Archive
(749 Total Articles)Page 12 of 13.
The piece is about a senator trying to remove some federal tax advantages for data centers. That fits the money beat because it concerns tax treatment of a project class, but the excerpt does not say which projects, where the policy would apply, or whether any site-specific deal is affected.
The piece says river-area mayors are talking about conservation because data center demand is putting new pressure on water supplies. It appears to be about how local governments along the Mississippi River are responding to that water-use issue, not about a specific project approval or utility deal.
The piece is about the public fight over data center expansion and the energy costs tied to it. It points to Congress as the place where proposals to protect consumers from rising power bills are being discussed, but the excerpt does not identify a specific project, host site, utility deal, or local approval.
Pennsylvania regulators issued a water-quality certification tied to the proposed restart of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant for data center power use. The filing points to a water and power decision in Dauphin County, but it does not say what water commitments, cooling changes, or broader project terms were approved.
The piece is about Minnesota's data center expansion and the strain it puts on energy supply, water use, and local decision-making. It frames the issue as a dispute over public costs and approvals, not as a project announcement.
The piece appears to summarize how county-level opposition to data centers varies by technology and place. It is about siting and community response, with the legal and local-government angle tied to where projects may face moratoriums or approval fights.
The piece appears to be about Ohio lawmakers and data center tax policy, with the focus on incentives and the political trouble around them. It points to a project-level money story in the Midwest and does not say anything about a specific site, utility deal, water use, or construction plan.
Harmony is advancing a revised proposed ordinance for data centers. The filing does not say what power, water, tax, or land commitments any specific project would bring, only that local rules are being updated before any siting decision.
The piece argues that promises to shield ordinary customers from the costs of serving AI data centers need enforceable rules. It is about who pays for new grid and tariff burdens tied to data center load, not about a specific site or project.
The piece is about Ohio data center tax policy, specifically whether the state should keep or roll back tax breaks already granted to existing projects. It is about the public cost of hosting data centers through tax relief, not about a new site or a company announcement.
The piece is about Indiana weighing how data center growth would affect its energy system and the local deal-making around hosting those projects. The headline and excerpt point to policy and incentive questions, but they do not say which project is involved or what specific commitments were made.
A French company is proposing a large data center project in Frankfort, Indiana. The headline and excerpt point to a planned AI-oriented facility and a large dollar figure, but they do not say what land, power, water, tax, or local approval commitments are attached.
The piece says a Wisconsin family sold land in Port Washington for far above its fair-market value, and that developers have already assembled more than 1,500 acres around a proposed 672-acre data center site. It points to land assembly and the money committed to control the site, but it does not say what power, water, tax, or permit terms the project has secured.
Microsoft’s data center proposal is back in front of Cherry Valley, so the local siting debate is still active. The excerpt does not say what land use changes, utility commitments, water supply terms, or tax package are on the table, if any.
The story is about federal legislation aimed at preventing AI data center power costs from being passed through to ordinary consumers. It concerns who pays for the electricity needed to serve large new loads, but the excerpt does not identify a specific project or host site.
The piece is about an Upper Burrell data center plan and the rule that the project must bring its own gas-fired power. That puts the focus on project siting and power, with local opposition and moratorium politics in the background.
The piece is about a proposed data center in Trenton and the public concern that the project is not being disclosed clearly enough. It points to a community-facing siting issue and likely a local approval process, but the excerpt does not say what utilities, tax terms, or land commitments the project includes.
Google is identified as the end user for the proposed Project Clydesdale data center campus in Tulsa County. The excerpt does not say what the project has secured on land, power, water, tax treatment, or local approvals, so those commitments are not clear from this filing.
Leavenworth County is holding a special meeting so nearby residents can weigh in on a proposed 1,000-acre data center site. The filing says this is about local opposition and neighbor input; it does not say the project has been approved, nor does it give details on power, water, tax terms, or land commitments beyond the acreage mentioned.
The council declined to revisit a data center agreement, which keeps the deal in place for now. The excerpt does not say what project terms were under review, what concessions were attached, or whether the decision involved land, power, water, or tax treatment.
The item appears to be about data center companies holding talks in Port Washington, which points to local project siting and possible incentives discussion. The excerpt does not say what was proposed, whether any land, power, water, or tax commitment was made, or what the companies asked for.
Five US grid operators are asking for more time on FERC’s deadline for handling data center power requests. The filing, as described here, concerns how utilities and grid operators manage large-load interconnection and tariff rules, not a specific project site or commitment.
A data center has broken ground near a former coal plant campus in Beaver County. The filing says the project is happening at a specific site, but it does not say what power deal, water source, tax package, or land-use approval is attached to it.
The House is set to consider a bill that would try to limit how much data center electricity demand is passed through to other customers. The excerpt does not say which projects, utilities, or states would be covered, or what specific cost rule the bill would change.
St. Louis approved a Midtown data center plan that is tied to projected tax revenue for the city over the next decade. The filing says what the project could contribute in tax terms, but it does not spell out the land deal, power supply, water use, or any clawback terms in the excerpt provided.