The column below reflects the views of the author, and these opinions are neither endorsed nor supported by WisOpinion.com. This colum was first published in the Wisconsin State Journal. 

Wisconsin has a real opportunity to benefit from one of the largest technology investment waves in a generation.

Artificial intelligence and cloud computing are driving rapid data center development. These projects can bring investment, jobs and tax revenue. They can also require extraordinary amounts of electricity, along with new power plants, transmission lines, substations, water systems and other infrastructure.

The opportunity is real.

So is the bill.

For Wisconsin, the key question is not whether the digital economy should grow. It is who pays for that growth, who benefits and who bears the risk.

Voters are already expressing concern. The latest Marquette Law School Poll found that 78% of registered voters believe the costs of data centers outweigh the benefits, up from 76% in July. Majorities of Republicans, independents and Democrats agree.

That should get policymakers’ attention.

Affordability should be our North Star.

Data centers can require billions of dollars in new energy infrastructure. Under traditional utility models, some of those costs can eventually be spread across everyone’s electric bills.

Wisconsin families, farmers, manufacturers and small businesses should not subsidize infrastructure built primarily to serve some of the largest and most profitable companies in the world.

The principle should be simple:

Large energy users should pay the full costs they create.

The Public Service Commission has already moved in that direction. Commissioner Kristy Nieto said existing Wisconsin customers should “not pay a single cent” to subsidize data center service, and the Commission has strengthened cost protections for large-load customers.

That is an important precedent. Now the same principle should apply consistently to generation, transmission, substations, water infrastructure, tax incentives and other public costs tied to data center growth.

Responsible companies should welcome clear, predictable rules. Voluntary commitments are useful, but they are no substitute for standards that apply equally to everyone.

Cost accountability must also extend to risk.

Data center forecasts can change. Projects can be delayed, reduced or abandoned. Technology evolves and corporate strategies shift.

Yet utilities may invest billions in power plants and transmission based on projected demand years into the future. If that demand never materializes, Wisconsin households and businesses should not inherit the cost of stranded infrastructure.

Private profit should not depend on public risk.

That is not anti-business. It is basic market discipline.

Wisconsin also should not assume that every projected megawatt of new demand automatically requires another conventional power plant.

Data centers are sophisticated energy users. Batteries, workload shifting, thermal storage and advanced controls can reduce demand when the grid is most stressed. New facilities can also be paired with new generation and storage.

The right question is not simply renewables versus fossil fuels.

It is: What combination of generation, storage, efficiency, transmission and demand flexibility provides the greatest reliability at the lowest total cost?

Reliability requires planning, not assumptions.

Data center growth also presents a governance challenge.

Local officials should not be left to negotiate individually with companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars without clear statewide standards or adequate technical resources. Residents should not first learn the details of a major project after nondisclosure agreements are signed and key commitments are already in place.

Developers should disclose projected electricity demand, water use, infrastructure needs, tax arrangements and long-term community impacts before decisions become difficult to reverse.

Community benefits should be public, measurable and enforceable.

Transparency is sometimes portrayed as an obstacle to economic development. The opposite is true. Businesses benefit from predictable rules. Communities benefit from meaningful participation. Developers benefit when expectations are clear from the start.

Wisconsin still has time to establish those rules while the industry is taking shape.

The Clean Economy Coalition of Wisconsin’s Data Center Accountability Framework offers a useful starting point: protect existing ratepayers, require cost accountability, strengthen transparency, protect water and farmland, require clean energy and give communities a meaningful voice.

Those are not barriers to investment. They are the foundation for responsible growth.

Wisconsin does not have to choose between technological leadership and public accountability. We can welcome investment while protecting existing customers, strengthen reliability while adding new energy resources, and create jobs while protecting water, farmland and community interests.

The durable position is not “stop the data center boom.”

It is set the rules for the data center boom.

Wisconsin should do that now, before enormous infrastructure commitments become sunk costs and higher bills arrive on kitchen tables and business balance sheets.

The principles are straightforward: affordability, accountability, reliability and transparency.

Data centers can be part of Wisconsin’s economic future. But growth works best when the rules are clear, communities have a voice and costs land where they belong.

John Imes is co-founder and director of the Wisconsin Environmental Initiative.