The data-center grid fight becomes less mystical when it is forced into a single study.

ERCOT's June 18 release says the Public Utility Commission of Texas approved its Batch Zero process for large-user connection requests, grouping qualified projects of 75 megawatts and greater into one study so the grid operator can assess future demand at once, fairly allocate available capacity, and identify the transmission upgrades each cluster needs. ERCOT calls itself the first independent system operator in the nation to use a batch process for large loads, and says it is tracking more than 438,000 MW of large-load requests, nearly 89 percent of it from data centers alone. [1]

That is the opposite of the viral version. On X, a data center is an outrage object, a warehouse of chips stealing power from households, or a national-security asset being strangled by regulators. Mainstream stories usually land on the same grid-strain headline. The queue record turns the dispute into projects, megawatts, studies, and deadlines.

ERCOT's large-load integration page is where the process stops being a slogan. It sets out the Batch Zero framework for facilities of 75 MW or greater, the forms and attestations a prospective large load must file, and the protocol revision that governs the study, replacing a project-by-project evaluation that had grown lengthy and repetitive as developers rushed to connect. A number on a press release becomes a row with a form attached. [2]

PJM's parallel problem sits on the supply side. Its April 29 Inside Lines report says 811 new generation projects, capable of 220 gigawatts, applied to connect through the first cycle of PJM's reformed interconnection process, which replaces a first-come, first-served queue with a first-ready, first-served approach that demands up-front financial commitments and proof of site control before a project enters. The application window closed April 27, and validation now decides which projects are real. [3]

Those records vindicate no easy camp. Texas is batching large loads before connection; PJM is trying to push viable generation through a disciplined queue. One asks how much new demand the grid can reliably accept. The other asks how fast new supply can clear and actually get built. [1][3]

The useful question is not whether data centers are good or bad. It is whether each proposed megawatt can be tied to a location, a study, a financial commitment, and a delivery date. If it cannot, it is not a grid plan. It is a press release wearing a hard hat.

-- DARA OSEI, London