Facebook and its parent company, Meta, are just the latest in a string of big tech names to put their huge operations behind efforts to provide renewable energy for their own facilities. Microsoft is seeking the same authorization, according to Bloomberg, and Apple has it through Apple Energy LLC.
If approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Meta could make long-term commitments to new plants — then hedge against (or reshuffle or resell) energy volumes as operations and demands change. In simple terms: It’s an attempt to take firm, power-down power at a very large scale without depending on utilities and interconnection processes that are moving too slowly for Big Tech’s timelines.
Why a social media giant wants its own power trading desk
It’s expensive, in terms of having to burn so many cycles.
Training and serving AI models is power hungry and more 24/7 all the time. Unlike previous generations of corporate renewables strategies that leaned on offsets and virtual power purchase agreements, AI campuses require reliable, 24/7 energy supplies near to load. Bloomberg said Meta’s Louisiana site could require several new gas plants — a sign of both how hyperscaler demand is extending beyond intermittent resources and into firm capacity and storage.
The scale is daunting. Global data center electricity use could nearly double to 620–1,050 TWh by 2026, the International Energy Agency said. U.S. grid planners, including the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, have cautioned that data centers, electrification and LNG expansions are significantly accelerating load growth in several regions for the first time in recent memory.
Developers want creditworthy off-takers before breaking ground. As a direct buyer — and seller when priorities change — Meta can offer projects the revenue certainty they require to get financing while maintaining flexibility as data center buildouts wax and wane.
How market-based rate authority would work for Meta
For wholesale transactions, non-utilities generally obtain market-based rate authority from FERC under the Federal Power Act. That status doesn’t make them a traditional utility; it permits sales at negotiated rates if they can prove that they don’t have market power or agree to mitigation. Apple gained a similar privilege in 2016 to sell excess renewable power and wring optimal terms from the supply chain.
The toolset for Meta, meanwhile, would include the ability to purchase energy and capacity from new plants, resell excess power onto regional markets, and hedge on congestion or price exposure — skills more common among independent power producers and commodity traders than internet players.
Look for compliance guardrails: market conduct rules, reporting requirements, and coordination with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over any derivatives activity.
How Meta could catalyze financing for new-build power
Interconnection queues are clogged. More than 2,600 GW of generation and storage in the United States wait to connect, according to the latest research from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, with average waiting periods nudging close to five years. So many projects lose momentum when the financing falls through in the absence of a solid offtake and a viable route around transmission constraints.
By putting its “skin in the game,” as Meta executives have hinted at, the company can fast-track shovel-ready projects — renewables bundled with storage, grid-scale batteries, and yes, gas plants that deliver firm capacity — especially in regions like MISO South and PJM where clusters of data centers are expanding. The goal, ultimately, is a portfolio that provides full-time reliability while also making headway on longer-term decarbonization objectives.
This is also supported by the normal direction of industry movement towards hourly 24/7 clean energy purchase (and not annualized renewable matching). Google has played a leading role in promoting 24/7 carbon-free energy and utilities are beginning to offer retail tariffs and clean firm products that align with that granularity. When paired with trading authority, it gives Meta more levers to assemble those portfolios on its own.
Risks, oversight and local realities for power trading
When you start participating in the market, it carries risk. Basis and congestion have the potential to whipsaw prices; and negative pricing incidents can further complicate traditional PPAs, with transmission constraints possible to decouple plant production from data center load. Financial transmission rights or congestion hedges are commonly used by companies, but they add a level of complexity and require experienced trading savvy.
There is also community and policy scrutiny. New gas units raise emissions questions, even if supplemented with offsets or future hydrogen blending. Projects, meanwhile, can be slowed by local permitting and water use and land siting. Grid operators, in the meantime, will balance reliability gains with possible market dominance; FERC’s review mechanism will study competitive effects and apply conditions if necessary.
What to watch next as Meta pursues FERC power approval
Key signals are FERC’s timing on Meta and Microsoft applications, if internal power trading teams start to coalesce, and early transactions that show what type of resources Meta plans to back. Keep an eye on regional footprints: MISO, PJM, ERCOT and SPP are all the places where data center growth is hot, but each of these areas has unique market rules that will impact strategy.
If Big Tech becomes a reliably strong percentage of such new generation (risk-taking on projects, in return for supply certainty), the U.S. grid will benefit from structural advancements — faster capacity additions, innovation in local financing methods and sharper price signals for clean firm power. The wager is that directly engaging with power markets will result in more quickly delivered electrons to AI clusters than the status quo — and at competitive costs even as demand skyrockets.