The bipartisan Ratepayer Protection Act, intended to shield consumers from soaring electricity prices amid the datacenter boom, would fail to meaningfully protect the public, consumer advocates warn.
The bill, backed by some in big tech such as Microsoft, moved through a House subcommittee in mid-June, but a full committee vote scheduled for July 1 was delayed.
Its measures are largely voluntary, meaning state utility commissions that set electric rates can ignore the law altogether.
The legislative package also includes benefits for big tech that would speed datacenter construction, prioritize grid connection, and open loopholes allowing companies to claim they are paying for their own power, said Jim Walsh, policy director with Food and Water Watch.
“They’re taking care of utilities and taking care of datacenters and the bill is posing as a consumer protection measure when in reality it will increase costs on consumers across the board,” Walsh said.
Rising Costs and Limited Protections
Regions with higher numbers of datacenters have seen electricity costs spike by 267% over the past five years.
About 200 new datacenters have been built in the last three years to house AI infrastructure, with dozens more proposed across the US.
The Federal Reserve found an average 6% increase in wholesale prices related to datacenters, and as high as 50% in some areas.
Beyond driving up residential electric costs, the centers often use high volumes of water, pollute, strain local infrastructure, and inflict other costs on the public.
The Ratepayer Protection Act does not consider those cumulative costs and only addresses “a very narrow piece of utility costs,” Walsh said.
Advocates also allege the bill takes the wrong approach to consumer protection.
“Congress is treating datacenter buildout like it’s inevitable, when lawmakers actually have the power to slow it down and prioritize protecting our communities, air, water and wallets,” said Camden Weber, an energy policy specialist at the Center for Biological Diversity.
One provision would reduce National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) evaluations for transmission lines or other infrastructure, speeding up datacenter development.
Connecting to the nation’s energy grid can delay datacenter projects by as much as 12 years, so big tech is increasingly building their own gas plants or clean energy infrastructure.
But the centers still use natural gas pipelines and massive quantities of fuel, driving up costs for individual consumers.
“These bills make datacenter investments less risky for utilities, which only accelerates buildout at a time when communities across the country are calling for more scrutiny,” Weber said.
Walsh pointed to Georgia, where some regulators failed to protect water resources and initially did not charge a datacenter for 30 million gallons of water use.
Most new datacenters use PFAS “forever chemicals” for cooling, which likely pollute the surrounding area and present a greenhouse gas threat, but no emission standards exist.
“We don’t have the regulatory regime to regulate datacenters, but we’re fast-tracking the projects,” Walsh said.
The provisions that do rein in costs are mere suggestions for state regulators, who are already accused of putting datacenter needs first and failing to protect residential ratepayers.
“They’re misleading the public and making it sound like they’re doing more than they are,” Walsh said.
