CLT Debate League logo Charlotte Urban Debate League
Evidence library  |  Public Forum  |  September/October 2026

Resolved: The United States federal government should enact a moratorium on hyperscale data center construction.

Twenty sources. The pro core is electricity demand growth, cost allocation, reliability, and the wave of state action; the con core is the 2026 evidence that data centers have not raised residential rates on average, the tariffs already spreading, and the cost of a blanket pause. Several 2026 studies are industry-funded; the entries say which.

20 sources  |  Verified  |  Block file  |  Topic archive

20 sources

Pro: demand, cost, reliability, and state action

Data center electricity use is growing at an accelerating rate

Shehabi, A., et al. (2024). 2024 United States Data Center Energy Usage Report. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy. LBNL PDF

176 TWh in 2023 (4.4 percent of U.S. electricity), up from 58 TWh in 2014; 325 to 580 TWh by 2028 (6.7 to 12 percent); annual growth rising from about 7 percent to 18 percent to a projected 13 to 27 percent.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Demand more than doubled from 2018 to 2024 and could triple by 2028

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (August 2026). Electricity Rate Designs for Large Loads. Technical brief. LBNL PDF

Cites the 2026 LBNL estimate that data center demand rose 2.3 times from 2018 to 2024 and could rise 3.3 times from 2024 to 2028, and describes the tariff provisions regulators are writing in response.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

EPRI: data centers could reach 9 to 17 percent of U.S. electricity by 2030

Electric Power Research Institute (2026). Powering Intelligence 2026: Data Center Load Growth in Context. epri.com

Scenario forecasts of data center consumption reaching 9 to 17 percent of national electricity by 2030, with state-level grid impacts.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Load growth drove about half the PJM capacity price increase

Energy and Environmental Economics, E3 (May 2026). Understanding the Drivers of Rising Electricity Rates and the Role of Data Centers. E3 PDF

Attributes roughly 50 percent of the increase in PJM's 2024/25 and 2025/26 capacity auction prices to load growth. Commissioned by the Data Center Coalition; the pro reads the PJM finding, the con reads the headline.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Utilities have sharply raised load-growth forecasts

Shehabi, A., et al. (2024), section on utility projections. LBNL PDF

Southern Company revised expected sales growth from 1 to 2 percent a year to about 6 percent for 2025-2028 because of data centers; Georgia Power raised near-term load forecasts.

proSupports: Contention 2Cut this card

Reliability: rapid load growth strains the grid

North American Electric Reliability Corporation. Long-Term Reliability Assessment (current edition). nerc.com

NERC's annual assessment of resource adequacy; recent editions identify large-load growth, including data centers, as a driver of elevated risk in several regions. Cut the regional findings.

proSupports: Contention 2Cut this card

More than 300 state bills on data centers in early 2026

MultiState (February 2026). State Data Center Legislation in 2026 Tackles Energy and Tax Issues. multistate.us

Tracks the wave of state legislation on data center energy use, water, and tax treatment, evidence that policymakers treat the harms as present.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

States and localities are enacting moratoriums

Rockefeller Institute of Government (2026). Updates on the Cloud: More Moratoriums on Data Centers. rockinst.org

Describes state and local moratorium proposals and enactments in 2026, including New York, and the fiscal and environmental concerns behind them.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Retail electricity price trends

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (March 2026). Retail Electricity Price Trends, 2026 edition. LBNL PDF

LBNL's annual analysis of retail price drivers by state; both sides cut from it, the pro for regions where load growth coincides with price pressure, the con for the national pattern.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

What will data centers do to your electric bill?

Borenstein, S. (September 29, 2025). Energy Institute at Haas blog. Energy Institute blog

An economist's explanation of the conditions under which large loads raise or lower rates, useful for explaining the mechanism to a lay judge.

proSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Con: the evidence on rates, tariffs already spreading, and the cost of a pause

No historical evidence that data centers raised residential rates

Energy and Environmental Economics, E3 (May 2026). Understanding the Drivers of Rising Electricity Rates and the Role of Data Centers. ethree.com

Reviews more than ten quantitative studies and finds the evidence mixed: states with the largest load growth (Texas, Virginia) saw the smallest rate increases, while inflation, grid modernization, and gas volatility drove costs. Commissioned by the Data Center Coalition; say so.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Causal estimate: data centers modestly lowered average rates, 2015-2024

EPRI and Watershed researchers (August 2026). Have Data Centers Raised Your Electric Bill? Causal Evidence from the United States. arXiv working paper 2606.19777. arXiv

Uses an instrumental-variables design and estimates that data centers caused average U.S. retail rates to fall modestly from 2015 to 2024, consistent with fixed costs spread over more sales. A working paper; note the industry affiliation.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

High-growth regions saw inflation-adjusted rates decline, but not automatically

Latitude Media (July 17, 2026). Studies say data centers don't raise rates. Does it matter? Latitude Media

Reports the EPRI and Columbia findings that regions with the highest demand growth saw real rates decline, with the authors' caveat that the outcome depends on supply, cost allocation, and tariff design. Also documents that the backlash is about water and land, not only bills.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Thirty-eight large-load tariffs since 2018, thirty in 2025 and 2026

Energy and Environmental Economics, E3 (May 2026), summary page. ethree.com

Documents the rapid adoption of large-load tariffs that shift interconnection and infrastructure costs to the facilities, the con's evidence that the cost-allocation problem is being fixed without a ban.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

How large-load tariffs protect other ratepayers

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (August 2026). Electricity Rate Designs for Large Loads. Technical brief. LBNL PDF

Describes minimum contract terms, load-ramp periods of four to five years, and revenue-sufficiency provisions that make large customers cover the costs they cause.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

Data center demand is one part of much larger growth

Shehabi, A., et al. (2024), executive summary. LBNL PDF

The DOE report itself says the surge should be understood against the much larger demand growth expected from electrification, vehicles, and manufacturing that the grid must meet regardless.

conSupports: Contention 2Cut this card

Industry pledge to fund grid upgrades directly

Reported by NetChoice (July 2026) and industry trackers: the White House Ratepayer Protection Pledge, March 2026. netchoice.org

Seven large AI companies reportedly signed a pledge to fund the grid improvements their facilities require. Secondary and interested sources; find the primary announcement before you read it in a round.

conSupports: Contention 1Cut this card

The fiscal stakes for host communities

Rockefeller Institute of Government (2026). Updates on the Cloud: More Moratoriums on Data Centers. rockinst.org

Describes the tax incentives states use to attract facilities and the local revenue at stake, evidence for the con's investment impact.

conSupports: Contention 2Cut this card

Official demand and price data

U.S. Energy Information Administration. Electricity data, Short-Term Energy Outlook, and Annual Energy Outlook. eia.gov

The official baseline for demand growth, generation mix, and retail prices that both sides should cite for uniqueness.

conSupports: GeneralCut this card

Water and land concerns are separate from the price question

Latitude Media (July 17, 2026), reporting on community opposition. Latitude Media

Notes that community objections increasingly concern water use and land, which the con uses to argue that the resolution's federal construction ban is the wrong instrument for local siting concerns.

conSupports: Contention 2Cut this card

Block file

The arguments each side will hear, with numbered responses. Read the responses aloud with the timer; each set should take forty-five to seventy-five seconds.

Pro answers to con arguments

•Data centers have not raised rates on average (E3, EPRI)3 responses
  1. Averages hide regions: PJM capacity prices rose sharply and E3 attributes about half of that increase to load growth.
  2. Those studies are industry-funded or industry-affiliated; weigh the DOE report accordingly.
  3. Past average effects do not govern a demand curve that the DOE projects to double or triple by 2028.
•Large-load tariffs already fix cost allocation3 responses
  1. Thirty tariffs in two years covers a fraction of utilities; most households are not protected now.
  2. Tariffs are contested in every rate case; a moratorium gives regulators time to finish them before the load arrives.
  3. The pro's plan and tariffs are compatible; the moratorium is the pause during which the tariffs get written.
•The moratorium forfeits investment and jobs3 responses
  1. A pause delays, it does not cancel; multi-year projects absorb a one-year delay.
  2. The jobs are mostly construction jobs that return when the pause ends; operating employment at a hyperscale site is small.
  3. Weigh: household bills and grid reliability affect everyone; the investment impact affects a few counties.
•Federal moratorium is the wrong level; it is a state issue3 responses
  1. The grid is interstate and federally regulated at wholesale; the federal government is the only actor that can pause construction nationally before load moves across state lines.
  2. State moratoriums (New York) show the demand for a pause; a patchwork pushes facilities to the least-regulated state.
  3. The resolution asks whether the federal government should act, not whether states could.
•Demand growth comes from electrification and manufacturing too3 responses
  1. Those loads are dispersed and gradual; data center load is concentrated and abrupt, which is what strains planning.
  2. The DOE report shows the data center growth rate far exceeds overall growth.
  3. Even if other loads matter, pausing the fastest-growing one is the marginal fix.

Con answers to pro arguments

•Household prices are rising because of data centers3 responses
  1. The 2026 evidence (E3 review, EPRI causal study) finds no average effect and some downward pressure; the pro's mechanism is theoretical.
  2. Cost allocation is a regulatory choice being changed by tariffs; the moratorium does not change a single rate.
  3. Alternative causality: inflation, grid modernization, and gas prices drove recent increases.
•Grid reliability3 responses
  1. Reliability planning is the grid operators' job and they are doing it; NERC assessments drive procurement, not construction bans.
  2. Data centers increasingly bring their own generation; a moratorium removes that capacity too.
  3. A pause does not add a single megawatt; it only removes a customer who pays for upgrades.
•States are passing bills, so the harm is real3 responses
  1. The bills are mostly tariffs and disclosure, not moratoriums; the pro's evidence supports the con's alternative.
  2. State action proves the federal moratorium is unnecessary.
  3. Legislative activity measures political salience, not harm.
•A pause is temporary and reversible3 responses
  1. Capital is not: projects delayed a year lose financing and move; the resolution does not set a duration.
  2. Regulatory uncertainty itself deters investment beyond the pause.
  3. The pro cannot show that a pause produces the rules it wants; those are written by state commissions regardless.

Related

New sources for this topic

When this library is expanded.

Bring CUDL to your school.

We supply the coaching, materials, and competition access. You supply the students. There is no cost to the school.

Talk to us about your school Support our mission