Georgia regulators approve massive power grid expansion to serve data centers

Georgia regulators unanimously approved a massive expansion of the state’s power grid Friday, approving Georgia Power’s request for nearly 10,000 megawatts of new energy capacity despite concerns over transparency and the potential financial risk to ratepayers. The vote by the Public Service Commission greenlights a plan that relies heavily on new fossil fuel infrastructure, with […]

Jennifer Whitfield, an attorney with Southern Environmental Law Center, asks the Georgia Public Service Commission on Dec. 19, 2025, in Atlanta to consider a motion for intervenors to have more information from the agreement between Georgia Power and the commission staff. Alander Rocha/Georgia Recorder

Georgia regulators unanimously approved a massive expansion of the state’s power grid Friday, approving Georgia Power’s request for nearly 10,000 megawatts of new energy capacity despite concerns over transparency and the potential financial risk to ratepayers.

The vote by the Public Service Commission greenlights a plan that relies heavily on new fossil fuel infrastructure, with five new natural gas plants to meet surging demand from the growth of data centers. While supporters argued that the expansion is needed to keep growing the state’s economy, the hearing was dominated by debate over whether the utility has provided enough evidence that an agreement between commission staff and Georgia Power allows at least $8.50 per month in “downward pressure” on residential rates.

Following the vote, Georgia Power celebrated the decision, saying that the new revenue from large customers will directly benefit families.

“We know every dollar counts. This plan means more money stays in your pocket while we power Georgia’s future,” said Georgia Power’s chief Kim Greene. “Unlike any other market in the country, we’re doing things differently here in Georgia to capture and serve this projected unprecedented growth. Large energy users are paying more so families and small businesses can pay less, and that’s a great result for Georgians.”

Commission Chair Jason Shaw said after the hearing that the commission did its “duty” to ensure companies coming to Georgia have power.

“Our job is to deal with growth,” he said.

But opponents of the power expansion criticized commissioners for potentially failing to protect residential customers from the cost of building massive power infrastructure largely to power data centers, which includes the addition of five new methane gas-burning units at plants Bowen, McIntosh and Wansley. Critics have argued that there is no guarantee the forecasted demand will come to fruition. 

“Today, commissioners chose to put this $60 billion risk on the backs of everyday Georgians, not Georgia Power. They had the chance to meaningfully protect existing customers, and they did not,” said Bob Sherrier, a staff attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, in a statement.

Critics also questioned the morality of the decision in light of the utility’s financial performance. Southern Company, Georgia Power’s parent company, reported earning $1.7 billion between July and September of this year, an increase from the same period last year.

“We’re being asked to risk our health and wellbeing so Georgia Power shareholders can get richer. It’s immoral and unjust,” said Codi Norred, executive director of Georgia Interfaith Power and Light.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Abe Scarr, energy and utilities program director for Georgia PIRG, which is a public interest research group, said that if the projected demand from data centers fails to materialize or cover costs, ratepayers will face long-term consequences.

“If the demand doesn’t show up, if data centers fail to cover their costs, and when gas prices spike again, Georgia Power customers will be left holding the bag for decades to come,” Scarr said.

Environmental advocacy organizations filed a motion Wednesday aimed at delaying the decision until Georgia Power provided the data behind its projections, specifically the math supporting a promise that the new industrial usage would help lower residential rates.

“This motion right now is not about whether their math is right or wrong. It’s about showing their work,” said Jennifer Whitfield, an attorney with SELC, to the commission. Without seeing the calculations, she said the public is forced to accept Georgia Power’s promises on faith.

The motion to delay was ultimately denied Friday. Brandon Marzo, representing Georgia Power, dismissed the interveners’ concerns, telling the commissioners that Whitfield was “confused by the facts” and that the necessary information was already available in the record.

Marzo framed the massive capacity request as an urgent response to economic expansion.

“The state is growing, commissioners,” Marzo said. “The load is coming.”

He insisted that the influx of large industrial customers would benefit residential ratepayers by spreading costs over a larger base. He said that Georgia Power’s projected $8.50 monthly savings for the average customer.

Commission staff came to an agreement with Georgia Power but warned that the years 2029 through 2031 would be critical for monitoring progress to ensure that Georgia Power’s promised $8.50 “downward pressure” pledge would materialize.

“It will be the responsibility of this commission to observe, to engage and if needed to act,” said commission attorney Chris Collado.

Environmental and consumer advocacy groups remained skeptical. Sherrier reminded the commission of past promises that ultimately fell short, saying that similar promises were made that the costs of the Plant Vogtle nuclear expansion would not be passed down to ratepayers. He advocated for the staff’s original recommendation of “conditional certification,” which would have approved resources only after contracts with new customers were signed.

“If they’re wrong and the load doesn’t commit, conditional certification ensures that we don’t have to pay for those resources. We don’t have to pay this round,” Sherrier said.

Curt Thompson of the Sierra Club echoed these concerns, saying that “no amount of alleged downward pressure on rates can ensure that the customer bills won’t go up.”