Offer faster interconnection in exchange for contractually curtailable load

The proposal

A utility offers a large load a materially earlier connection date in exchange for a contractual obligation to reduce demand during a defined, capped number of scarcity hours. The obligation is enforceable and metered, with penalties for non-performance, not a voluntary best-efforts arrangement.

Why it would work

Grid capacity is sized for peak, and peaks are rare. A load willing to step back during the tightest hours can be accommodated on existing infrastructure that would otherwise require reinforcement. Modelling of the 22 largest US balancing authorities finds 76 to 126 GW of new load could be hosted if curtailed roughly 0.25 to 1% of hours — about 177 hours a year at 0.5% — led by PJM at 18 GW, MISO 15 GW, ERCOT 10 GW, and SPP 10 GW (Utility Dive summary of the Duke study).

Curtailable load avoids the capacity procurement that drives ratepayer cost shifts. It also fits AI training workloads, which are the most deferrable large computing task, unlike inference serving live traffic.

Google has signed roughly 1 GW of data centre demand response across five utilities as of March 2026 (Google).

Trade-offs and limitations

• The headroom study is being over-claimed. It answers a long-term planning question and is cited to win interconnection concessions. 44 hours of curtailment is 99.50% availability against SLAs of 99.95–99.99%, and the system-level figure ignores transmission constraints, geographic deliverability, and whether curtailment is enforceable at the specific node (Handshy). The honest version of this solution is node-specific and far smaller than 126 GW.
• No published performance data. Google's 1 GW of contracts includes no disclosure of curtailment events called or MWh actually shed, and Google notes the capability is available only at certain locations. Until performance data exists, contracted flexibility is a commitment, not a demonstrated resource.
• Scale. 1 GW of contracted flexibility sits against a fleet in the tens of gigawatts.
• Backup generators are the wrong compliance path. A load that "curtails" by starting diesel generators shifts the problem to an air quality issue rather than solving it. Any contract needs to specify that curtailment means reduced consumption, not on-site combustion.
• Scope. This addresses cost and capacity only; water, noise, and land use are untouched.