TriStar Technology Council · Civic Education · Tennessee

The grid is being
rebuilt around you.
The deal decides who pays.

The United States is adding data centers and power generation at a pace with no modern precedent. That is not automatically good news or bad news for the people who live nearby — the outcome depends almost entirely on how each deal is structured: who funds the new power, who absorbs the risk, what gets abated, and what a community asked for before saying yes. This project maps those deals — starting with Tennessee and the TVA corridor.

EARLY ACCESS — v0.1 · THE NATIONAL MAP IS IN DEVELOPMENT · ONE WORKED EXAMPLE IS LIVE

File 0 — The thesis

Same buildout, opposite outcomes.

A data center can stabilize a region's grid and quietly subsidize every household's electricity — or it can push new generation costs onto residential bills, drain a watershed, and lock a county into a 30-year tax abatement nobody read. Both have happened. The difference is rarely the technology. It is the deal structure: behind-the-meter or grid-connected, who sits where in the interconnection queue, what the PILOT actually says, and whether the community showed up at the two or three meetings where the terms were still negotiable.

We sit deliberately between resistance and boosterism. This is not an anti-data-center page and it is not a development ad. It exists so that residents, operators, and policymakers can all see the same board — and so the decisions get made with the people who live with them.

File 1 — How to read this site

Every claim grades its own certainty.

Nothing here asks for your trust without showing its work. Every factual claim on this site carries one of four confidence tiers. A page that admits what it doesn't know is the page worth reading.

T1 · CONFIRMEDOn the record

Documented in filings, dockets, official announcements, or direct data.

T2 · REASONABLE INFERENCEStrongly grounded

Follows directly from confirmed facts, but not yet official.

T3 · INFORMED SPECULATIONA known playbook

No announcement — but the same actors run this pattern elsewhere. Possible and patterned, not predicted.

T4 · CONNECT-THE-DOTSNo real signal

A line you could draw. We label it, and mostly we decline to assert it.

File 2 — The frames

Six questions that decide what a buildout does to you.

These are the recurring structures under every data-center and generation deal in the country. Each becomes a full explainer with live examples as the project grows.

FRAME 01

Who pays for new power?

New generation gets funded somehow — by the hyperscaler that needs it, or socialized across every household's bill through rate cases. The single most consequential line in any deal.

Your stake: your monthly electric bill, for decades.
FRAME 02

Behind-the-meter vs. grid-connected

Some data centers bring their own generation and barely touch the shared grid. Others draw from the same pool you do. The same building can be a grid asset or a grid burden.

Your stake: reliability — whose lights flicker first.
FRAME 03

The interconnection queue

The years-long line to plug new generation and new load into the grid. Unglamorous, mostly unwatched — and it is where the next decade is actually being decided.

Your stake: which projects exist at all, and in what order.
FRAME 04

PILOTs & tax abatements

Payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreements and county abatements are where the local terms get struck — often in sparsely attended meetings, years before the first shovel.

Your stake: school and county budgets, for the life of the deal.
FRAME 05

Water

Cooling at scale is a water question, and in the Southeast it is a sleeper issue: rarely in the headlines, central to whether a site makes sense where it's proposed.

Your stake: the watershed you drink from.
FRAME 06

The "No" map

Failed and withdrawn proposals — where communities said no, and why — are the most valuable, least reported data in this space. They are the civic playbook, documented.

Your stake: proof that the terms are negotiable.

File 3 — The instrument

The national map.

The centerpiece of this project: an interactive map of the US grid and data-center landscape — every existing facility, every proposal, every failed proposal, every speculative site — cross-referenced with where each sits in its county and state approval process, with particular attention to nuclear and solar capacity and the Oak Ridge / TVA corridor. It is in development; we'd rather ship it right than ship it first.

National grid & data-center map

IN DEVELOPMENT · BUILT ON PUBLIC DATA (EIA · FERC · TVA · STATE DOCKETS)

EXISTING PROPOSED FAILED / WITHDRAWN SPECULATIVE

Each point will carry its regulatory stage, its deal structure, and a confidence tier. The map engine is shared with the East Bank case study below — one instrument, two scales.

File 4 — The worked example

Start with one node.

Abstract forces are easiest to understand on a real piece of ground. Nashville's East Bank — 550 acres, the largest public stadium subsidy in US history, an Oracle campus, and a Super Bowl clock — is the national playbook running in one place, fully documented.

CASE STUDY 001 · NASHVILLE, TN

The East Bank File

The story, map, money, power brokers, and timeline of Nashville's 550-acre remake — from the 1780 river landing to Super Bowl LXIV, with every claim graded.

$2.1B stadium
$1.26B public money
8,500 Oracle jobs pledged
2030 Super Bowl LXIV
OPEN THE FILE →

File 5 — Who this serves

Three seats at the same table.

Residents

  • Will this raise or lower my bill — and who decided that?
  • What is it doing to my water, noise, and air?
  • Which meeting matters, and when is it?
  • Where did communities like mine push back and win better terms?

Operators & developers

  • Where is power actually available, and on what timeline?
  • What did approved projects do differently from withdrawn ones?
  • What does a deal that communities accept look like?
  • Who are the actual decision-makers in each county?

Policymakers

  • What deal structures protected ratepayers elsewhere?
  • What's in the interconnection queue for my district?
  • What did comparable counties trade away in their PILOTs?
  • Where are the gaps between state policy and county practice?