on fixed incomes. At a crowded July town hall addressing the rate hike, LaMance observed that “every demographic you could think of” opposed the increase. She left feeling that representatives from both AES Ohio and the Ohio PUC failed to adequately justify the necessity of the hike. AES Ohio did not respond to Straight Arrow’s inquiries.

In regulatory filings reviewed by Straight Arrow, AES Ohio cites a $170 million shortfall in covering existing distribution grid costs for 2027, explicitly noting that data centers are not a driver of those expenses. “Generally we see that data centers really aren’t causing a lot of costs” on the distribution grid, said Maureen Willis, Ohio Consumers’ Counsel. “But there’s a lot of different