Briefing 03/06/2025

Mar 6

03/06/2025

This week's roundup: Virginia lawmakers passed new regulations on data centers, though environmental groups like PECVA say they don’t go far enough. Meanwhile, Idaho’s Kootenai County imposed an emergency moratorium on new data center permits due to concerns over water and electricity demand.

Virginia General Assembly Wraps Up 2025 Session with Key Energy and Data Center Bills

The 2025 Virginia General Assembly adjourned on February 22, 2025, after a short session and passed 917 bills. Several key energy and data center-related bills were approved. However, a proposal to establish a Virginia Energy Facility Review Board did not pass. Governor Youngkin has until March 24, 2025, to sign, amend, or veto the bills.

Bill information:

Key data center regulations passed and pending to be signed by Governor Youngkin:

HB 1601 / SB 1449: Requires site assessments for data centers, evaluating their impact on water, agricultural resources, parks, historic sites, and sound levels.

Sponsors: HB 1601 – Del. Josh Thomas (D) | SB 1449 – Sen. Adam Ebbin (D)
Vote:

HB 1601 passed the House with a vote of 57 YES (49 D, 9 R) – 39 NO (40 R).
SB 1449 passed in the Senate with a vote of 33 YES (21 D, 12 R)-- 6 NO (6 R), 1 Abstention (1 R)

HB 2084: Directs the Virginia State Corporation Commission to assess whether Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power's rate classifications are reasonable, including whether data centers should have separate pricing structures.

Sponsor: Del. Irene Shin (D)
Vote: Passed 61 YES (51 D, 10 R)-- 35 NO (35 R)

SB 1047: Directs the Virginia Department of Energy to evaluate and assess demand response programs, which could impact how data centers manage electricity usage.

Sponsor: Sen. Danica Roem (D)
Vote:

Senate: Passed 21 YES (21 D) – 17 NO (17 R)
House: Passed 53 YES (50 D, 3 R) – 44 NO (1 D, 43 R)

Why it matters:

Potential Cost Impacts: New siting requirements could extend project approval timelines, while potential changes to energy rate classifications may increase electricity costs for data centers.
Activist Influence: Environmental and policy advocacy groups, like the Southern Environmental Law Center, or Nature Forward, played a key role in pushing for these regulations. They campaigned for increased scrutiny on data center energy consumption, land use, and tax incentives.

Main takeaway:
In the last round of legislation passed in the Virginia State Legislature to tighten regulations on data centers, support and opposition began to split along partisan lines. This trend contrasted with the more varied positions seen at the local level.

Environmental Groups Criticize Virginia General Assembly for Failing to pass stronger Data Center regulations

The Piedmont Environmental Council (PECVA) – a Virginia-based advocacy group opposed to data center developments and the leading voice in the Data Center Reform Coalition – issued a statement condemning the General Assembly for failing to pass meaningful reforms on the industry.

The group considers the two out of thirty bills that passed to be merely minor measures. PECVA accuses Dominion Energy and major tech companies of using their influence to block reforms and warns of rising electricity costs for residents.

Bills supported by PECVA:

HB 2035: Aimed to establish a statewide clearinghouse for reporting water and energy usage of high-energy facilities.

Outcome: The bill was left in the House Labor and Commerce Committee –Democratic majority, chaired by Jeion Ward (D)– on February 5, 2025.

SB 960: Asked to direct the State Corporation Commission to assess and adjust the allocation of electric utility costs to ensure data centers are not subsidized by other customers.

Outcome: Passed the Senate with a vote of 26 in favor, 13 against, and 1 abstention, but fell in the conference committee and did not become law.

SB 1196: Aimed to require data centers to meet specific energy efficiency standards to qualify for sales and use tax exemptions.

Outcome: The bill was left in the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee ( Democratic majority), chaired by Louise Lucas (D).

Why it matters:

Renewed activism: Although Virginia’s General Assembly did pass regulations that limit data center development, PECVA is not satisfied with the outcome, and given its leadership position on the Data Center Reform Coalition, we can expect that it will continue to push for greater oversight and strengthen pressure over legislators in the upcoming election.
Differences among Data Center opposition: Not all activist groups hold the same opinion about the bills passed in the Virginia General Assembly. For example, the Southern Environmental Law Center was satisfied with the new regulations.

What’s next:
In its statement, PECVA pledged that if the General Assembly and the SCC do not act against data centers, it will intervene in Virginia’s 2025 gubernatorial and general election campaign by introducing the issue of utility prices and data centers into the electoral agenda.

Kootenai County, Idaho, Imposes Moratorium on Data Centers Amid Resource Concerns

Kootenai County, Idaho, has enacted a 182-day emergency moratorium on new data center building permits due to concerns over water consumption, electricity demand, and environmental impact. County officials cited the need to assess zoning and regulatory gaps before approving large-scale facilities.

Kootenai County has no data centers or publicly available information on ongoing data center developments, but its economy heavily relies on the tourist sector. However, county staff claim they took action in response to inquiries from data center developers. Local news sources linked Apple's recent announcement of a $500 billion investment in the U.S. to the county’s moratorium, though its connection to Kootenai County remains unclear.

Why it matters:

Preventive Action: The moratorium was enacted in a county with no data center development, responding to developer inquiries. Meanwhile, other parts of Idaho, like Kuna, have seen growth, including Meta’s $2 billion campus. This highlights how opposition can arise even in low-activity areas and how development in neighboring counties can fuel anti-data center sentiment.
Competing economic interests: Tourism plays a major role in Kootenai County’s economy, with resorts, golf courses, and outdoor recreation areas—all highly water-intensive activities. While aquifer protection and public health groups backed the data center moratorium, their involvement may signal that opposition is driven not only by environmental concerns but also by a desire to protect resources for established economic activities.

Main takeaway:
Kootenai County’s emergency moratorium reflects how data center development in neighboring areas and competing local economic interests, leveraging anti-data center narratives—such as water usage—can create fertile ground for opposition to data centers.