DOE Picks Brookfield and NextEra for a 1.8 GW Data Center at Paducah; the Power Deal Still Needs Kentucky's PSC

“The power service agreement remains subject to approval by the Kentucky Public Service Commission.” That sentence, near the end of the Energy Department’s July 29 release, is the only regulatory step either announcement names for a data center campus that the companies size at up to 1.8 gigawatts of utility capacity on DOE’s Paducah Site in western Kentucky ^[1,2]. Everything else announced last Wednesday was a selection: Brookfield to lease land and run the campus, NextEra Energy to build and own the power plants ^[2].

The companies call it a $100 billion privately funded project ^[2]. The agreement that decides who carries the risk of a load that size has not been made public.

What DOE selected on July 29

DOE’s Office of Environmental Management, which runs cleanup at the former Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, issued its Request for Offer on Nov. 4, 2025 ^[3]. It asked companies for proposals to build and power AI data centers under long-term leases “that would be solely funded by the applicants,” with offers due Jan. 30, 2026 ^[3]. Paducah was one of four DOE sites picked in July 2025, with Idaho National Laboratory, Oak Ridge and Savannah River ^[4]. This column covered the Savannah River selection on July 23.

The Paducah awards split the job in two. DOE selected Brookfield “to lease land and develop and operate the data center campus” and NextEra “to build and own the dedicated generation resources,” including up to 2 GW of natural gas and up to 2.6 GW of battery storage ^[2]. DOE’s release adds that NextEra will upgrade existing transmission and that the gas plant would be grid-connected and built “at or near the Paducah campus” ^[1].

Big Rivers Electric Corporation, a generation and transmission cooperative, will provide wholesale service; Jackson Purchase Energy Cooperative, one of its three member-owners, will provide retail service; Paducah Power System, the municipal utility, signs on as a community partner ^[1,2].

And the hedge, in the companies’ words: “The project is subject to negotiation and execution of definitive documentation” ^[2].

Which numbers to read

The companies publish three load-side figures and one supply figure. Once fully built, they say, the campus “will support up to 1.8 gigawatts (GW) of utility capacity and over 1.2 GW of compute capacity,” backed by “up to 4.6 GW of dedicated generation resources” ^[2]. DOE’s release uses 1.8 GW and lists the gas and storage separately ^[1].

The 4.6 GW is the companies’ sum of 2 GW of gas and 2.6 GW of batteries ^[2]. Batteries store energy; they do not produce it. The firm supply in the announcement is the 2 GW gas plant, set against 1.8 GW of load. NextEra says it will add generation “in stages as the campus ramps up” ^[2].

Now set the load against the utilities that will serve it. Big Rivers owns 936 MW of generating capacity at three stations and lists 1,114 MW of total capacity, including contracted Southeastern Power Administration power ^[2]. Jackson Purchase serves more than 23,000 members across six counties: Ballard, Carlisle, Graves, Livingston, Marshall and McCracken ^[2]. At full build, one retail customer of a 23,000-member cooperative would draw more than its wholesale supplier’s entire listed capacity ^[2].

Who carries the cost if the load arrives late or leaves

On paper, the developer pays. The solicitation made applicants responsible for building, operating and decommissioning each project and required them to “secure utility interconnection agreements” ^[3]. DOE says the project’s generation and storage “would exceed the campus’s energy needs,” with the excess delivered to the regional grid, and ties the arrangement to the administration’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge ^[1].

NextEra chief executive John Ketchum was more specific about bills: the data center “will bring its own power, pay for its own power infrastructure,” with “not a dollar of added cost on an existing customer’s electric bill” ^[2].

The documents published so far do not show how that promise is enforced. Neither release states a contract term, a minimum bill, collateral, an exit fee or who owns the transmission upgrades once built ^[1,2]. Those are the terms that protect a cooperative’s members if a 1.8 GW customer ramps more slowly than planned. In a co-op, members are the owners. Big Rivers president Don Gulley put it this way: “Our members count on us to protect them from risk while planning boldly for the future” ^[2]. The place those terms would surface is the PSC case, and no case number appears in either announcement ^[1,2].

Timing is not settled either. DOE says construction “is expected to be completed in 2031” ^[1]. The companies say “fully constructed in 2032” ^[2]. A Brookfield spokesperson told WKMS the first components could come online as soon as 2028 and that the campus would take about 600 acres leased by the company ^[5].

Water, cleanup and the neighbors on the site

The campus shares the reservation with ongoing cleanup that WKMS reports is expected to run through 2065 ^[5]. A DOE fact sheet, as WKMS reported it, puts combined water use for the data center and gas plant at under five million gallons a day, drawn from the Ohio River, and WKMS reported the campus would be cooled by a closed-loop system ^[5]. Two uranium enrichment projects are also planned at or next to the site: General Matter’s $1.5 billion facility and Global Laser Enrichment’s $1.76 billion plant ^[5].

Where the sides stand

DOE and the developers. Assistant Secretary Tim Walsh said the department is “intently focused on finding ways to put federal land back to productive use for the American people” ^[1]. Secretary Chris Wright traveled to Kentucky for the announcement ^[6]. Brookfield chief executive Bruce Flatt called the site “the seed of our plan to invest $100 billion in AI infrastructure” ^[2], and told the crowd the $100 billion was “the first phase” of the company’s plans there, according to WKMS ^[5].

The utilities. Gulley said Big Rivers believes the project will benefit members “without compromising the affordability or reliability of their electricity” ^[2]. Jackson Purchase chief executive Greg Grissom said the cooperative’s priority “is always the people and communities we serve” ^[2].

Elected officials. Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) said he “personally advocated with the Secretary to help make the project happen” ^[1]. State Rep. Randy Bridges called it “a generational, life-changing [event] for all of western Kentucky,” and State Rep. Steven Rudy said, “It’s great news for the state” ^[8]. The response from Frankfort was less unified: the Paducah Sun reported that Lt. Gov. Jacqueline Coleman raised concerns about the rollout and said the governor’s office was not included in discussions ^[9].

Residents. After the announcement, many residents questioned whether the project could raise electric bills, the Paducah Sun reported; project leaders answered that the campus would run on new infrastructure built for it rather than on existing resources ^[7]. No ratepayer advocate or environmental group appears in the record this column draws on.

What I’m watching

The PSC filing. The power service agreement among Big Rivers, Jackson Purchase and the data center is the first document that will put a term, a minimum bill and collateral on the 1.8 GW ^[1,2]. No filing date has been announced.

The lease. DOE’s selection is not yet a signed lease, and the companies’ own release conditions everything on definitive documentation ^[2]. Whether the lease carries the 600 acres, and which completion year it uses, 2031 or 2032, is still open.