Energy

Ohio customers are set to pay roughly $3 billion for electric transmission this year as transmission prices continue a 15-year climb. Beginning in April 2026, manufacturing customers in AEP Ohio’s secondary and primary rate classes, all non-residential customers in Toledo Edison, and primary and transmission-level customers in Cleveland Electric Illuminating will see higher transmission charges. AES Ohio and Duke Energy have not yet finalized new transmission rates.

This cost surge did not begin with data center headlines. Utility transmission spending has been climbing for years, driven largely by supplemental transmission projects that face limited regulatory scrutiny even as the bills keep landing on customers.

That is why Ohio should be skeptical when utilities claim the latest tariff or rider will protect everyone else. AEP Ohio has argued its data center tariff shields other customer classes from infrastructure costs tied to large new load, but no data centers are currently enrolled in the tariff and transmission spending is still rising statewide. Ohio Manufacturers’ Association energy experts have raised that warning repeatedly: when utility spending keeps growing and customers keep paying more, the promised protections are not much protection at all. 3/30/2026

Special tariffs for data centers and other large loads are spreading quickly, but the core problem has not changed: utilities are still asking regulators and customers to make long-term decisions based on forecasts that may never become real. Utility Dive reported this week that large-load tariffs are proliferating nationwide, even as doubts remain about whether those tariffs are protecting other customers from risk.

That is why OMA has kept pressing the forecast-integrity issue in Ohio. As OMA has argued, AEP Ohio’s widely cited 30-gigawatt figure was never a real planning number. OMA energy engineer John Seryak said it was used to create urgency around the tariff case, not to reflect credible system needs.

“Utilities keep presenting these tariffs as risk management,” said Lindsey Short, OMA managing director of energy and advocacy services. “But the first risk regulators should manage is whether the underlying forecast deserves to be trusted in the first place.” 4/1/2026

Ohio House Democrats this week rolled out a proposal to freeze Public Utilities Commission of Ohio-approved utility rate increases for 12 months and send Ohioans a $150 energy dividend funded by a higher severance tax on oil and gas extraction, framing the package as immediate relief for customers facing rising bills.

The Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) said Ohioans do need relief, but argued the plan mistakes political theater for reform.

“Ohio families and manufacturers need relief, but gimmicks are not reform,” said Lindsey Short, OMA managing director of energy and advocacy services. “A one-year rate freeze and a one-time check may sound good at a press conference, but they do not fix the system that keeps driving bills higher.”

OMA said the real problem is not a lack of headlines or rebate checks, but a system that keeps pushing more risk onto customers through bad forecasts, distorted incentives and infrastructure spending untethered from real demand. Relief that leaves those drivers in place, OMA said, is relief built to expire. 3/26/2026

Oklo’s latest federal approvals offer another sign that advanced nuclear projects are inching ahead, even with major hurdles still to clear. Oklo has now received two Department of Energy nuclear safety design agreement approvals and a Nuclear Regulatory Commission materials license, marking new but still early progress toward deployment. Major authorization steps still remain as no Reactor Pilot Program company has yet reached the final documented safety analysis stage needed to begin operating. The update also carries an Ohio angle: Oklo and Centrus said in January that they plan to pursue a Pike County joint venture tied to HALEU deconversion services at Centrus’ Piketon site. 3/23/2026

Before the Ohio House voted on House Bill 646 earlier this week, the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) warned lawmakers not to let a convenient political storyline obscure the real problem in Ohio’s electricity debate. Data centers may be drawing the headlines, but the deeper threat to ratepayers is a system that rewards inflated utility forecasts, speculative planning and infrastructure costs that end up landing on everyone else.

In its letter sent to every member of the General Assembly, OMA argued that Ohio should be asking harder questions about the assumptions driving grid planning and electric bills. When utilities project demand too aggressively, the result is not just a paper exercise. It can trigger overpriced capacity procurement, unnecessary transmission expansion and higher costs for manufacturers, families and other customers.

“Ohio lawmakers should be very careful about building policy around a scapegoat while ignoring the real cost driver in plain sight,” said Lindsey Short, OMA managing director of energy and advocacy services. “When utilities can inflate demand, overbuild the system and send the bill to everyone else, that is not responsible planning. That is a direct threat to affordability, accountability and public trust.” 3/19/2026

Rick Platt, JobsOhio board member and president and CEO of the Heath-Newark-Licking County Port Authority, argues in a Columbus Dispatch guest column that the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) is right to reject the claim that data centers alone are driving higher electric bills.

Instead, he points to a utility structure that rewards inflated demand projections and exposes weak accountability for monopoly utilities. Platt warns that building major electric infrastructure around speculative data center load is a risky bet, especially if technological advances reduce future power needs, and says the greater danger is leaving other customers to pay for stranded investments. He also argues Ohio should not reverse course on electricity deregulation.

“Ohio customers should not be forced to finance infrastructure built on wishful thinking, inflated forecasts and utility self-interest,” said Lindsey Short, OMA managing director of energy and advocacy services. 3/16/2026

A new Cleveland.com story centers on an Innovation Ohio report that misreads the real threat.

The report treats data centers as the problem when they are really the excuse. Ohio does not have a data center cost crisis. It has a utility-driven cost crisis. Utilities such as AEP have every incentive to inflate future demand, especially around data centers, because bigger forecasts can justify more infrastructure, more spending and higher profits.

“Innovation Ohio is aiming at the sideshow and missing the racket,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “Ohio customers are not paying more because data centers exist. They are paying more because utilities inflated demand projections, planned around speculation and positioned themselves to cash in while families and manufacturers pick up the tab.”

Data centers are the excuse. Utility overreach is the engine. Ohio lawmakers should stop chasing scapegoats and start confronting the bad forecasts, bad incentives and bad oversight driving higher bills. 3/12/2026

A new White House-backed pledge from Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and other major technology companies could intensify scrutiny of Ohio’s data center tariff debate. The companies committed to pay for new electricity generation, upgrades to power delivery systems and special rate arrangements tied to their power needs. That matters in Ohio, where the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) has warned that inflated utility forecasts tied to data center growth are already driving up costs for other customers.

In Ohio, the issue is whether those commitments will mean anything in practice. OMA has warned that inflated forecasts and utility-favored treatment for large new load can leave manufacturers, families and small businesses paying for infrastructure tied to speculation, not actual demand. Lawmakers and regulators should make sure the rules match the promise.

“If data centers are serious about covering their own costs, Ohio does not need a special tariff built around inflated forecasts and utility favoritism,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “Manufacturers and other captive customers should not be asked to underwrite speculative infrastructure in any form.” 3/10/2026

Ohio manufacturers made clear Wednesday that the future of the state’s power system cannot be built on speculation.

Members of the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association’s (OMA) Energy Committee met to examine the demand forecasts now shaping billions of dollars in transmission and generation planning across the region. Utilities and grid planners have pointed to enormous potential new loads tied largely to data-center development, projections increasingly used to justify major infrastructure investments that customers ultimately finance.

Manufacturers said projections alone cannot become the foundation for billion-dollar infrastructure decisions. When forecasts move into transmission plans and utility investment proposals, customers can end up paying years before the demand appears and, in some cases, even if it never does.

“Forecasts are not demand,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “And customers should not be paying today for electricity load that might appear someday.”

The meeting featured an energy engineering report from OMA Energy Engineer John Seryak, P.E., of RunnerStone, LLC, examining inflated load forecasts, rising transmission costs and the implications of the upcoming PJM 2027–2028 capacity auction. Members also discussed challenges emerging from the regional interconnection queue and heard guest remarks from Chris Zeigler, executive director of the American Petroleum Institute Ohio.

Additional briefings included a regulatory update from Chief OMA Energy Counsel Kim Bojko of Carpenter Lipps LLP covering key Public Utilities Commission of Ohio proceedings, along with market trends analysis from Susanne Buckley of Scioto Energy.

OMA leaders said forecast integrity and cost accountability will remain central as policymakers weigh decisions that could shape electricity costs for Ohio industry for decades. 3/4/2026

In January, AEP Ohio filed its annual update to its Basic Transmission Cost Rider (BTCR) which establishes the applicable rates to customers for the year. Within these filings, AEP Ohio shows monthly forecasts for billed demand and energy use for different customer rate classes.

This year, AEP Ohio is claiming that secondary rate class customers will experience billing demand 32% higher than 2024’s demand. Secondary rate class customers are typically small businesses, schools and churches. Although both OMA Energy Group (OMAEG) and the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) pushed back on AEP Ohio last year for using inflated forecasts to calculate the BTCR rates, it is clear that AEP Ohio is continuing to use inflated forecasts. OMAEG has filed comments in the case asking the PUCO to order AEP Ohio to reduce their load forecasts for this rider and use realistic values to calculate rates, and to investigate where else these inflated forecasts are being applied in AEP Ohio’s planning. 3/5/2026

Ohio lawmakers this week advanced House Bill 646, legislation that would create a commission to study the impacts of large-scale data center development, including electricity demand, infrastructure needs and water use.

After being blocked from presenting live testimony, the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) submitted its analysis to the committee, in an attempt to ensure manufacturers’ concerns were part of the debate.

In that written testimony, OMA Energy Engineer John Seryak of RunnerStone LLC pointed to findings from PJM’s Independent Market Monitor showing that forecasts tied to unbuilt data centers increased regional electricity capacity costs by more than $21 billion over three years.

“When forecasts exceed demand, customers bear the cost of overbuilt infrastructure through higher rates,” Seryak wrote.

OMA said the findings underscore a central issue in Ohio’s energy debate: electricity planning must be grounded in verified demand, not speculative projections that customers may be forced to finance years before the load ever materializes. 3/4/2026

Federal courtroom testimony tied to House Bill 6 is laying out how political spending and regulatory maneuvering were used to shield favored nuclear and coal plants from market forces, shifting cost and risk onto Ohio customers.

Testimony has detailed how former PUCO Chairman Sam Randazzo acted in ways that aligned with utility interests at the very moment manufacturers and other ratepayers were depending on regulators to protect the integrity of Ohio’s competitive framework.

“House Bill 6 was a betrayal of trust,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “Ohio manufacturers paid the price for a system that put utility interests ahead of customers. Accountability in energy policy is not optional. It is foundational.” 3/2/2026

President Trump’s State of the Union address on Tuesday night placed renewed emphasis on domestic energy supply, affordability and infrastructure as drivers of economic competitiveness. The president pointed to increased oil and natural gas production and lower fuel prices as indicators of a stronger U.S. energy position, signaling continued federal attention on supply expansion and competitive energy costs.

The address also referenced federal proposals tied to projected AI data-center demand, highlighting growing scrutiny of utility load forecasts and how forecast assumptions are shaping grid investment decisions and future electricity costs.

Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association, said manufacturers remain focused on ensuring projections do not outpace reality.

“We keep hearing about massive new loads that are always just over the horizon,” Short said. “Ohio manufacturers have learned the hard way that when projections drive policy, customers end up paying long before the demand shows up.” 2/25/2026

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments from oil and gas companies seeking to block climate-related lawsuits filed by state and local governments, a case many in the business community view as a test of whether energy policy is being shaped through litigation instead of legislation. Industry leaders warn the growing wave of climate lawsuits could expose domestic producers and manufacturers to new liability, higher energy costs and regulatory uncertainty. Business groups argue national energy policy should be debated and decided by Congress, not imposed through a patchwork of courtroom rulings that complicate long-term investment decisions.

“Trial lawyers and activist governments are trying to rewrite national energy policy in courtrooms instead of Congress, and employers are the ones stuck paying the bill through higher costs and legal uncertainty,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “Manufacturers depend on reliable, affordable energy to compete, and that requires predictable rules set through lawmaking, not a wave of politically driven lawsuits that punish domestic production and make it harder to invest, hire and compete.” 2/24/2026

Electricity costs are climbing, and reporting from Spectrum News and Hannah News Service shows the fight over who should pay for grid expansion intensifying as utilities and manufacturers clash over the assumptions driving future demand. Missing from much of the public debate is how the numbers behind these investments are created in the first place. In a recent filing, American Electric Power (AEP) Ohio acknowledged its earlier 30,000-megawatt projections were “purely speculative,” even as planning decisions tied to future growth continue moving forward. Manufacturers argue that when early-stage requests shape transmission planning, paper forecasts quickly turn into real costs for captive customers.

“What happened was they have used this number that they were never using for planning to create an impression of urgency with a lot of data center load,” Ohio Manufacturers’ Association (OMA) energy engineer John Seryak told Columbus Business First. “And then when calls for load forecast integrity investigation started to come up, they said, ‘Oh, well, we’ll cut it.’

“That number was never real.”

Ohio manufacturers are not opposing growth; they are challenging a system that allows speculation to influence billion-dollar infrastructure decisions before projects are proven. When assumptions are treated like guaranteed load, risk shifts away from utilities and onto customers who have no choice but to pay the bill.

“Ohio families and manufacturers should not be financing a hypothetical future,” said Lindsey Short, OMA managing director of energy and advocacy services. “If the load is real, prove it. If it is speculative, stop asking customers to underwrite it.” 2/18/2026

Coverage from Construction Review Online highlights the scale of transmission expansion now moving forward in central Ohio after PJM approved new 765-kilovolt backbone lines designed to handle rising electricity demand. Projects of this size are built to move massive amounts of power across regions, underscoring how future load forecasts are already translating into long-term infrastructure commitments. The approval comes as manufacturers continue warning that early-stage demand assumptions are being treated as guaranteed growth, potentially locking customers into decades of higher costs before projects are fully realized. Steel in the ground and towers on the skyline show how quickly projections can turn into permanent infrastructure, raising the stakes for regulators to ensure that planning decisions are driven by verified demand rather than expectations that exist primarily on paper.

“Once these projects move forward, customers are paying for decisions that cannot be undone,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. 2/18/2026

More than 100 ratepayer organizations, including the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association, are urging federal regulators to strengthen oversight of long-range grid projects, according to a new filing led by the Industrial Energy Consumers of America. The coalition argues that escalating infrastructure spending and weak cost controls are pushing electricity prices higher, calling on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to use its authority to protect customers from excessive transmission charges.

The push comes as new analysis from RunnerStone shows transmission costs for Ohio customers climbing sharply over the past decade, with AEP’s rates surging even as demand growth remains uncertain.

Manufacturers warn that without stronger guardrails, long-range projects could lock customers into decades of rising charges tied to projections that may never fully materialize.

“Competition is one of the few tools regulators have to control costs before they show up on customer bills,” said Lindsey Short, managing director of energy and advocacy services for the Ohio Manufacturers’ Association. “If transmission spending keeps accelerating without accountability, affordability becomes an afterthought.” 2/18/2026

Lawmakers in New Mexico rejected legislation that would have locked aggressive climate targets into state law, highlighting growing concern that rigid mandates could push electricity prices higher before technology and infrastructure are ready. Reporting from E&E News shows the proposal stalled as policymakers questioned whether government timelines were moving faster than markets can realistically support. The debate signals a broader national shift as states weigh affordability alongside environmental goals.

The outcome carries clear implications for Ohio, where regulators and lawmakers face similar decisions about how energy policy shapes manufacturing competitiveness, grid investment and customer bills. As transmission spending accelerates and planning decisions rely more heavily on future demand projections, manufacturers are urging policymakers to prioritize affordability and reliability before adopting mandates that risk locking in higher costs.

Across the country, policymakers are confronting a growing reality: when energy policy timelines outpace technology and infrastructure, customers are often left paying for decisions long before solutions are ready. 2/18/2026

The Ohio Senate on Wednesday passed Senate Bill 106, legislation aimed at preserving competition in Ohio’s electric vehicle charging market. The measure clarifies that EV charging is a competitive service, reinforcing Ohio’s market structure and preventing it from being treated as a regulated monopoly utility function. The Ohio Manufacturers’ Association previously submitted testimony supporting the proposal, noting that competitive frameworks help protect customers from unnecessary costs while encouraging private investment and innovation. The bill now moves to the Ohio House for consideration as lawmakers continue debating how EV infrastructure should develop within Ohio’s electric system. 2/19/2026

A newly announced $33 billion natural gas power project in southern Ohio, highlighted by President Donald Trump as part of a broader U.S.-Japan investment pledge, is adding fresh momentum to the state’s manufacturing outlook. The proposed facility near Portsmouth is expected to strengthen baseload generation, expand grid capacity and support the affordable power manufacturers rely on to compete and grow. Leaders say projects of this scale reinforce Ohio’s position as a hub for advanced manufacturing and global investment, while signaling confidence in the state’s workforce and business climate. Reliable energy is not optional for manufacturers. It is a competitive advantage that helps Ohio build, hire and lead in the next era of industrial growth. 2/18/2026