A dispute over Duke Energy Florida's proposed tariff on data centers is emerging as an early test of whether legislators will protect households from rising energy costs, according to The Apopka Voice.
Here's what to know
In a proceeding that could signal how aggressively Florida shields ordinary customers from subsidizing major new power users, the Florida Public Service Commission heard arguments over Duke Energy Florida's proposed tariff for exceptionally large customers.
"Exceptionally large customers" includes data centers.
At the center of the dispute is Senate Bill 484, a law that requires major customers to pay the costs of serving them instead of pushing those expenses onto the wider pool of ratepayers, and all investor-owned electric utilities in Florida must file tariffs that comply with it by Oct. 1.
Critics of Duke's filing claim it still misses a basic requirement because it did not set out a distinct rate schedule for large-load customers.
"DEF's non-compliant tariff proposal doesn't attempt to comply with the most basic provisions of SB 484, because Duke claims it doesn't have to," said Walt Trierweiler with the Office of Public Counsel.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
"Because they can't raise rates in the immediate future because of a settlement agreement. OPC points out that there's no settlement agreement exclusion or exemption from the statutory requirements," he added.
Bradley Marshall with Florida Rising asserted that the issue went well beyond utility procedure.
"We have an affordability crisis in this state, and now we have a new law that quite sensibly requires that data centers pay their full cost of service. Duke's proposal doesn't come close and must be rejected," Marshall stated.
More background
Data centers are becoming a larger part of utility planning in Florida and across the country.
As demand rises due to AI tools, cloud computing, and digital services, utilities may need additional generation, transmission, and local grid infrastructure to serve those facilities.
That can bring both benefits and risks. AI may help improve forecasting, manage electricity use more efficiently, and support cleaner energy systems.
On the other hand, AI-related data centers consume enormous amounts of electricity and water, raise cybersecurity and misuse concerns, and increase the chances that everyday customers will be on the hook for these costs if regulators do not put strong guardrails in place.
If a large new customer requires costly grid investments, those expenses will eventually show up on residential bills unless the company structures its rates carefully.
Duke Energy's deputy general counsel, Dianne Triplett, said the company's proposal already includes substantial protections: a 20-year minimum commitment, "significant" financial assurances, early termination obligations, monthly minimum bills, and two years' notice before termination.
What's being done?
With Senate Bill 484 already passed, the remaining question is how regulators will apply it.
The measure sets baseline tariff and service terms intended to "reasonably ensure" that each large-load customer covers its own costs.
The commission must now decide what meeting that standard looks like in practice.
Consumer advocates maintain that the best way to stop cost shifting is a dedicated rate schedule for large-load customers, while Duke argues its current proposal provides enough protection for now even without one.
"You may hear that you cannot and should not approve the tariff because DEF is not proposing a specific large load rate schedule today," Triplett told regulators.
"You may also hear large cost estimates and allegations that those costs will be imposed on existing customers, but no party has identified a mechanism by which approval of this tariff could increase any customer rates before the end of 2027, which is DEF's settlement term."
Triplett also claimed that Duke intends to file a large-load customer rate schedule in a future rate proceeding.
The commission's decision could help shape how Florida responds to the next wave of data-center growth and whether utilities will be required to build stronger protections before those facilities connect to the grid.
Advocates say the rules need to be settled clearly at the outset.
"This is a case of first impression, and the commission must get this right," Marshall warned.
Where can I learn more?
Florida is far from the only state wrestling with this issue.
Across the country, utilities and regulators are facing the same questions as AI-driven data center growth drives up power demand, and these examples show how quickly costs hit household bills when protections are weak or still unsettled.
• In New Jersey, AI data centers could push household electric bills up another 20 percent.
• In New Jersey, AI-fueled rates surged despite promises of electric-bill relief from officials.
• Across the U.S., utilities are signing unprecedented deals with data centers to manage soaring demand.
• Across the country, data centers are driving up electricity costs as AI demand accelerates.
• Public backlash is growing as AI strains water and electricity in many communities.
These examples help explain why Florida's tariff fight matters beyond one utility filing. Who ends up covering the cost of new demand could determine whether data center growth helps households or leaves them paying more.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
