Regulating high-demand customers does seem most reasonable. But when the Texas legislature gets involved, it's typically to build a political franchise by creating government power than can be used arbitrarily against a fixed asset. In this case, nothing prevents the grid authority from harassing the data center during the many overload periods when a power contract is coming up for renewal.

Not that businesses aren't abusing the process, either. The article mentions that 80-90% of planned data centers won't be built, due to duplicate applications. They duplicate both to secure a "phantom" slot for power, and to get localities to compete with incentives for business. It's hard to plan a grid when financial speculation and gamesmanship is driving the planning.

The worst aspect is that Texas corruption is explicitly being offered as a model for other states in the PJM interconnect.

I wonder how much of the high economic growth rate in the 1950's-1980's came from the lack of gamesmanship and political franchises. But it's probably unrealistic to think professionals could step back from the very maximalist positions that are selecting them as leaders.

> But when the Texas legislature gets involved, it's typically to build a political franchise by creating government power than can be used arbitrarily against a fixed asset.

When I saw that it only applies to datacenters using more than 75 MW, my first thought was who are they writing the rule around?

I imagine we will see things like "xAI Under 75 MW Datacenter III, LLC", "xAI Under 75 MW Datacenter IV, LLC", etc.