Battleground Pennsylvania: What We’re Really Talking About with Energy Affordability and Data Centers

NRDC commissioned Global Strategy Group to survey likely 2026 voters across the commonwealth (600 statewide plus large oversamples in the congressional districts of PA-1, PA-7, PA-8, PA-10; ±4 percent statewide margin of error and ±4.9 percent in each district). These districts represent a mix of urban, suburban, and rural communities whose electric bills are rising. There are data center projects proposed in all of them. 

The message from Pennsylvanians is clear: Affordability comes first. 

Pennsylvanians prefer new clean energy over new gas (i.e., fossil fuel) plants to meet growing energy demand (55 percent versus 38 percent statewide, with majorities in each target district). They say clean energy is more sustainable and effective at reducing pollution, improving health, and keeping bills lower. Views are more divided on reliability and speed to add capacity—but support for clean energy grows after they hear a balanced debate. 

When asked what is driving higher prices, the top answer statewide is “increasing demand for electricity, including from data centers” (46 percent). The second is “utility companies seeking to maximize profits” (30 percent). In PA-10 (Harrisburg), Pennsylvanians blame utilities almost as much as data centers. 

Most Pennsylvanians (74 percent) agree that when data centers are built, local bills go up. And 64 percent would not support one near their community. 

Policy solutions test extremely well—and people believe these lower bills: 

• Require data centers to pay for the extra electricity they need: 95 percent support; +78 net “positive impact on bills”
• Upgrade the grid with storage and transmission: 83 percent support; +53 net positive on bills
• Require tech companies to fund new clean energy to meet their demand: 81 percent support; +48 net positive on bills
• Offer efficiency incentives for households and businesses: 81 percent support; +50 net positive on bills. 

When these steps are combined into one clean energy affordability agenda, support reaches 70 percent statewide, with majorities in each district. 

Pennsylvanians also say this agenda would improve air and water quality (+56 net), help the economy (+35), boost reliability (+34), and lower their own bills (+29).  

PJM is the organization that operates and coordinates the country’s largest electrical grid that spans across parts or all of 13 states, including Pennsylvania; it serves as an air traffic controller to balance electricity supply and demand and keep power reliable. PJM also operates a competitive wholesale electricity market that includes a day-ahead and real-time energy market and uses annual capacity auctions to pay electricity generators on a three-year forward basis to commit to being available to provide electricity when the grid needs it most. 

When energy demand rises faster than supply, those auction prices, and ultimately, customer bills, go up. The three most recent PJM capacity auctions (since July 2024) and long-term load forecasts show surging electricity demand across the 13-state grid, driven heavily by data centers. Against this backdrop—and with supply chain hurdles in new energy, bottlenecks in PJM’s interconnection queue, and a hostile federal government—new generation is not keeping up with the significant pace of new demand. 

Expert testimony in Pennsylvania has warned of tens of gigawatts of new data center load happening within this decade—and flagged bill impacts if large loads do not bring new, clean, firm power and fully fund the grid upgrades they trigger. 

When demand rises faster than supply, prices go up. That’s not partisan—it’s math. 

What’s adding to frustrations is that, as bills rise, Washington is not delivering durable affordability solutions. Instead, people see: 

• The blockage of energy projects that are almost 80 percent completed because it involves a windmill
• Rollbacks and weakening of federal tools aimed at cutting power-sector pollution and modernizing the grid
• The opposition of transmission build-out and clean energy deployment
• No clear national framework ensuring that massive new electricity users pay the full cost of their grid impacts 

From a voter’s perspective, it feels like this: Big new energy users are moving in. Bills are climbing. And the federal government is hostile, stupid, or prioritizing Big Tech’s profits over affordability for voters. 

That frustration is real—and it’s bipartisan.  

The mandate from voters couldn’t be louder: 95 percent say data centers should cover their own energy costs, period. This means the responsibility shifts to the states. 

If Washington isn’t going to guarantee that new large loads pay their way and that new demand is met with fast, affordable, clean supply, Pennsylvania has to write those rules itself. 

Polling shows voters connect clean energy and efficiency with lower bills. They prefer building new wind, solar, and battery storage over new gas plants by a 17-point margin statewide. They respond strongly to evidence that renewables can be deployed faster and often at lower cost than new gas infrastructure. 

Politically, the incentive to act is clear: An official who supports a clean energy affordability agenda outperforms one who opposes it—especially among swing voters. 

Voters are not asking for ideology. They are asking for three things: 

1. Growth that creates jobs
2. Protection from hidden cost shifting
3. Faster, cheaper energy solutions—not slower, more expensive ones 

Federal failures increase state responsibility. 

If the governor’s GRID standards remain open-ended, Pennsylvania households could end up subsidizing hyperscale load growth. If, instead, they translate into airtight statutory and regulatory language, the state can welcome economic development while protecting ratepayers and accelerating clean, affordable power. 

The frustration that Pennsylvanians feel isn’t abstract. It’s about rising bills. It’s about fairness. And it’s about whether anyone is actually in charge of making sure growth doesn’t come at their expense. 

Pennsylvania can answer that question, but only if it writes rules clearly. Pennsylvanians see the same problem—fast‑growing data center demand and rising bills if we don’t set fair rules. The path they support is practical and popular: Make large users pay their way; build more clean energy, storage, and transmission; protect water and communities; and stop cost shifting to families. That’s how we keep the lights on, lower bills, and secure the benefits of new investment…no matter where you land on Wawa versus Sheetz.