Georgia Power Bill Payers Left in the Dark

Georgia Power failed to run meaningful analyses, explore alternative scenarios, or isolate the true costs of serving these large, speculative loads. Our experts did. What we found was stark: The utility’s plan could trigger tens of billions of dollars in unnecessary investments, from new gas units to major transmission build-out, all based on a single, fragile forecast.

By failing to account for those risks or to clearly identify the costs tied specifically to large data customers, the plan offers no assurance that everyday Georgians won’t end up subsidizing an industry with uncertain benefits. In times of uncertainty, the planning process should lean cautious. Instead, what we got was a rush job to green-light a massive build-out, without the safeguards that ratepayers deserve.

The now-approved plan reflects a mix of progress, missed opportunities, and serious setbacks for Georgia’s energy future.

In response to our advocacy, Georgia Power will no longer rely on its previously proposed load forecast during the upcoming 2029–2031 capacity certification proceeding, the process that determines how much new power the company can bring online. This is a meaningful change. A large portion of the projected growth, especially from data centers, remains speculative. 

While Georgia Power is currently authorized to seek certification for up to 8.5 GW of new capacity during that window, the company and PSC staff will re-evaluate that figure in October 2025. The approved stipulation also includes modest wins in transparency, such as continued filing of the Large Load Economic Development Reports (which track progress of committed and potential large customers) and semiannual compliance reporting on EPA Section 111 greenhouse gas rules, though this may become irrelevant if federal regulations are rolled back.

Encouragingly, the flawed methodology for forecasting large load growth is only approved for this IRP cycle, leaving room for improvement as better real-world data and modeling tools become available. Greater coordination in transmission planning between northern and southern Georgia, another of our requests, is now included in the stipulated plan. However, meaningful stakeholder access to grid planning data and decisions remains elusive.

On renewables, the commission approved up to 1,000 MW of utility-scale resources, 3,000 MW for subscribing commercial customers, and 1,500 MW of battery storage. While these numbers represent some forward motion, they fall far short of the levels our testimony identified as both necessary and achievable, especially in light of the state’s rising demands. New pilot programs include a Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) initiative with 10 public school districts using electric school buses and a solar-plus-storage program for residential customers, houses of worship, and government entities.

Unfortunately, the plan also locks in several major setbacks. Georgia Power’s excessive reserve margins, 26 percent for winter and 20 percent for summer, were approved; this reinforces overbuilding rather than true resilience, despite the commission’s stated support for the latter during IRP proceedings. The company will also continue operating several coal-fired units past their original 2028 retirement dates.

Georgia Power is now authorized to procure up to 8,500 MW of new capacity later this year, which we expect to be heavily weighted toward new fossil gas resources. And despite earlier promises stemming from the Plant Vogtle settlement to expand energy efficiency programs, Georgia Power is reverting to a business as usual approach, maintaining previous levels of funding. The Southern Environmental Law Center has filed a motion to enforce that settlement. Meanwhile, Georgia Power’s “cap-in-place” strategy for coal ash continues to receive regulatory approval, even as long-term liability concerns persist.

While the 2025 IRP contains a few positive steps, they are overshadowed by continued dependence on fossil fuels, weak renewable energy targets, and a lack of transparency and accountability in long-term energy planning. Much more work is needed to push Georgia Power and the commission toward a cleaner, fairer, and more responsible energy future.