Facebook and its parent company, Meta, are the latest big tech giants to directly power their massive operations with renewable energy. Microsoft is pursuing similar authorization, according to Bloomberg, and Apple already secured it through Apple Energy LLC. If the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approves Meta’s application, the company could lock in long-term commitments with new power plants while maintaining flexibility to hedge, reshuffle, or resell energy as operational demands shift. In simpler terms: Meta wants to secure reliable, large-scale power without depending on utilities and grid connection processes that move too slowly for Big Tech’s aggressive timelines.
Why a social media giant needs its own power trading desk Training and running AI models demands enormous amounts of electricity around the clock. Unlike earlier corporate renewable strategies that relied on carbon offsets and virtual power purchase agreements, AI data centers need dependable 24/7 energy supplies located close to their facilities. Bloomberg reported that Meta’s Louisiana site alone could require several new gas plants — demonstrating how hyperscaler demand now extends beyond intermittent renewables into firm capacity and energy storage.
The scale is staggering. Global data center electricity consumption could nearly double to 620–1,050 TWh by 2026, according to the International Energy Agency. U.S. grid planners, including the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, warn that data centers, electrification, and LNG expansions are driving unprecedented load growth across multiple regions.
Project developers need creditworthy buyers before breaking ground. As both a direct purchaser and potential seller when priorities shift, Meta can provide projects with the revenue certainty needed to secure financing while maintaining flexibility as data center construction ebbs and flows.
How market-based rate authority works
Non-utilities typically obtain market-based rate authority from FERC under the Federal Power Act for wholesale transactions. This status doesn’t transform them into traditional utilities but allows sales at negotiated rates if they prove they lack market power or agree to mitigation measures. Apple secured similar privileges in 2016 to sell excess renewable power and optimize supply chain terms.
For Meta, this toolset would enable purchasing energy and capacity from new plants, reselling excess power to regional markets, and hedging against congestion or price volatility — capabilities more commonly associated with independent power producers and commodity traders than internet companies.
Expect compliance requirements: market conduct rules, reporting obligations, and coordination with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on any derivatives activity.
How Meta could accelerate financing for new power projects
Interconnection queues are severely congested. More than 2,600 GW of generation and storage capacity sits waiting to connect in the United States, according to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory research, with average wait times approaching five years. Many projects stall when financing falls through due to lacking solid offtake agreements and viable paths around transmission constraints.
By committing capital upfront, Meta can fast-track shovel-ready projects — renewables paired with storage, grid-scale batteries, and gas plants delivering firm capacity — particularly in regions like MISO South and PJM where data center clusters are expanding rapidly. The ultimate goal is building a portfolio that ensures round-the-clock reliability while advancing longer-term decarbonization targets.
This aligns with the broader industry shift toward hourly 24/7 clean energy procurement rather than annualized renewable matching. Google
has championed 24/7 carbon-free energy, and utilities are beginning to offer retail tariffs and clean firm products at that granularity. Combined with trading authority, Meta gains additional tools to assemble these portfolios independently.
Risks and oversight considerations
Market participation carries inherent risks. Basis risk and congestion can create price volatility, while negative pricing events complicate traditional power purchase agreements. Transmission constraints may decouple plant production from data center load. Companies typically use financial transmission rights or congestion hedges, but these instruments add complexity and demand sophisticated trading expertise.
Community and policy scrutiny looms large. New gas units raise emissions concerns, even when supplemented with offsets or future hydrogen blending. Local permitting, water use, and land siting can slow projects considerably. Grid operators must balance reliability improvements against potential market concentration, and FERC’s review will examine competitive effects and impose conditions if necessary.
What to watch next
Key signals include FERC’s decision timeline on Meta and Microsoft’s applications, the formation of internal power trading teams, and early transactions revealing which resource types Meta prioritizes. Monitor regional developments: MISO, PJM, ERCOT, and SPP all face intense data center growth, but each operates under unique market rules that will shape strategy.
If Big Tech becomes a major driver of new generation — underwriting project risk in exchange for supply certainty — the U.S. grid could see structural benefits: faster capacity additions, innovative financing methods, and sharper price signals for clean firm power. The gamble is that directly engaging power markets will deliver electrons to AI facilities faster and more cost-effectively than the status quo, even as demand soars.
