Numerous East Coast states are counting on offshore wind projects to power tens of millions of homes and to help them transition to cleaner energy.

But putting wind turbines at sea requires the cooperation of a powerful landlord: the federal government. Soon, that government will be led by President-elect Donald Trump, who has frequently disparaged offshore wind and said he will “make sure that ends on Day 1.”

In the eight states that have passed legal mandates to reach certain amounts of offshore wind power, Trump’s second term threatens those timelines.

“This is absolutely going to create problems for how we’re going to meet our emissions goals and the energy needs for the state,” said Massachusetts state Sen. Jamie Eldridge, a Democrat who serves as vice chair on the legislative Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources.

For many East Coast states that lack a large land base for extensive onshore development, offshore wind in federal ocean waters is central to their plans for a power supply that doesn’t use fossil fuels. Lawmakers in Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia have established mandates requiring their states to produce certain amounts of offshore wind power in the coming years. Other states have passed laws to allow for offshore wind to be added to their grids or set nonbinding planning targets to prepare for the industry’s development.

State leaders say they will continue to pursue offshore wind but realize there may be delays during the next four years.

In the meantime, some say they will continue to build out the needed electrical grid and ports to get ready for turbines, in hopes of speeding up offshore wind once Trump’s term ends. Others say they may need to consider building more onshore energy projects, including wind and solar, in the next few years to meet near-term climate goals.

“That’s something states will have to take into account,” said Dylan McDowell, executive director with the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators, a collaborative nonpartisan forum for state lawmakers. “Is [offshore wind] still feasible, or do there need to be conversations about solar, [onshore] wind, geothermal, other energy sources that could be put into the mix to help meet those goals? There’s more questions than there are answers right now.”

While a handful of offshore wind projects have already started construction or been completed, many more are in various stages of permitting or awaiting lease auctions held by the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. Industry experts say the Trump administration could deny permits, cancel pending leases and halt further auctions. It could also threaten the industry’s financing by denying clean energy tax credits.

In an extreme scenario, the bureau could even side with opponents who have brought legal challenges against projects that already have been approved and retract permits issued under the Biden administration. Trump’s ability to unwind the moves made under President Joe Biden is “underappreciated,” said Timothy Fox, a vice president at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, an independent research firm.

Trump has repeated claims that offshore wind turbines are a major cause of whale mortality — an assertion that scientists say is false. Many of the groups raising concerns about whales to oppose offshore wind are funded by oil and gas donors.

Trump’s transition team did not respond to an interview request before publication.

Offshore wind also has drawn local opposition from coastal residents who fear it will worsen their views and from fishermen who worry projects could block access to key fishing areas. Meanwhile, some Republicans have pointed to the wind industry’s recent financial struggles to argue that it will increase ratepayers’ bills.

“[T]he business model for these projects has fallen well short of projections to the degree that those wind energy developers are either halting construction or asking the government for additional subsidies to make up for projected cost increases,” four Maryland Republican senators wrote to Democratic Gov. Wes Moore in April, unsuccessfully urging him to veto a financing package to boost offshore wind in that state.

Counting on offshore wind

States’ offshore wind goals were already facing difficulties. Numerous projects were canceled or delayed last year as inflation and supply chain issues raised costs dramatically. Now, political headwinds could cause greater delays.

“Offshore wind might not be a viable option over the next four years,” said Fox, the energy analyst. “Unlike a lot of other resources, offshore wind is reliant on a federal review process because these projects are being deployed in federal waters.”

Offshore wind turbines currently provide only a negligible amount of power to the United States. But a handful of projects currently under construction will soon raise that number to 4 gigawatts (1 gigawatt can power about 750,000 homes). And much more is on the way.

Developers of other projects are working to finalize financing or permits, and wind companies are awaiting federal lease auctions that will open up new areas for development. In total, the project pipeline for offshore wind exceeds 80 gigawatts, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory — enough to consistently power more than 60 million homes. The incoming administration could thwart most of that production by denying development permits or leases in federal waters.

East Coast states don’t have a viable way to meet their clean energy goals without that offshore production, said Maryland state Del. Lorig Charkoudian, a Democrat who authored a law last year that increased the state’s offshore wind targets.

“We’ll continue to support the ongoing development of offshore wind until we have to make other adjustments,” she said.

The Maryland law mandates that the state produce 8.5 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2031. Developers of a trio of projects off the state’s coast, totaling 1.7 gigawatts, are working to secure permits and financing, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. And the state is counting on future lease auctions by federal regulators to prompt more development.

Charkoudian acknowledged that Trump could threaten those efforts, but she said the state remains committed to its offshore wind plans. She noted that Maryland is working to improve its electrical grid so that offshore wind projects can “land” their power, an effort that will continue.

“Even if other things do get slowed down, this will make things move faster whenever it can get moving again,” she said.

Nick Guariglia, outreach manager with the New York Offshore Wind Alliance, a network of industry and environmental groups, said that projects take many years to develop, a timeframe exceeding one presidential administration. He also noted that the maturing industry aligns with Trump’s goals of restoring manufacturing jobs and American energy independence. Members of Congress in both parties are seeing economic growth in their districts because of offshore wind, he said.

“This industry has a lot of things to prove about why it’s here to stay,” he said. “Actions are much more important than rhetoric.”

Regardless of what happens at the federal level, offshore wind backers will urge New York lawmakers to continue investing in infrastructure and workforce development to support the buildout of more turbines, he said.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

In 2023, the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) directed staff to review the impacts of the data center industry in Virginia. Now, JLARC has released its findings in the report, Data Centers in Virginia.

In the U.S., data center demand is expected to reach 35 GW by 2030, up from 17 GW in 2022, McKinsey & Company projects. Grid operators and utilities expect to see significant load growth driven by electrification, new manufacturing, and data center development. According to EPRI, 15 states accounted for 80% of data center capacity in 2023, led by Virginia, Texas, California, Illinois, Oregon, and Arizona. That concentration creates economic opportunities for states hosting data centers, but could also stress the grid.

Northern Virginia is the largest data center market in the world, constituting 13% of all reported data center operational capacity globally and 25% of capacity in the Americas. According to recent analysis from Upwind, Northern Virginia has a future power requirement of 11,077 MW. Multiple factors have contributed to Northern Virginia’s market prominence, including a strong fiber network, supply of reliable cheap energy, available land, proximity to major national customers, and the creation of a state data center tax incentive.

Dealing with ‘unconstrained’ demand

In addition to the benefits associated with new data center development, like tax revenues and construction investments, they are unsurprisingly also expected to drive an “immense” increase in energy demand, the report said. Energy demand in Virginia was “essentially flat” from 2006 to 2020 – and although the population increased during this time, this was offset by energy efficiency improvements, the report said. A report commissioned by JLARC found that “unconstrained demand for power” in the state would double within the next 10 years, mostly from the data center industry.

JLARC argues that building the infrastructure to meet unconstrained data center demand would be “very difficult,” and even trying to meet half of that demand would likely be a struggle. New solar facilities, wind generation, natural gas plants, and increased transmission capacity would all be required to meet unconstrained demand, and the number of projects needed would be “very difficult” to achieve, the report said. New solar facilities would need to be built at twice this year’s annual rate, and the amount of new wind generation required would “exceed the potential capabilities of all offshore wind sites that have so far been secured for future development.”

Even if the state only tries to meet half of unconstrained energy demand, and Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) requirements are not considered, a bottleneck would likely arise in gas generation. New natural gas plants would need to be added at the rate of about one large 1,500 MW plant every two years, for 15 straight years – a cadence not seen since between 2012 and 2018. With VCEA requirements in mind, JLARC says the biggest challenges would be building enough wind, battery storage, and natural gas peaker plants, with no changes to wind generation needs.

Utility requirements and processes could help limit risks

The report notes that the projected energy demand increases from data centers have raised concerns about whether enough infrastructure can be built to keep up. PJM currently requires utilities to secure “sufficient generation capacity” plus a reserve margin, and the state requires utilities to develop plans describing how generation capacity needs will be met. However, JLARC argues that individual electric utility planning does not guarantee that the generation resources needed for the whole PJM region will be built since regional generation is not centrally planned.

If utilities can’t build enough infrastructure to keep up with demand, they could choose to delay the addition of new large load customers until there is enough generation and transmission capacity on the grid, the report said.

The costs of high demand

JLARC commissioned an independent study of electric utility cost recoveries under current rate structures and found that data centers are already paying the full cost of service, but growing energy demand is likely to increase costs for other customers as well. The large amount of new generation and transmission that needs to be built will create fixed costs that utilities will need to recover, and the difficulty associated with supplying enough energy to keep pace with growing data center demand means energy prices will likely increase for all customers, the report said. Additionally, if utilities rely on importing power, they will be at the whims of the market and its spikes in prices.

Data centers also pose a financial risk to electric utilities and their customers, the report found. For example, utilities could end up building more generation and transmission infrastructure than is needed if forecast demand does not materialize, or if several large data centers close – essentially “stranding” utilities with infrastructure costs they would have to recoup from existing customers. One risk is unique to electric co-ops: if a data center customer delays, disputes, or fails to pay an energy generation bill and the co-op cannot recoup these costs from the customer, all of the other co-op members would have to foot the bill. Finally, if data centers participate in the state’s retail choice program and purchase generation through third parties instead of their incumbent electric utility, generation costs could begin to shift to other customers, the report said.

The report also included several recommendations and policy options meant to help address data center demand in Virginia, including:

• Clarify that electric utilities have the authority to delay, but not deny, service to customers when the addition of customer load cannot be supported;
• Direct Dominion Energy to develop a plan for addressing the risk of infrastructure costs being stranded with existing customers, and file that plan with the State Corporation Commission;

Read the full report here.

Deemed the “Biden Energy Slush Fund” by The Wall Street Journal, the LPO has dabbled in everything from biofuels to hydrogen production, from onshoring electric vehicle wiring manufacturing to disseminating distributed energy resources.

Project IceBrick, LPO’s latest endeavor, is unique even by its standards.

Not just another brick in the wall

This week, LPO announced a conditional commitment to IceBrick Energy Assets I, LLC, a subsidiary of Nostromo Energy, for a loan guarantee of up to $305.54 million (including $303.69 million of principal and $1.85 million of capitalized interest) to finance Project IceBrick.

Project IceBrick is a virtual power plant (VPP) of up to 193 cold thermal energy storage (TES) installations at commercial buildings across California. The TES cells, a technology Nostromo has been touting since 2018 and the main component of the IceBrick systems, will be manufactured for this project and future U.S. installations entirely domestically by contractors in Texas, Iowa, and California.

The technology is hilariously simple. Basically, it utilizes ice to cool buildings rather than relying solely on air conditioning.

Project IceBrick would provide customers with efficiency as a service by freezing a water-based solution during prime solar generation hours when electricity is at its cheapest and cleanest. The IceBrick system would store and later use the ice to support cooling of the building during hours of peak power demand when electricity production is dirtiest and most expensive.

Nostromo says its nonflammable (duh) IceBrick cells are suitable for both new buildings and retrofits, and their compact and modular design makes them easy to configure into spaces of all sizes.

The company’s Cirrus software platform enables the IceBrick systems to operate as a VPP by orchestrating multiple energy assets to function in concert with one other or participating as individual assets. The resulting flexibility of this load shift technology provides resilient power capacity and serves as a load-stabilizing complement to intermittent clean energy assets, Nostromo contends. Project IceBrick also supports a higher rate of grid asset utilization, tempering electricity costs in a state facing some of the highest electricity bills in the nation.  

Nostromo asserts its IceBrick systems would allow California’s bulk power system to avoid up to 500 thousand tons of CO2 emissions over the project’s lifetime. Nostromo plans to share with its customers a portion of the expected cost savings attributable to this aggregate shift in building cooling load and intends to earn additional revenue by having the VPP participate in wholesale energy and capacity markets. At full scale, the project could provide the equivalent of approximately 170 MW (450 MWh) of behind-the-meter storage capacity for hotels, offices, data centers, and other commercial buildings.

Impact and next steps

DOE’s LPO believes the project can create more than 200 jobs, including at least 170 peak construction jobs. Over its five-year construction period, Nostromo Energy says it will create more than 870 annual job equivalents.

LPO’s investment supports the Biden-Harris Administration’s Justice40 Initiative, which sets a goal that 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal investments in clean energy and other areas flow to disadvantaged communities marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by pollution. Some energy justice advocates fear Justice40 will be among the first items on the chopping block under the incoming Trump Administration, which could butcher provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act.

Project IceBrick is the third VPP project LPO has announced and the first to use cold TES. VPPs are aggregations of electrified, grid-connected devices, including grid-interactive efficient buildings, that reduce utilities’ reliance on natural gas peaker plants and reduce the strain on transmission and distribution infrastructure by intelligently time-shifting and shaving electricity demand.

If Nostromo Energy’s loan guarantee is finalized, it will be offered through the Innovation Energy category of LPO’s Title 17 Clean Energy Financing Program, which includes financing opportunities for projects that deploy new or significantly improved high-impact clean energy technologies. Interest in projects like IceBrick is also supported by the IRA’s Section 48 Investment Tax Credit, which allows businesses to deduct a significant percentage of the installation costs of TES and other clean technology installations from their federal taxes.  

DOE must still complete an environmental review and Nostromo must satisfy certain technical, legal, environmental, commercial, and financial conditions before the feds can decide whether to enter into definitive financing documents and fund the loan guarantee.

Originally published in Renewable Energy World.

Across the U.S. and worldwide, energy demand is soaring as data centers work to support the wide and growing use of artificial intelligence. These large facilities are filled with powerful computers, called servers, that run complex algorithms to help AI systems learn from vast amounts of data.

This process requires tremendous computing power, which consumes huge quantities of electricity. Often, a single data center will use amounts comparable to the power needs of a small town. This heavy demand is stressing local power grids and forcing utilities to scramble to provide enough energy to reliably power data centers and the communities around them.

My work at the intersection of computing and electric power engineering includes research on operating and controlling power systems and making the grid more resilient. Here are some ways in which the spread of AI data centers is challenging utilities and grid managers, and how the power industry is responding.

Upsetting a delicate balance

Electricity demand from data centers can vary dramatically throughout the day, depending on how much computing the facility is doing. For example, if a data center suddenly needs to perform a lot of AI computations, it can draw a huge amount of electricity from the grid in a period as short as several seconds. Such sudden spikes can cause problems for the power grid locally.

Electric grids are designed to balance electricity supply and demand. When demand suddenly increases, it can disrupt this balance, with effects on three critical aspects of the power grid:

• Voltage can be thought of as the push that makes electricity move, like the pressure in a water hose. If too many data centers start demanding electricity at the same time, it’s like turning on too many taps in a building at once and reducing its water pressure. Abrupt shifts in demand can cause voltage fluctuations, which may damage electrical equipment.
• Frequency is a measurement of how electric current oscillates back and forth per second as it travels from power sources to load demand through the network. The U.S. and most major countries transmit electricity as alternating current, or AC, which periodically reverses direction. Power grids operate at a stable frequency, usually 50 or 60 cycles per second, known as hertz; the U.S. grid operates at 60 Hz. If demand for electricity is too high, the frequency can drop, which can cause equipment to malfunction.
• Power balance is the constant real-time match between electricity supply and demand. To maintain a steady supply, power generation must match power consumption. If an AI data center suddenly demands a lot more electricity, it’s like pulling more water from a reservoir than the system can provide. This can lead to power outages or force the grid to rely on backup power sources, if available.

Peaks and valleys in power use

To see how operating decisions can play out in real time, let’s consider an AI data center in a city. It needs 20 megawatts of electricity during its peak operations – the equivalent of 10,000 homes turning on their air conditioners at the same time. That’s large but not outsize for a data center: Some of the biggest facilities can consume more than 100 megawatts.

Many industrial data centers in the U.S. draw this amount of power. Examples include Microsoft data centers in Virginia that support the company’s Azure cloud platform, which powers services such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and Google’s data center in The Dalles, Oregon, which supports various AI workloads, including Google Gemini.

The center’s load profile, a timeline of its electricity consumption through a 24-hour cycle, can include sudden spikes in demand. For instance, if the center schedules all of its AI training tasks for nighttime, when power is cheaper, the local grid may suddenly experience an increase in demand during these hours.

Here’s a simple hypothetical load profile for an AI data center, showing electricity consumption in megawatts:

• 6 a.m.-8 a.m.: 10 MW (low demand)
• 8 a.m.-12 p.m.: 12 MW (moderate demand)
• 12 p.m.-6 p.m.: 15 MW (higher demand due to business hours)
• 6 p.m.-12 a.m.: 20 MW (peak demand due to AI training tasks)
• 12 a.m.-6 a.m.: 12 MW (moderate demand due to maintenance tasks)

Ways to meet demand

There are several proven strategies for managing this kind of load and avoiding stress to the grid.

First, utilities can develop a pricing mechanism that gives AI data centers an incentive to schedule their most power-intensive tasks during off-peak hours, when overall electricity demand is lower. This approach, known as demand response, smooths out the load profile, avoiding sudden spikes in electricity usage.

Second, utilities can install large energy storage devices to bank electricity when demand is low, and then discharge it when demand spikes. This can help smooth the load on the grid.

Third, utilities can generate electricity from solar panels or wind turbines, combined with energy storage, so that they can provide power for periods when demand tends to rise. Some power companies are using this combination at a large scale to meet growing electricity demand.

Fourth, utilities can add new generating capacity near data centers. For example, Constellation plans to refurbish and restart the undamaged unit at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant near Middletown, Pennsylvania, to power Microsoft data centers in the mid-Atlantic region.

In Virginia, Dominion Energy is installing gas generators and plans to deploy small modular nuclear reactors, along with making investments in solar, wind and storage. And Google has signed an agreement with California-based Kairos Power to purchase electricity from small modular nuclear reactors.

Finally, grid managers can use advanced software to predict when AI data centers will need more electricity, and communicate with power grid resources to adjust accordingly. As companies work to modernize the national electric grid, adding new sensor data and computing power can maintain voltage, frequency and power balance.

Ultimately, computing experts predict that AI will become integrated into grid management, helping utilities anticipate issues such as which parts of the system need maintenance, or are at highest risk of failing during a natural disaster. AI can also learn load profile behavior over time and near AI data centers, which will be useful for proactively balancing energy and managing power resources.

The U.S. grid is far more complicated than it was a few decades ago, thanks to developments such as falling prices for solar power. Powering AI data centers is just one of many challenges that researchers are tackling to supply energy for an increasingly wired society.

Anurag Srivastava, Professor of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, West Virginia University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ALEXANDRIA, VA. (AP) — The sprawling, windowless warehouses that hold rows of high-speed servers powering almost everything the world does on phones and computers are increasingly becoming fixtures of the American landscape, popping up in towns, cities and suburbs across the United States.

Demand for data centers ballooned in recent years due to the rapid growth of cloud computing and artificial intelligence, and urban and rural governments alike are competing for lucrative deals with big tech companies.

But as data centers begin to move into more densely populated areas, abutting homes and schools, parks and recreation centers, some residents are pushing back against the world’s most powerful corporations over concerns about the economic, social and environmental health of their communities.

In Northern Virginia, more than 300 data centers dot the rolling hills of the area’s westernmost counties and butt up against wooded bike trails winding through the suburbs. But one of the latest proposals in the area, Plaza 500, would see a 466,000-square-foot facility and adjacent electrical substation built a few hundred feet from townhomes, playgrounds and a community center.

The pitch from Starwood Capital Group, the private investment firm founded by billionaire Barry Sternlicht, to Fairfax County officials promised jobs and a significant property tax boost. But data center critics say the incentives aren’t enough to counteract the consequences of building the facilities so close to homes.

Tyler Ray, a leader in the fight against the Virginia project, worries that more data centers in the area could compromise the already stressed power grid: Over 25% of all power produced in Virginia in 2023 went to data centers, a figure that could rise as high as 46% by 2030 if data center growth continues at its current pace. Some estimates also show a mid-sized data center commands the same water usage every day as 1,000 households, prompting concerns over the cost of water. Ray also frets over air quality, as the massive diesel generators that help power the data centers’ hardware send plumes of toxic pollutants into the atmosphere.

Ray and his neighbors tried to stop the development, but their efforts were largely unsuccessful. The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in September said all newly proposed data centers must adhere to stricter zoning rules, but the Plaza 500 project was exempt.

“I don’t know how a general resident, even someone who has been engaging intently on an issue, has any chance to go up against the data center industry,” Ray said the night the supervisors voted.

For local governments, attracting data centers to their municipalities means a financial boon: Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in 2024 that Virginia’s current data centers brought in $1 billion in tax revenue.

For average-sized facilities, data centers offer a small number of direct jobs – often fewer than 100 positions. Google announced recently that its investment in nearby Loudoun County, which included two data centers, created around 150 direct jobs, a figure that data center opponents say isn’t worth the hassle. But data center advocates argue that the number of indirect jobs like construction, technology support and electrical work make the projects worthwhile. In that same announcement, Google said their investment spurred 2,730 indirect jobs.

Kathy Smith, the vice chair of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, voted in favor of the Plaza 500 proposal because, in her estimation, data center growth is inevitable in the region, and Fairfax County should reap the benefits.

“I have a responsibility to step back from what we do and look at the big picture,” Smith said. “Data centers are not going away.”

On the other side of the country, in Morrow County, Oregon, Amazon Web Services has built at least five data centers surrounding the 4,200-person town of Boardman, nestled among vast stretches of farmland flecked with mint patches and wind turbines, next to the Columbia river.

Last year, AWS paid roughly $34 million in property taxes and fees stipulated in the agreements after receiving a $66 million tax break. Those payments, in addition to $1.7 in charitable donations from the company in 2023, have been instrumental in updating infrastructure and bolstering services. These funds have gone toward a new ladder fire engine, a school resource officer and $5,000 grants for homebuyers so far totaling at least $2.8 million.

“This road right here? Wouldn’t happen if it wasn’t for AWS,” said Boardman Mayor Paul Keefer, riding in the passenger seat of Police Chief Rick Stokoe’s cruiser, pointing out the window at construction workers shifting dirt and laying pavement.

AWS has cultivated relationships with local officials including Keefer and Stokoe, who have both been in positions to vote on whether to authorize tax breaks with the company. Some former county commissioners and residents worry that those relationships are too cozy.

Kevin Miller, AWS’s vice president of global data centers, said in an interview with the Associated Press that “our interest is in being a model corporate citizen, to really be partners with those communities.”

Skepticism of the deals started years ago, when three formerly elected officials allegedly helped approve data center deals while also owning a stake in a company that contracted with AWS to provide fiber optic cables for the data centers. In June, they each paid $2,000 to settle an ethics complaint.

Those officials are no longer in office. But the latest data center deal struck between Morrow County officials and AWS, which gives the company an estimated $1 billion in tax breaks spread over the 15 years to build five new data centers, again raised eyebrows.

Two former Morrow County Commissioners, Jim Doherty and Melissa Lindsay, pushed unsuccessfully in 2022 for AWS to pay more in taxes in new data center negotiations.

“We didn’t want to blow it up. We didn’t want to run them off,” said Lindsay. “But there were better deals to be made.”

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — The largest artificial intelligence data center ever built by Facebook’s parent company Meta is coming to northeast Louisiana, the company said Wednesday, bringing hopes that the $10 billion facility will transform an economically neglected corner of the state.

Republican Gov. Jeff Landry called it “game-changing” for his state’s expanding tech sector, yet some environmental groups have raised concerns over the center’s reliance on fossil fuels — and whether the plans for new natural gas power to support it could lead to higher energy bills in the future for Louisiana residents.

Meanwhile, Elon Musk’s AI startup, xAI, is expanding its existing supercomputer project in Memphis, Tennessee, the city’s chamber of commerce said Wednesday. The chamber also said that Nvidia, Dell, and Supermicro Computer will be “establishing operations in Memphis,” without offering further details.

Louisiana is among a growing number of states offering tax credits and other incentives to lure big tech firms seeking sites for energy-intensive data centers.

The U.S. Commerce Department found that there aren’t enough data centers in the U.S. to meet the rising AI-fueled demand, which is projected to grow by 9% each year through 2030, citing industry reports.

Meta anticipates its Louisiana data center will create 500 operational jobs and 5,000 temporary construction jobs, said Kevin Janda, director of data center strategy. At 4 million square feet (370,000 square meters), it will be the company’s largest AI data center to date, he added.

“We want to make sure we are having a positive impact on the local level,” Janda said.

Congressional leaders and local representatives from across the political spectrum heralded the Meta facility as a boon for Richland parish, a rural part of Louisiana with a population of 20,000 historically reliant on agriculture. About one in four residents are considered to live in poverty and the parish has an employment rate below 50%, according to the U.S. census data.

Meta plans to invest $200 million into road and water infrastructure improvements for the parish to offset its water usage. The facility is expected to be completed in 2030.

Entergy, one of the nation’s largest utility providers, is fast-tracking plans to build three natural gas power plants in Louisiana capable of generating 2,262 megawatts for Meta’s data center over a 15-year period — nearly one-tenth of Entergy’s existing energy capacity across four states.

The Louisiana Public Service Commission is weighing Entergy’s proposal as some environmental groups have opposed locking the state into more fossil fuel-based energy infrastructure. Meta said it plans to help bring 1,500 megawatts of renewable energy onto the grid in the future.

Louisiana residents may ultimately end up with rate increases to pay off the cost of operating these natural gas power plants when Meta’s contract with Entergy expires, said Jessica Hendricks, state policy director for the Alliance for Affordable Energy, a Louisiana-based nonprofit advocating for energy consumers.

“There’s no reason why residential customers in Louisiana need to pay for a power plant for energy that they’re not going to use,” Hendricks said. “And we want to make sure that there’s safeguards in place.”

Public service commissioner Foster Campbell, representing northeast Louisiana, said he does not believe the data center will increase rates for Louisiana residents and views it as vital for his region.

“It’s going in one of the most needed places in Louisiana and maybe one of the most needed places in the United States of America,” Foster said. “I’m for it 100%.”

Environmental groups have also warned of the pollution generated by Musk’s AI data center in Memphis. The Southern Environmental Law Center, among others, says the supercomputer could strain the power grid, prompting attention from the Environmental Protection Agency. Eighteen gas turbines currently running at xAI’s south Memphis facility are significant sources of ground-level ozone, better known as smog, the group said.

Patrick Anderson, an attorney at the law center, said xAI has operated with “a stunning lack of transparency” in developing its South Memphis facility, which is located near predominantly Black neighborhoods that have long dealt with pollution and health risks from factories and other industrial sites.

“Memphians deserve to know how xAI will affect them,” he said, “and should have a seat at the table when these decisions are being made.”

If Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin and Democratic leaders in the General Assembly are aligned on one thing, it’s their enthusiasm for bringing more data centers to the commonwealth. Where they part ways is in how to provide enough electricity to power them. Youngkin and most Republican legislators advocate for an “all of the above” approach that includes fossil gas as well as renewables; Democrats are committed to staying the course on the transition to zero-carbon energy, with a near-term emphasis on low-cost solar. 

Data centers are making the transition harder, but so is local resistance to building solar. General Assembly members mostly understand the connection, leading to a lively debate in last year’s legislative session over whether to override some local permit denials for solar projects – and if so, how to ensure the localities still have some say. Though none of the legislative proposals moved forward last year, the topic has become a central one for the recently revamped Committee on Electric Utility Regulation (CEUR). 

In January, the General Assembly is likely to consider legislation to override local solar permit denials in some cases, such as last year’s HB636 from Del. Rip Sullivan, D-Fairfax, or another approach that would break the solar logjam. It remains to be seen, however,  whether legislators will take any action on data centers.

The problem has grown only more urgent as localities have continued to approve new data center proposals with little thought given to where and how they will get the power to serve them.

Ann Bennett, Sierra Club Virginia’s data center chair, has been tracking data center permit applications across the state. She counts at least two dozen Virginia counties with data centers under development, including rural areas far outside the industry’s stronghold in suburban Northern Virginia. By Bennett’s calculation, data centers existing and under development in Virginia will consume at least 100,000 acres. 

Even as local governments woo data centers, many have become hostile to solar development. A presentation from the Weldon Cooper Center at the University of Virginia, which tracks solar permitting across Virginia, shows that far more local permits for solar facilities have been denied or withdrawn than were approved this year. 

In some cases, county boards that approve data center development also reject permits for solar farms. Sometimes, it happens even at the same meeting.

In an effort to understand this paradox, I watched footage from two county board meetings in Hanover County, one in March of this year and the other in September. At the March meeting, county supervisors approved a 1,200-acre data center complex for an area north of Ashland. Later the same night, they denied a permit for a utility-scale solar project. 

The parcels of land slated to be developed for the data center complex “included wooded areas, recently-logged areas, open fields, wetlands, ponds and stream corridors.” The developer plans to build about 30 data centers on the property, each 110 feet tall (about 10 stories), with setbacks from the property line ranging from 150 to 250 feet. The complex will require 700,000 gallons per day of cooling water. When fully developed, the data centers are expected to total a staggering 2,400 megawatts (MW) of power capacity, not far short of what all of Loudoun County had in 2022. There was no discussion of where so much electricity would come from. 

Public testimony was overwhelmingly negative. The objections echoed those that have been widely reported in response to projects such as the Prince William Digital Gateway: noise, light, a massive increase in truck traffic, secrecy surrounding the project, air pollution from diesel back-up generators. 

Yet the Hanover supervisors voted unanimously in favor of the project. It came down to money: the developer promised a tax benefit to the county over 20 years of $1.8 billion, plus upfront cash for road improvements and a $100,000 donation to a park. Supervisor Jeff Stoneman, who represents the Beaverdam district where the complex will be located, acknowledged his constituents’ concerns but noted that the revenue would be a “game-changer for this community.” 

Even for me, as thoroughly aware as I am of all the downsides of data center sprawl, the negative impacts on communities, the risks to our water and energy security, the possibility that folks will be left with nothing but regrets – well, I just have to say: It’s really hard to argue with $1.8 billion. Rural leaders see Loudoun County raking in revenue from data centers, letting it cut taxes for everyone else. Why wouldn’t they want in on that?

As I noted before, though, there was no discussion of how or where the enormous amount of electricity needed to power the data centers would be generated. This disconnect was underscored later in the same meeting when the supervisors voted to reject a 20 MW solar project on 100 acres of a 315-acre site, in the same district as the data center complex they had just approved. 

It was especially hard to understand the denial of this particular permit. Supervisors agreed the project met all the terms of the county’s solar ordinance, including provisions for the use of native grasses and pollinator plants. Most of the property would remain untouched. The county would receive an upfront cash contribution of $438,600, in addition to the increased tax revenue from the project. The planning commission had recommended approval. No one testified against it; a number of people, including the farmer across the street, testified in its favor.  

Most of the discussion of the project focused on screening the solar panels from view. Supervisors fussed that the trees to be planted at the entrance were too small, and worried that some of the existing mature trees along the road might die off over time and not be replaced. The developer agreed to put larger trees at the entrance, and even to walk the perimeter annually to monitor the health of the trees, and replace any if they needed to.

It was no use. Two of the supervisors wanted to approve the project, but they were outvoted. Stoneman, the Beaverdam supervisor who had led the way in supporting the data center complex, said he worried that erosion might impair the creek on the property, in spite of ample natural buffers, and said he did not have a “comfort level” with the project.

Evidently, the county’s solar ordinance, adopted in 2023, was irrelevant, or at least, misleading. Such objective standards make a developer think it will be worth their while to put in months of planning, public outreach, and working with county staff. But then it turns out that what actually matters is whether a supervisor can achieve a certain undefined “comfort level.” 

Six months after the approval of the 2,400 MW data center complex and the denial of the 20 MW solar facility, another solar project met the same fate, again with Stoneman making the motion to deny the permit. 

This time the project would take up 250 acres of a 1,500-acre site and produce 72 MW of electricity, achieved through stacking the panels to a double height. Again, the project more than met the requirements of the county solar ordinance. The land was described as currently consisting of managed pine forest, already subject to being cut over at any time, and fully 70% of the property would be preserved for conservation. Native grasses would be planted, and sheep would do most of the vegetation management. The shepherd, Marcus Gray of Gray’s Lambscaping, attended the hearing to describe the sheep operations he runs successfully at other solar sites.  

Approval of the project would earn the county roughly $1.7 million upfront, and $300,000 in annual tax revenue. 

Supervisors praised the developer for “a really good application” that “respected” the ordinance and the environment, for the company’s willingness to listen and respond to concerns, and for agreeing to build stormwater basins and sacrifice buildable space in favor of conservation. 

Several members of the public testified in favor of the project, but this time there were also opponents. Some of them repeated common myths about solar panel toxicity and the risk of fires. One woman stated flatly, and obviously incorrectly, that it was not possible to raise sheep at a solar farm because they would die from the heat. 

The supervisors themselves did not appear ill-informed or misinformed, though one expressed surprise that Gray could successfully sell his lamb at farmers markets when buyers knew where they had been raised. (Watching, I could only laugh, because I’ve always thought of the solar-sheep synergy as a great selling point for climate-conscious carnivores.) 

The concern raised most often was the risk of impacts to the nearby North Anna River, though the developer had agreed to shrink the project to accommodate a much greater setback from the river than required. 

Ultimately, however, Supervisor Stoneman’s argument for denying the permit rested on a different argument. He praised the developer for doing a good job, and noted the project was in accordance with all requirements. But, he said, “Beaverdam is just a different place.” People take pride in the rural character and forest and farmland. Our job, he noted, is to protect the trees that are harvested on the site currently, something “that is as important as the power.” 

“Money is not the most important thing,” concluded the man who led the cheering squad for a data center complex in his district six months earlier.  

The two supervisors who had supported the smaller solar facility that had been rejected in March made their best arguments for this project as well, though they ultimately voted with Stoneman as the home supervisor. One said she supported solar “because I’m pro-farm,” and solar is a way to preserve farmland from development. The other noted that the land would certainly be developed one way or another, and the results would almost certainly be worse. Maintaining rural culture is important, he noted, but “we are approving residential development and seeing by-right development that people don’t want either.”

He also warned his colleagues, as he had in the spring, that rejecting good solar projects was going to result in legislation that would take away local authority and give it to the unelected State Corporation Commission. He said he would go along with Stoneman’s motion to deny the permit because “I assume he knows something,” but he made it clear he considered it the wrong decision, and a dangerous one for local autonomy.

Evidently, he had been paying attention to the conversation at the General Assembly.

To be clear, my sympathies lie wholeheartedly with people whose instincts are to protect the woods and fields around them. I share the one Hanover supervisor’s belief that solar is a means to preserve land from permanent development and even improve soil health and wildlife habitat, but I also understand it may be years before some people see sheep grazing under solar panels as a welcome feature in their landscape. 

So I get how a rural county, having sold a little bit of its soul for $1.8 billion, might then slam the door to other development, even after applicants had worked with the county for months in good faith and done everything asked for. 

It’s not a choice I’d make – I’d take solar over data centers every time – but then, no one made it the county’s responsibility to contribute electricity to the grid that serves it, much less to produce the electricity needed to run the data centers it embraced.

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com. Follow Virginia Mercury on Facebook and X.

In a filing sent to the North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) last week, Duke said it will pause “any further efforts or expenditures” until February, hoping to gain more clarity on the situation once the dust clears. The utility said it is “closely monitoring” the potential for changes to DOE’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) or to funding for loan guarantee programs under the IRA, which could impact the EIR Program.

In 2023, Duke, the NCUC Public Staff, Walmart, and the Carolinas Clean Energy Buyers Association (CCEBA) entered into an agreement to further assess the cost and benefits of the EIR program. Under this agreement, the parties agreed to hire a consultant to refine the cost-benefit analysis of the EIR program to assess the potential to achieve ratepayer benefits, Duke said. A report stemming from the consultant’s work was meant to be filed with the NCUC by May 1, 2025.

However, the companies and NCUC Public Staff have not selected a consultant yet after sending multiple RFPs to several companies in October. Given Duke’s decision to halt the process, it notified the NCUC that it would likely not meet the May 1 deadline for the consultant’s report.

Through the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment (EIR) category of the Title 17 Clean Energy Financing Program, LPO can finance projects that retool, repower, repurpose, or replace energy infrastructure that has ceased operations or enable operating energy infrastructure to avoid, reduce, utilize or sequester air pollutants or greenhouse gas emissions.

The EIR project category can support a range of projects that utilize existing energy infrastructure, including: 

• Upgrading or uprating energy infrastructure so it can restart or operate more efficiently, at higher output, or with lower emissions
• Replacing retired energy infrastructure with clean energy infrastructure
• Building new facilities for clean energy purposes that utilize legacy energy infrastructure

The U.S. energy sector as a whole is facing uncertainty after Trump’s re-election. On the campaign trail, President-elect Donald Trump railed against clean energy policies enacted under the Biden-Harris administration, vowed to throttle offshore wind development “on day one” and end the “Green New Scam.”  It’s still unclear if Trump will attempt to dismantle the landmark Inflation Reduction Act, which pumped billions into clean energy technologies like solar panel and electric vehicle manufacturing, investments that have largely benefited Republican-led communities.

Leading up to the election, Trump insisted the IRA was too expensive and promised to rescind all unspent funds allocated by the law- prompting the Biden administration to speed up to ensure it spends the majority of available grant funding left. Since parts of the IRA have not yet been fully implemented and it’s not clear which direction some of Trump’s incoming staff will be compelled to go in specific cases, its fate in totality remains murky.

Transmission advocates could potentially benefit from Trump’s desire to fast-track permitting for oil and gas pipelines, but that may not come in the form of the long-awaited energy permitting reform bill that passed the Senate in July. While a bipartisan effort, the bill has been stuck in the Republican-controlled House, and some large utilities are reportedly lobbying lawmakers to stop it.

Originally published in POWERGRID International.

Georgia Power projects that over the next decade the state will be leading the nation’s second industrial revolution, led by artificial intelligence boosting data centers, which could triple the state’s energy consumption.

According to Georgia Power’s projections, the company’s projected 12,000 megawatts load growth will triple by the mid-2030, which is consistent with the state’s consistently upward trending economic prospects the company cites as it requests a significant expansion of its energy capacity.

“The latest data continue to support Georgia Power’s expectation for continued and robust economic growth in Georgia and the timing of new large loads,” the company’s Nov. 18 economic development outlook reads. “The pipeline of committed and potential economic development projects continues to grow.”

The Georgia Public Service Commission is scheduled to vote by next 2025 on the company’s long-term plans. The five-member board regulates the state’s utilities and will determine whether new natural gas plants will be built, if more solar power capacity is added, and how much more electricity customers will be charged when the company passes along rising costs.

Georgia Power is estimating that about 90 large-sized industrial projects could be built in Georgia before the end of the decade. Georgia Power has received commitments to purchase its electricity from about 70 prospective data center facilities should they be built inside the Peach State.

However, clean energy advocates are among the knowledgeable critics expressing skepticism about Georgia Power’s projected list of commitments from large data centers, questioning the accuracy of energy demand forecasts over the next several years and what the company says are actual energy usage levels by new data centers.

Georgia Power is set to outline its proposals to meet projected energy demand in its 2025 integrated resource plan, a three-year operations forecast due to be filed in late January with the Georgia PSC. The filing will kick start a process of hearings before state regulators and interested parties where expert testimony from Georgia Power and advocates for consumers and environmental protection are typically presented to chart the utility company’s energy future.

As of Sep. 30, Georgia Power says the total pipeline of economic development projects expected through the mid-2030s has increased by 12,200 megawatts to 36,500 megawatts, with large-scale facilities accounting for 34,600 megawatts. All 25 of the committed large scale projects are expected to be in service by the end of 2028 or sooner, the utility company’s quarterly report states.

“Thirteen of these projects have broken ground, and twelve are pending construction,” the report said. “This evidence clearly indicates that these large load customers are materializing and making progress without material delays.”

According to the U.S. Department of Energy data, centers consume 10 to 50 times as much electricity as the average commercial building.

A 2024 report from the Barclays Equity Research team estimates that data centers account for 3.5% of U.S. electricity consumption today, and the electricity use of those facilities could be above 5.5% in 2027 and more than 9% by 2035.

Maggie Shober, the research director at the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, said she has concerns about the level of commitment Georgia Power is securing from the planned new data centers. Companies are committing to use Georgia Power as their electricity provider, but it does not guarantee they will build a data center in the state.

“Although these are scary numbers, I think there’s a lot of speculation going on, especially in the data center industry, where people and companies that are interested in sort of flipping sites for data centers are absolutely scrambling to get into this queue. I think that a lot of these will ultimately never show up. I think it’s going to be a challenge to figure out which ones and how do we determine that?”

After decades of almost non-existent demand growth for electricity in the U.S., the artificial intelligence revolution is expected to more than double data center electricity needs by 2030 based on current grid capacity, according to the Barclays report.

“Unlike other industries or energy-consuming activities which place fluctuating requirements on the grid depending on the time of day or year that can be managed to maintain overall reliability and capacity, AI operations are an ‘always on’ demand,” Barclays senior research analysts Will Thompson and Betty Jiang wrote in the August report. “Data centres must operate continuously, 24/7/365, to function for users. In effect, AI energy demand can be considered a constant peak that leads to higher overall peak power demand across the grid.

“With the current focus on building data centre capacity that prioritises secure access to power over specific fuel type, meeting rising electricity demand while lowering emissions will likely be a monumental challenge for grid operators,” the Barclays report said.

In April, the Georgia Public Service Commission approved Georgia Power’s plans to expand its generation capacity by increasing its reliance on fossil fuels and adding more renewable energy by 2025. The company’s integrated resource plan will be the next significant development since then.

Georgia Power is projecting the updated plans will save the typical residential customer about $2.89 on their monthly bills from 2026 to 2028.

“At Georgia Power, our customers are at the center of everything we do, and we are unwavering in our commitment to provide them with clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy,” Georgia Power CFO Aaron Abramovitz said in April.

State regulators already approved the company’s request for natural gas or oil-burning generators and solar batteries to meet increasing demand from data centers and other large industrial users over the next decade. Regulators were warned by several clean energy groups against allowing Georgia Power to build three fossil fuel burning units at the legacy fossil-fuel facility Plant Yates in Coweta County.

Concerns linger for clean energy advocates like the Southern Environmental Law Center, anxious about what the upcoming request from Georgia Power will mean for the state’s energy future. The company has also been given the green light by state regulators to delay the retirement of its coal-burning plants Bowen in Bartow County and Scherer in Monroe County.

If Georgia Power’s projected electricity demands fall short, the company would still reap the financial benefits of adding new energy sources, said Jennifer Whitfield, SELC senior attorney.

“If you’re over projecting, and you don’t actually need to meet those demands, it’s not the Georgia Power shareholders who are going to pay for that,” Whitfield said. “ It’s going to be Georgia Power customers.

“That is a particular concern for overbuilding gas plants, because the cost of gas plants is for the fuel, and those costs get passed on directly to customers,” Whitfield said. “George Power customers, in particular, have seen a bunch of increases. They’ve had a rate increase. They’ve had Plant Vogtle increases. The largest increase they’ve seen in the last few years is actually from fuel costs.”

The Barclays research report found that sustainability appears to be a lower priority for the majority of data center companies.

“Data centre developers are prioritising land with access to untapped power sources, water, workforces and favourable regulation,” the report says. “With the current focus on building data centre capacity that prioritises secure access to power over specific fuel type, meeting rising electricity demand while lowering emissions will likely be a monumental challenge for grid operators,” the report says.

Whitfield said the commission has some ability to be creative with how it requires Georgia’s Power to diversify its sustainable energy portfolio. The company’s plans include some positives, she said, such as expanding solar and programs that benefit seniors living on fixed incomes.

“Is this going to be this moment where we decide, as Georgians, who we want to be? What kind of energy future do we want to have?” Whitfield said.

Georgia Recorder is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Georgia Recorder maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor John McCosh for questions: info@georgiarecorder.com. Follow Georgia Recorder on Facebook and X.

Virginia’s air regulators are awaiting data from Dominion Energy to further process the utility’s air permit request for the natural gas plant they’re proposing to build to meet rising energy needs, as pushback over the location and potential environmental impact of the facility continues.

“We are expecting to receive air quality monitoring data … in the next couple of weeks or so,” said Mike Dowd, director of air and renewable energy at the Department of Environmental Quality, in an update to the State Air Pollution Control Board Thursday. “As soon as we get the air quality modeling data, we will be processing the permit.”

Dominion spokesperson Jeremy Slayton confirmed to The Mercury that the utility is “currently planning to submit our modeling report to DEQ in early 2025.”

Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility, is proposing the Chesterfield Energy Reliability Center to meet increased energy demands expected to hit the state as a result of data center development. After local opposition, Dominion moved the proposed location from an industrial site on Battery Brooke Parkway to its former coal-fired Chesterfield Power Station on Coxendale Road. 

Construction is expected to start in 2026. It’s expected to be operational in 2029.

Environmental and community groups have staunchly fought against the project, saying it runs counter to the state’s 2020 Virginia Clean Economy Act that mandates the retirement of fossil fuels by 2045, unless there’s a concern over being able to reliably send electricity to the grid. 

Critics also are concerned about the air pollution impacting the surrounding community.

The update on the timeline means next year “is going to be pretty busy in terms of the public engagement,” said Mason Manley, a field manger with Clean Virginia, an advocacy group formed by millionaire Michael Bills to oppose Dominion’s influence in the legislature. The public will likely have the chance to weigh in on both the air permit for the Chesterfield Energy Reliability Center, as well as a separate Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity from the State Corporation Commission, which regulates Virginia’s utilities, Manley said.

The air permit is expected to be issued by July 28, according to DEQ’s permitting website, with public engagement opportunities occurring before then. The CPCN is going to be requested “in the first quarter of 2025,” said Slayton, with Dominion.

Andy Farmer, a spokesperson for the SCC, said “It is too early to discuss an SCC public engagement process when an application hasn’t been filed.”

“After Dominion files the application, the SCC will issue an Order for Notice and Hearing that will include a hearing schedule and public comment opportunities,” Farmer said. 

Manley said the public engagement opportunity is when community members can make their case for a denial or express their concerns necessitating controls for emissions be put in place. Last month, community members held a “People’s Hearing” to collect public testimony that will be submitted to DEQ during the public engagement period.

“(The air permit) is extremely important, (Dominion) can’t actually begin construction until that is issued,” Manley said.

The timeline update comes as opposition continues over local approval of the land use for the project, which is considered one of the first requirements before the DEQ and SCC processes can finish.

On Monday, the Friends of the Chesterfield, a group formed to oppose the plant, filed another appeal with the Chesterfield County Board of Zoning Appeals over a decision to use a 2010 conditional use permit for the Coxendale Road site for the proposed plant.

Previously, the friends group challenged a zoning determination from Chesterfield County Deputy Administrator Jesse Smith, but the zoning board said that determination was made as part of the air permitting process under the air board’s authority, not its own. 

After the rejection, the friends group followed up with Chesterfield County Chesterfield County Planning Director Andrew Gillies with their own request for a zoning determination on using the conditional use permit for the new site. Gillies responded on Oct. 18 saying that the previous letter stating the existing conditional use permit applies to the proposed plant, “fully answers your letter.” 

Evan Johns, an attorney with Appalachian Mountain Advocates, which filed both appeals on behalf of the Friends group, said the second appeal is a response to a determination by Gillies, a zoning official, which the groups says is reviewable by the zoning board.

“It seems like a determination that can be reviewed,” said Johns.

Chesterfield County spokesperson Teresa Bonifas said, “We do not comment on pending or potential litigation.” The next zoning board meeting is scheduled for Dec. 4.

Another requirement for the air permit process is a determination of “site suitability.” As Chesterfield County has declined to make that determination, Dowd said “there hasn’t been a full resolution.”

“I assume this is all part and parcel with (the appeal),” Dowd said.

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com. Follow Virginia Mercury on Facebook and X.