Setting strategy for powering data centers while safeguarding co-op members

Key points

• Georgia recently surpassed Virginia in adding new data center capacity. By decade’s end, these new large loads are expected to use at least 80% of the new generation produced in the state.
• Atlanta’s expanding digital economy is driving unprecedented growth in data center development within GreyStone Power Corporation’s service territory. The co-op is attempting to navigate Georgia’s evolving regulatory environment to provide affordable, reliable power to these new members while protecting its existing membership.
• By requiring data centers to pay upfront for infrastructure, implementing minimum billing requirements and ensuring that all incremental supply costs are covered by the data centers, GreyStone is striking a balance between meeting large load growth while safeguarding the co-op.

CBRE reports metro Atlanta led the nation in new data center development in 2024, exceeding Northern Virginia with a net absorption of 706 megawatts (MW), compared to Northern Virginia’s 452 MW. This is the first time any primary market has outpaced Northern Virginia in this metric. With its proximity to the growth underway in Atlanta, the adjacent communities served by GreyStone Power Corporation stand to play a significant role in Georgia’s expanding digital economy. For this reason, we caught up with Creighton Batrouney, GreyStone’s executive vice president of power supply.

With approximately 134,000 members, GreyStone ranks as Georgia’s fourth-largest cooperative by membership. Located west of Atlanta, the cooperative serves eight counties including Paulding, Douglas, Fulton, Coweta, Cobb, Fayette, Carroll, and Bartow — a region notable for both its residential density and its strategic proximity to Atlanta’s expanding data center market. The cooperative’s infrastructure is robust, with roughly 7,500 miles of line and an annual sales volume of about 3 million megawatt-hours. In addition to its core electric service, GreyStone has diversified into broadband through its subsidiary, GreyStone Connect, which celebrated its first customer connection in February 2024.

Historically, Georgia Power has dominated the provision of energy to large data center loads, with GreyStone serving only a single 32 MW digital realty load until recent years. However, as Atlanta’s core fills up, data center growth is naturally radiating outward into nearby counties with available land and infrastructure. Reflecting that expansion, GreyStone connected a data center with a peak load of 85 MW in late 2024, with another 180 MW facility scheduled for commissioning in the first quarter of 2026, and a third 225 MW data center in the procurement phase. The cooperative anticipates planned and contracted data center growth totaling approximately 2 gigawatts within a single area of its service territory.

Beyond mere proximity, the fiber network’s presence in the region has positioned GreyStone at the heart of a burgeoning data center hub. The area’s appeal is further enhanced by a combination of state and local incentives, such as sales tax breaks and property tax abatements, which have fueled rapid growth and investment in large-scale IT infrastructure. This strategic advantage has attracted attention from major technology companies, including Google, Microsoft and AWS, all of which have established a presence—albeit sometimes modest—in Douglas County.

Eight counties and cities in Georgia have passed moratoriums, temporarily halting any data center development.

This explosive growth, however, has not gone unnoticed by local communities. Since the spring of 2025, eight counties including Douglas County and a few cities in Georgia have passed moratoriums, temporarily halting any data center development. Local authorities have suspended further development — due to concerns regarding power and water resource allocation, noise and the aesthetic change of their neighborhoods — pending resolution of these issues. Ordinances often follow moratoriums, with the pause in development allowing time for local officials to update codes or create ordinances before new projects commence. Data centers are still a relatively new land use, and they are often misunderstood or miscategorized. At the moment, Georgia land-use authorities are trying to work out the right balance.

The balancing act explained — attracting beneficial loads

From an electric cooperative perspective, balancing community and member needs begins with fair utility cost allocation. Data centers in Georgia are expected to use at least 80% of the new energy produced in the state by decade’s end. Utilities, lawmakers and regulators want to ensure that the costs of grid expansion to meet the emerging load from this sector are not passed on to households and small businesses.

Earlier this year, the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) approved a new rule letting Georgia Power charge new data centers for site-specific infrastructure, generation, transmission, and distribution to protect ratepayers from cost shifting. The new rule also allows for longer contract lengths — from five-year contracts to 15-year contracts — and minimum billing requirements for high-load customers. These new provisions were meant to ensure that new high-usage customers do not shut down and leave the state before paying for new infrastructure built specifically to meet their needs.

Many of the new PSC protections are already reflected in GreyStone’s master data center contracts. Negotiating agreements with these large, sophisticated electricity buyers is a complex process, shaped by factors such as credit ratings, billing cycles, and deposit requirements. Hyperscale customers often request longer payment and cure periods, necessitating higher deposits to offset the increased risk. Creighton emphasized that the cooperative’s ability to tell its story and articulate its competitive advantages is crucial, as data centers may not fully understand the benefits of the co-op model or its risk-averse approach. She explains to these prospective members that GreyStone’s margins are returned to its members, and that co-ops do not earn a return on investment in the same way as investor-owned utilities. This distinction is important as it influences both the structure and spirit of negotiations. Moreover, it can be a pivotal determinant of whether a data center ultimately elects to join a cooperative community.

In Georgia, large-load customers — such as data centers — have the unique ability to choose their electricity provider. They can negotiate and select among eligible utilities.

Georgia’s electricity market is regulated, with most customers assigned a utility based on their geographic location. However, large-load customers — such as data centers — have the unique ability to choose their electricity provider through a process known as “customer choice.” Only a select group of states, including Georgia, have carved out this option for large commercial and industrial users, while the majority retain a traditional, assigned-utility model for all customer classes. This means that when a large customer (typically with a load above a certain threshold) seeks service, they can negotiate and select among eligible utilities, including investor-owned utilities like Georgia Power and electric cooperatives such as GreyStone Power Corporation.

Should a data center ultimately select GreyStone as its utility provider, the onboarding process will begin with the member’s execution of a Customer Choice Agreement. Execution of that agreement signals the intent to negotiate further service agreements and allows GreyStone to include the expected facility load in the Georgia Transmission Corporation (GTC) transmission planning studies. The co-op’s estimates to its transmission provider must include only confirmed facility loads, as including unverified loads commits the co-op to transmission costs for cost allocation purposes. Subsequent transmission and distribution agreements outline the specifics of substation design, equipment, delivery dates, and milestone payments. These agreements are accompanied by substantial deposits, which are applied to the cost of construction and serve as a financial commitment from the customer.

As Creighton explained — thanks in large part to other cooperatives such as NOVEC, REC and Umatilla — data centers are now accustomed to paying for all of their delivery infrastructure upfront through Contribution in Aid of Construction (CIAC) payments with lower recurring fixed payments to reflect the operation, maintenance and future replacement costs for the infrastructure. GreyStone stipulates that data centers must provide full payment in advance for the construction of their dedicated substations. This payment arrangement avoids stranded investment risk should the data center walk away.

With limited pushback on delivery costs, Creighton highlighted that the material part of the negotiations really revolves around securing adequate power supply and covering the costs of that supply. When a data center approaches GreyStone, the co-op evaluates what power supply options are currently available. This can include building new generation resources or contracting for existing power in the market. If contracting for market power, GreyStone typically enters into a long-term bilateral agreement with an entity that has excess generation capacity. The data center pays for all incremental costs associated with this arrangement, and the contract is structured so that the data center is responsible for a fixed minimum charge, regardless of whether their facility is online at the start date. GreyStone requires a level of performance assurance from the data center. If the data center fails to materialize, a termination payment is required to cover the utility’s risk and allow time to resell the power or grow into the load.

While the revenue boost can be a great opportunity for co-ops, it comes with risks that must be confronted head-on. Data centers must pay for new substations, transformers and other infrastructure investments needed to fulfill their power demands.

– Gary Miller, CEO, GreyStone Power Corporation

For new generation, GreyStone has used an RFP process in the past to source incremental power resources. However, this approach is time intensive and can prove challenging because of the obvious disconnect between project timelines because many data center customers want power supply "yesterday." As a result, GreyStone often leverages its market contacts and prior experience to expedite the process and identify suitable suppliers without always issuing a formal RFP for every project. Moreover, the biggest constraint in the Georgia market is the existing natural gas pipeline capacity. Having firm fuel supply is a priority when supplying around the clock power to data centers, with renewables supplementing but not replacing base load needs. Even with an RFP, the limiting factor is often infrastructure rather than available suppliers. GreyStone’s familiarity with the market allows them to quickly assess what is feasible based on timing and resource availability.

Strategic adaptation and future outlook

GreyStone’s evolution in response to data center load has centered on engineering, contracting, financial risk management, community engagement, and operational planning. The most significant organizational impact of this journey has been felt by the co-op’s engineering team, which is responsible for building substations and supporting infrastructure development for these customers. The engineers have faced increased pressure and workload due to the scale and complexity of these projects, and their ability to deliver substations quickly and efficiently has become a point of pride for the organization. GreyStone’s membership services are also poised for change as the cooperative prepares for increasing requests from large loads. The need for education and transparent communication with the community is paramount, particularly as concerns about resource allocation, rate impacts, and infrastructure investment persist. GreyStone’s goal is to ensure that data centers do not negatively affect residential members, with careful planning and contractual safeguards in place to protect the interests of all stakeholders.

GreyStone engineers have faced increased pressure and workloads due to the scale and complexity of these projects. Their ability to deliver substations quickly and efficiently has become a point of pride for the organization.

The conversation with Creighton Batrouney reveals a cooperative in transition, navigating the challenges and opportunities presented by the rapid growth of data centers in Georgia. GreyStone’s strategic location, robust infrastructure, and commitment to risk management have positioned it as a key player in the region’s energy market. The cooperative’s approach to contract negotiation, financial planning, and community engagement reflects a deep understanding of both the technical and human dimensions of utility service.

As the market continues to evolve, GreyStone’s experience offers valuable lessons for other cooperatives and utilities facing similar pressures. The importance of upfront investment, milestone-based payments, and clear contractual terms cannot be overstated. Equally critical is the need for ongoing dialogue with stakeholders, from local governments to community members, to ensure that growth is managed responsibly and sustainably. Their journey illustrates the complexities of serving large-load customers in a dynamic market. And their proactive strategies, operational excellence, and commitment to member interests provide a model for balancing growth with community well-being—a narrative that will continue to unfold as the energy landscape transforms.