At a press conference this afternoon, speakers shed light on how this immense project encapsulates the many environmental, economic, and accountability issues arising from the rapid expansion of AI data centers across the country.
The groups are challenging Entergy’s proposal before the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) to fast-track approval of seven new gas power plants for Meta through the Governor’s “Lightning Speed” initiative, which was designed expressly to incentivize AI data center development.
Meta now plans to double the size of its AI data center, pushing energy demand to more than twice the level previously disclosed, all while receiving $3.3 billion in tax breaks. This massive expansion threatens to increase utility bills; harm local environments, public health, and the climate; strain the electric grid; and will likely fail to deliver the number of permanent jobs Meta promised.
In addition to those ongoing proceedings, Meta is now fighting an Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) recent ruling granting Earthjustice’s request for Meta to turn over key information it has hidden from the public about its current proposal, including its level of economic investment and permanent job creation, and the amount of electricity load the enormous AI data center will need. Meta is now making a flagrant attempt to continue hiding critical information and circumvent the normal regulatory process.
Speakers discussed the impacts of Meta and Entergy’s proposal on Louisianans; the ongoing litigation, a recent hearing on the subpoena fight, and new expert testimony submitted to the LPSC exposing the proposal’s loopholes that could push massive costs onto ratepayers; significant issues around transparency and how they tie into recent news about the Governor’s NDA with the tech giant and serious concerns with Meta’s financing and stranded asset risk; as well as the politics surrounding this case at the LPSC, in the Governor’s office, and at the White House.
“Entergy and Meta are trying to ram through approval of these seven new gas plants, just as they did with the first three, by leveraging their political influence. Fast-tracked proceedings like these make meaningful public participation and careful regulatory review near impossible. On top of that, Meta is once again trying to hide information from the public,” said Susan Stevens Miller, senior attorney at Earthjustice. “As Meta continues to expand its enormous AI data center footprint in Louisiana, transparency can no longer remain optional when the public is paying the price. It’s time for Louisiana leaders to stop giving billion- and trillion-dollar corporations free rein and put the public interest first. We will continue to fight to protect Louisianans until they do.”
“With stakeholders having just weighed in on the substance of this proposal for the first time, it’s abundantly clear that Entergy and Meta have deliberately structured their deal to push a massive amount of the risk onto Louisiana communities,” said Paul Arbaje, senior analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “The Commission must act now to protect Louisianans from all the harms that could result from this data center and associated fossil fuel buildout, including grid strain, bill increases, and toxic pollution.”
“Entergy and Meta want the public to believe Meta is footing the entire bill for this massive fossil fuel infrastructure buildout. That’s not true and they know it,” said Logan Burke, executive director of AAE. “While Meta may cover much of the upfront sticker price, all of Entergy Louisiana’s customers are on the hook for costs that are buried in the technical details today, but will absolutely show up on residents’ electric bills in the decades to come. Before approving such a risky investment, the PSC must take the time to consider what this multi-billion dollar decision means for ratepayers, demand transparency about economic promises, and establish more guardrails to ensure Louisianans interests are put first over Meta and Entergy’s profits.”
Media Contact: Emma Meyerkopf, Communications Manager, 504-229-4643, emma@all4energy.org
In April, AAE and UCS, represented by Earthjustice, intervened to challenge Entergy Louisiana’s (ELL) proposal before the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) to fast-track approval of seven new gas power plants primarily to power Meta’s Hyperion AI data center project in Richland Parish through the Governor’s “Lightning Speed” initiative. What is now planned to be a 5GW project at one site for Meta is the equivalent of powering millions of homes. The same organizations also fought Meta and Entergy’s fast-tracked proceedings last year for the first three gas plants, which the LPSC approved.
On Friday, the groups submitted expert testimony showing that ELL and Meta’s claims that ratepayers will benefit from the proposed gas buildout rely on unrealistic assumptions that don’t hold up. A deviation of just 3.5% from ELL’s own projections would eliminate those benefits entirely. The testimony warned that other utility customers, not Meta, could bear much of the cost and risk of the more than $15 billion fossil fuel expansion, including through charges for new gas pipelines recovered on all ELL customers’ bills through the Fuel Adjustment Clause. It also highlighted that ELL never evaluated cleaner or cheaper alternatives because the “Lightning Speed” process does not require it. The testimony also raised concerns about grid reliability impacts and shows how Entergy dismissed solutions that could both mitigate the data center’s strain on the grid while reducing overall costs.
In a separate part of the same proceeding, an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in early July granted Earthjustice’s request on behalf of AAE and UCS, ordering Meta to demonstrate its level of economic investment and permanent job creation for the data center and substantiate the amount of electricity load it will need. The ALJ ruling was a major win and an important step toward a more transparent regulatory process, even though it denied requests on load variability, Meta’s assets, and for communications between Meta and Entergy regarding Meta’s sustainability agreement. Meta swiftly challenged that decision, which the ALJ held a hearing for on Wednesday.
Meta claims the evidence the ALJ ruled it must turnover isn’t necessary for the LPSC to determine whether this massive fossil fuel buildout is in the public interest. This is completely false. Just last month, an LPSC consultant found that ELL’s proposal to purchase a Texas gas plant to provide even more electricity to power Meta’s Hyperion could increase residential utility bills by $8–$13 per month. Seven additional gas plants will only increase those costs. Ratepayers deserve to know how Meta calculated its energy needs, whether those projections are justified, and how much they will ultimately be forced to pay.
Meta has also continuously made promises that this AI data center project will provide economic development and jobs to the state and surrounding community, including its recent claim that 1,000 permanent jobs would come out of the expanded Hyperion AI data center. These projects, however, notoriously produce very few permanent jobs and far fewer than tech companies promise. On top of attempting to avoid accountability by hiding critical evidence from the public, Meta has fought to get the subpoena issue moved from the ALJ to the Commissioners themselves. This is a blatant attempt to kick the can down the road, raising the question, what does Meta have to hide?
This isn’t the first time Meta has hidden information over this project. In the initial fast-tracked proceeding last year for Meta and ELL’s first three gas plants for Hyperion, the LPSC denied a request for critical information made by Earthjustice, AAE and UCS while it approved those gas plants. Meta has attempted to avoid accountability in other ways as well. On the same day the LPSC rubber-stamped those first three gas plants, Meta made a shady financing deal that left it with only 20% ownership in the data center project, giving the company the ability to walk away from the data center in four years while leaving Louisiana customers on the hook for Entergy’s methane gas plants that have a 30-year lifespan. Earthjustice asked the LPSC to investigate the post-approval deal when it became known to the public, which the Commission denied.
Given the precarious state of Meta’s AI data center financing and its rising infrastructure costs, Louisianans deserve to know whether the trillion-dollar company will pay to build costly, polluting fossil fuel infrastructure or leave Louisiana ratepayers to pay for these potential stranded assets.
Meta is pushing to secure approval for the seven gas plants before two of the five LPSC Commissioners leave office after this year’s elections. Meanwhile, many candidates for the LPSC and the Legislature have received campaign money, directly or indirectly, from Entergy and other utilities. Meta has also struck backroom deals with public officials, including persuading the Governor to sign an NDA over Hyperion, while at least one legislator who championed data center incentive legislation had a conflict of interest. Most recently, the Governor and Entergy’s CEO joined the President to sign his unenforceable “Ratepayer Protection Pledge” to curry favor with Louisianans pushing back against Meta’s expanding influence over the state’s energy future.
This fight is about more than seven gas plants—it’s about whether Meta and ELL can rewrite the rules and game the system while Louisiana communities pay the price.
