The Clean Cloud Act amends the Clean Air Act to require annual reporting of electricity use and electricity-source mix for data centers and cryptomining facilities with more than 100 kW of IT nameplate power, and to publish facility-level greenhouse‑gas (GHG) intensity measures. It establishes regional emissions‑intensity baselines, reduces those baselines 11% per year from 2027–2034 and to zero in 2035, and charges fees on emissions-intensity exceedances for both grid-supplied and behind‑the‑meter electricity.
The bill pairs reporting and fees with a directed reuse of proceeds: 3% for administration, 25% for grants to offset residential energy costs, and 70% for ‘clean firm’ grants (zero‑carbon generation and long‑duration storage). The law builds a detailed test for when PPAs, behind‑the‑meter generation, and energy attribute certificates (EACs) can be counted toward a facility’s low‑carbon claims — and includes notification, enforcement, and a clawback for grant recipients that fail obligations.
For compliance teams, developers, utilities, and cryptomining operators, the statute creates new data obligations, a novel fee formula tied to tons CO2e per kWh, and explicit limits on rate pass-through by utilities.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires owners of covered data centers and cryptomining facilities (>100 kW IT nameplate) to report annual electricity consumption, behind‑the‑meter generation, PPA terms, and source percentages; EPA (with EIA) publishes facility GHG intensity. Establishes region-by-region baselines and imposes fees on grid-supplied and behind‑the‑meter electricity when facility GHG intensity exceeds the baseline, with explicit fee calculation rules and annual adjustments.
Who It Affects
Owners/operators of data centers and cryptomining facilities above the 100 kW threshold; electric utilities that serve those facilities; developers/providers of behind‑the‑meter generation and PPAs; state energy agencies and recipients of grant funds (States, Tribes, municipalities, utilities).
Why It Matters
This bill operationalizes a facility‑level accounting regime and creates a financial penalty tied to emissions intensity rather than energy use alone, incentivizing on‑site zero‑carbon generation, hourly matching after 2027, and investment in clean firm resources funded by the fee pool.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The statute creates a new Section 139 in Title I of the Clean Air Act that focuses on electricity consumption and emissions from data centers and crypto‑mining facilities with more than 100 kilowatts of installed IT nameplate power. Owners must submit detailed annual data to EPA (and EIA), including location (balancing authority area), owner identity, whether the site is a data center or cryptominer, the serving utility, total annual electricity use, volume from behind‑the‑meter generation, percentage breakdown by fuel/source for both grid and on‑site generation, and PPA or contract terms.
EPA will calculate a greenhouse‑gas emissions intensity (metric tons CO2e per kWh) for each facility for grid electricity and for behind‑the‑meter generation and publish facility‑level source shares and GHG intensity each year.
The bill sets regional baselines (EPA to publish by December 31, 2025). For 2026 the baseline is the published figure; for 2027–2034 the baseline for each year is the prior year baseline minus 11% of the 2026 baseline; and for 2035 onward the baseline is 0.
Facilities whose computed intensity exceeds the regional baseline trigger fees. Fees are computed separately for grid‑supplied electricity (charged to the serving utility) and for behind‑the‑meter generation (charged to the facility owner).
The fee formula multiplies the kWh in the relevant category by a base dollar amount (initially $20), and then multiplies that product by the amount by which the facility’s emissions intensity (tons CO2e/kWh) exceeds the regional baseline. The base dollar amount is increased annually beginning in 2027 by adding an inflation adjustment (CPI‑U) on the prior year’s base plus $10.The bill tightly restricts when a facility can count PPAs, EAC retirements, behind‑the‑meter assets, or uprates as low‑carbon supply for the purpose of avoiding fees.
EPA (with EIA) will only recognize those claims when specific conditions are met: new or recently commissioned assets (within 36 months), prevention of otherwise imminent retirements, evidence of physical delivery (same balancing authority/region or physical delivery demonstration), hourly matching after 2027 (same hour), and exclusive retirement of EACs by the facility. Certain behind‑the‑meter generation will be disregarded if its emissions intensity is higher than the grid it would otherwise displace.
Confidential business information protections cover raw consumption figures in many cases, but EPA still makes location, owner, source percentages, and GHG intensity publicly available for every covered facility. Proceeds from fees are appropriated automatically: 3% for program administration, 25% for grants to offset residential energy costs, and 70% for grants/loans to develop zero‑carbon generation capable of high capacity factors and long‑duration storage.
Grant recipients must certify utility customers can opt into higher‑rate, zero‑carbon products and must face clawbacks if they fail that commitment. The law also treats tenants as owners for leased covered space and treats leased portions as separate covered facilities when they meet the size threshold.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Threshold: A 'covered facility' is any data center or cryptomining facility with more than 100 kilowatts of installed information-technology nameplate power.
Baseline schedule: EPA must publish regional grid GHG intensities by Dec 31, 2025; 2026 uses that baseline, 2027–2034 reduce the baseline by 11% of the 2026 baseline each year, and the baseline is 0 in 2035 and after.
Fee formula: For grid-supplied electricity the utility is assessed fees equal to (kWh supplied to the covered facility) × ($20 base, adjusted annually) × (facility GHG intensity minus regional baseline). A parallel formula applies to behind‑the‑meter generation charged to the facility owner.
Counting low‑carbon supply: PPAs/EACs/behind‑the‑meter generation count only if they meet strict tests — recent commissioning/uprate rules (36 months), same-region interconnection or physical delivery, hourly matching after 2027, exclusive EAC retirement, or a demonstrated avoided retirement/curtailment or deep retrofit.
Use of proceeds: Fee receipts are automatically appropriated each year — 3% for administration, 25% for programs to offset residential electricity costs, and 70% for competitive 'clean firm' awards for zero‑carbon generation at >70% capacity factor or long‑duration storage (≥10‑hour discharge), with certification and clawback rules.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions and scope for covered facilities
This subsection sets the perimeter: 'covered facility' means data centers or cryptomining facilities with >100 kW IT nameplate power and imports standard statutory definitions for data centers and electric utilities. The definition of cryptomining explicitly includes both freestanding and within‑building operations that use environmental control equipment, which avoids a narrow physical‑structure loophole. Practically, that 100 kW threshold will sweep in many commercial colocation spaces and small mining operations, and creates a bright‑line trigger for owners and tenants to assess reporting obligations and potential fee exposure.
Annual data collection, facility disclosures, and confidentiality
EPA, working with EIA, must collect annual data from both covered facilities and their serving utilities. Required facility data include location (balancing authority area), owner, whether data center or cryptominer, total annual consumption, behind‑the‑meter generation, source percentages for both grid and on‑site generation, and PPA/contract terms. Utilities must report class rates and the portion of grid supply by source. EPA will publish facility location, owner, whether data center/cryptominer, serving utility, percent breakdown by source, and the computed GHG intensity each year. However, EPA treats raw consumption volumes (total annual kWh and behind‑the‑meter kWh) and certain utility reports as confidential business information except where publication is required. Compliance teams will need to prepare submissions that segregate public and CBI data and retain documentation to support PPA and behind‑the‑meter claims.
Rules for crediting PPAs, EACs, and behind‑the‑meter generation
The bill creates multi‑part tests before EPA will credit claimed low‑carbon supply toward a facility’s intensity: recent commissioning or uprates (within 36 months), prevention of an otherwise unavoidable retirement, evidence of physical delivery (same balancing authority/region or a physical delivery demonstration), hourly matching for generation after 2027, and exclusive retirement of equivalent EACs by the facility. For behind‑the‑meter generators, EPA may disallow on‑site generation if its emissions intensity exceeds the grid’s. Those provisions are mechanical but detailed; operators relying on PPAs, contracts, or on‑site generation must retain contract dates, commissioning records, and interconnection and dispatch data to satisfy EPA's scrutiny.
Baseline determination, fee triggers, and fee calculation
EPA must publish regional grid GHG intensities by the end of 2025. The law reduces each region's baseline 11% per year (of the 2026 baseline) from 2027–2034 and sets the baseline to zero in 2035. Fees begin January 1, 2026. The statute charges utilities for grid‑supplied exceedances and owners for behind‑the‑meter exceedances using the same algebraic structure: Fee = kWh × (base dollar amount, initially $20) × (facility intensity − regional baseline). The base dollar amount is increased annually by adding prior‑year inflation on the base plus $10. The statute additionally forbids utilities from recouping fees from non‑covered customers and provides EPA authority to fine utilities twice the recouped amount if they do so.
Use of fee revenues and grant program design
Fee receipts are automatically appropriated: 3% to EPA for administration of the program; 25% for grants to states, tribes, municipalities, and utilities to lower residential electricity costs (rebates or efficiency); and 70% to competitive awards for 'clean firm' resources — zero‑carbon generation capable of year‑round output at >70% capacity factor or long‑duration storage with ≥10‑hour discharge. Grant recipients financing assets must secure commitments from participating utilities to offer voluntary higher‑rate zero‑carbon products to customers and to use additional revenue for financing eligible assets; EPA can claw back awards if recipients fail certification obligations.
Leased facilities and tenant obligations
The bill treats leased space meeting the threshold as a separate covered facility and deems the tenant the 'owner' for reporting and fee purposes. That shifts reporting and fee exposure onto tenants in many colocation or multi‑tenant data center arrangements, which will affect lease negotiations, submetering strategy, and who bears the costs of behind‑the‑meter generation or PPAs.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Energy across all five countries.
Explore Energy in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Renewable and long‑duration storage developers: The 70% clean‑firm grant pool targets projects with high capacity factors and ≥10‑hour storage, creating a dedicated funding stream and market signal for firm zero‑carbon resources that can serve data centers.
- Residential electricity consumers in hosting regions: 25% of fee proceeds fund grants to States, Tribes, municipalities, and utilities to offset residential energy costs (rebates or efficiency), which aims to blunt upward pressure on household bills from increased data center loads.
- State, Tribal, and municipal energy programs: Eligible entities gain access to a new revenue stream for consumer energy programs and for co‑funding local clean firm projects, increasing options for local decarbonization and grid planning.
Who Bears the Cost
- Owners of covered facilities (data centers and cryptominers): They must report detailed consumption and contract data, face fees for behind‑the‑meter and grid‑supplied emissions‑intensity exceedances, and need to validate PPA/EAC documentation to avoid fees.
- Electric utilities serving covered facilities: Utilities are assessed fees for grid‑supplied exceedances, must provide detailed reporting, and are prohibited from recouping fees from non‑covered customers; utilities will also manage regulatory scrutiny around rate design and cost allocation.
- Developers/operators of high‑emitting behind‑the‑meter generation: On‑site fossil or high‑intensity generators used to support facilities risk being excluded from low‑carbon claims and subject owners to fees; they may also see reduced marketability of certain behind‑the‑meter solutions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between decarbonization by price and measurement versus preserving predictable business conditions for energy‑intensive computing: the bill uses facility‑level intensity accounting and escalating fees to internalize emissions externalities and fund clean firm capacity, but the same mechanisms can push operators toward relocation, on‑site fossil generation, or contractual workarounds unless measurement, timing, and enforcement are airtight — forcing a trade‑off between rapid emissions reductions and stable operating rules for a fast‑growing sector.
The bill builds a granular measurement and fee regime, but its practical application involves multiple measurement choices that invite ambiguity and gaming. EPA must translate facility submissions into consistent GHG intensities (tons CO2e/kWh) using a 20‑year GWP for methane, choose how to allocate regional grid mixes for partial claims, and adjudicate physical‑delivery demonstrations.
Those technical choices — emission factors, attribution rules for mixed grids, and treatment of storage charging/discharging losses — will materially affect who pays and how much.
The statute's exceptions for when PPAs, EACs, or behind‑the‑meter generation count are intended to prevent superficial 'greenwashing,' but they also create timing and contractual frictions. For example, the 36‑month/new‑asset and 'pre‑existing PPA' carveouts could incentivize structuring transactions or construction timelines to meet tests, and the post‑2027 hourly matching requirement shifts the burden toward more complex scheduling and tracking.
The fee algebra (kWh × dollar base × intensity exceedance) ties monetary liability to an intensity gap, but because intensity units are tons CO2e/kWh, very small numerical differences can produce disproportionate fees depending on kWh volumes and the dollar base; annual base adjustments (inflation + $10) accelerate fee growth in an opaque way until EPA issues implementing guidance.
Finally, enforcement and administrative capacity matter. EPA and EIA must process confidential submissions, publish vetted public metrics, monitor utility pass‑through, and run a competitive grant program with certification and clawback authority.
Those are resource‑intensive tasks and the statute funds EPA administrative costs at 3% of receipts only after 2028, potentially creating start‑up funding shortfalls and delays in guidance that will shape early compliance behavior.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.