Northwest states and the ongoing boom in big data centers 

Northwest policymakers are responding to the ongoing increase of energy-hungry data centers in the region. Oregon legislators took the lead last year with the POWER Act, requiring data centers and other large electricity users like cryptocurrency operations to pay their fair share for their electricity costs, rather than being subsidized by average consumers. 

Now Washington lawmakers are following suit with a more ambitious proposal, incorporating recommendations from a multi-sector working group convened last year by Governor Ferguson. Like the POWER Act, the Washington legislation would protect consumers from price hikes by requiring data centers to cover the costs of any new grid infrastructure or resources built to satisfy their needs. Further, the bill would also require data center operators to report on their environmental impacts, including water usage. In the case of electricity shortages or brownouts, data centers would have to cut their power before other users like hospitals and households. Finally, they would be put on a faster timeline to be powered by renewable energy instead of fossil fuels.

Nationally (and internationally), the increasing ubiquity of cloud-based, streaming and AI services is driving the data center boom and its energy needs. The US is leading a global surge in new gas-fired energy capacity, linked to booming data centers, leading to a wide range of policy responses from both state and local governments. Some states have offered tax incentives, and some local communities have welcomed the jobs and promised economic benefits. States—often the same states—and communities have also expressed wariness of data centers’ environmental impact, cost pressure on average ratepayers, and strain on the power grid.

Neither the Oregon nor the Washington legislative responses signal categorical opposition to the development of large data centers, but rather want to make sure that ratepayers, the environment, and grid reliability are protected—and that growth of data centers should not undo the region’s progress transitioning to clean energy.

In Oregon, regulators are currently working out details of implementing the POWER Act. PGE, the state’s largest power utility, has proposed making average ratepayers cover some of the long-term costs of serving data centers, a move which a watchdog group described as using “twisted logic” to skirt the new law. Governor Kotek has convened a new working group to gauge data centers’ impact on things like energy and water supply, with policy recommendations due later this year.

It’s complicated: Trump efforts to weaken environmental protection hit a speed bump

Trump officials are reportedly delaying, and potentially backing off, threats to repeal one of the cornerstones of federal environmental protection, fearful that their own arguments would not withstand court scrutiny. 

Since the appointment of Administrator Lee Zeldin, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has taken steps to weaken its own regulatory authority, including plans to repeal the so-called ‘endangerment finding”—that is, the research-backed conclusion that CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere constitute an environmental and public health threat. Abandoning this tool would stop the EPA from regulating emissions from cars and trucks, a duty under the Clean Air Act. The repeal had not been finalized, leaving the environmental advocacy community on edge. 

In another recent attack on the government’s responsibility to protect public health from pollution, the EPA decided to stop considering the monetary value of human lives from its calculations when considering industrial permit applications and the like. For the EPA, quantifying the value of health and human life allowed them to consider these impacts in developing regulations that require companies to reduce their pollution to the air, soil, or water. Now, the monetary impact of regulation to reduce pollution will focus purely on the costs to the corporations to comply with the regulation instead of considering the benefits to human health and livelihood.

Courts weigh in on the clean energy transition 

This month has seen significant developments in a number of legal battles involving the fossil fuel industry and their allies, including the Trump administration. 

In spring 2025, Climate Solutions joined a lawsuit challenging Trump administration cuts to National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) funding. This month, a US District Court Judge ruled in our favor, determining that the administration “yanked the NEVI Formula Program’s cord out of the outlet.” The court “permanently barred the Dept of Transportation from taking away states’ funds or cancelling previously approved implementation plans.” That means more than $5 billion has been returned to state coffers to build out EV charging infrastructure for a nationally connected system (Washington is spending its first $12 million of this money now). Drivers will have more, easier and more affordable options for emissions-free driving as a result.

Climate Solutions has joined with Earthjustice and other partners to challenge the Trump administration’s controversial, quixotic emergency order to keep open Washington’s last remaining coal power plant, a TransAlta facility in Centralia. Trump officials issued the order late last year, just weeks ahead of the plant’s planned closure. Closing the TransAlta plant is the final act of a fifteen-year process for the state to transition away from coal power, as required by state law. The absurdity of the Trump order is underlined by the fact there are no coal suppliers prepared to serve the plant, and no electricity customers prepared to buy coal-fired power should the plant remain online.

Last week the WA Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a case to decide the legality of controversial ballot initiative I-2066, a measure designed to slow the state’s transition to clean energy homes and buildings. Voters narrowly approved the measure in 2024 after a highly misleading campaign by Let’s Go Washington, the group which also undertook a failed effort to repeal the state’s landmark Climate Commitment Act. Last March, a King County Superior Court Judge ruled that the initiative was unconstitutionally broad. A final decision is expected later this year.

On the CS blog: The path to more clean energy for the PNW and how we get there

Climate Solutions authors are on our blog this week with new insights. Meredith Connolly describes how the Pacific Northwest can meet the demand for more clean power and make it affordable, dependable, and a beacon for national progress. If you haven’t yet heard of virtual power plants, check out Alma Pinto’s new article detailing how we can coordinate our energy uses to help balance the grid supply and demand during peak times.

One thing you can do

Washington State residents: you have the opportunity to weigh in as lawmakers consider a bill which would impose accountability on data centers’ environmental and economic impact.