Key Takeaways

  • Ohio data centers produced an estimated $62 billion in net social benefits from 2013 through 2026, according to Scioto Analysis.
  • Projected net benefits fall to $2.4 billion for 2027 through 2034 under current policies, producing a benefit-cost ratio of 1.04 (source).
  • Electricity costs, grid planning and tax incentives are becoming central issues for Amazon Web Services, Google, Microsoft and Ohio communities.

Ohio’s data center expansion has generated substantial employment, wages and economic activity. A new assessment, however, suggests that the favorable economics of the industry’s first growth phase may not carry into the next one.

Scioto Analysis estimates that data centers delivered $62 billion in net social benefits to Ohio between 2013 and 2026. That calculation includes approximately 96,000 jobs and $75 billion in wages, illustrating why state officials and local governments have competed to attract projects operated or developed by Amazon Web Services, Google and Microsoft (source).

The outlook for 2027 through 2034 is much tighter. Under current policies, Scioto Analysis projects $2.4 billion in net benefits and a benefit-cost ratio of 1.04. In practical terms, projected benefits would exceed costs by only a narrow margin. Small changes in electricity prices, construction schedules, tax treatment or environmental assumptions could alter the result.

The sheer scale of proposed development is shifting the economic calculation. Planned projects could increase Ohio data center capacity from roughly 10,000 MW to nearly 36,000 MW by 2028. That would more than triple electricity use associated with the sector in a short period, placing pressure on power generation, transmission infrastructure and regional capacity planning.

The study estimates that higher electricity prices associated with data center growth could cost Ohio ratepayers $16 billion from 2027 through 2034. That does not mean every dollar would appear as a distinct data center charge on a household bill. It does indicate that decisions about new power plants, transmission lines and capacity procurement could spread costs beyond the companies creating the demand.

PJM’s regional transmission and capacity-planning process will therefore play a significant role. Data centers can be built faster than major generating stations or transmission projects, creating a timing mismatch between new load and the infrastructure intended to serve it. Who should bear the resulting costs: developers, utilities, ratepayers or some combination of the three?

Other research reinforces the sector’s economic importance. A 2026 study from the University of Virginia Weldon Cooper Center and the Joyce Foundation, covered by WOSU, calculated that Ohio data centers generated approximately $10.6 billion in state GDP during 2023. The sector also produced nearly $931 million in state and local government revenue and supported about 84,490 jobs.

The composition of those jobs matters. Many are temporary construction positions rather than permanent roles inside operating facilities. Construction employment provides substantial short-term wages, supplier spending and local tax receipts. But communities considering long-term tax exemptions may want to separate the benefits of a multiyear building cycle from the smaller workforce typically required after a facility opens.

Tax policy is another pressure point. Supporters argue that incentives can secure large capital investments, create construction work and expand funding available to schools and local governments. Critics contend that exemptions reduce the public return while electricity and infrastructure costs are distributed more broadly. More than 125 active local moratoriums across Ohio show that the debate is no longer confined to state agencies or utility proceedings, according to the Ohio Capital Journal.

Environmental accounting adds another layer. Electricity-related emissions may occur outside the community hosting a data center, particularly within a regional grid. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol provides a framework for assessing those emissions, but the eventual footprint depends on the generation mix, renewable procurement and whether new demand extends the operation of fossil-fuel plants.

That said, the findings do not erase the industry’s earlier gains. They point to a different negotiating environment. Ohio officials now have more reason to examine load forecasts, tax agreements, permanent employment and infrastructure responsibilities together rather than treating each project as a standalone development deal. For Amazon Web Services, Google and Microsoft, future approvals may increasingly depend on demonstrating not merely investment, but how the costs of serving that investment will be allocated.