PGIQ Rating v2 (reliability-adjusted) · as of June 2026

🇺🇸 US Southeast (Atlanta)

Strong, with known trade-offs, and the path is improving Minor flags found
Tier 2 Strong · Composite 65/100, #15 of 79 markets (fundamentals 69 minus a reliability dock) · Outlook Positive · Med confidence · how we score

A top-three North American market that is building fast and cheaper than the coasts. Atlanta has around two gigawatts under construction, Southern Company is adding gas and solar, and access is workable. Strong and on an improving path.

See live grid data →

One market,
four reads

BuildTier 2Siting rating SellGrade AOfftake PlanRisingLoad pressure MonitorSoundGrid strength

The same market, four decisions. Open any lens to see this market ranked against the rest.

Time to energize · file to power

~50 mo

File a large load today, powered ~2030. Typical range 42 to 57 months, measured.

End-to-end wait for a large new load, from a complete application being accepted to full firm energization of the nominated MW. Earlier milestones (initial, phased, temporary or conditional energization) are reported separately. A typical case, not a firm quote. · Source: LBNL Queued Up 2026 · Compare markets →

The same market, read four ways

BuildSellPlanMonitor

US Southeast (Atlanta) is a strong market to sell power into

Grade A (Strong)

Offtake score 89/100

Demand 50, build feasibility 71, combined into the score. For a seller: where buyers already pay, how tight supply is, and how feasible new build is here.

Price to beat

A 100 MW load on our standard case pays about $72/MWh delivered here. A competitive supply offer works against that level.

Queue depth (generation and storage)

About 153 GW in the interconnection queue (the line to connect to the grid), typical wait 50 months.

Regulatory momentum

Mixed, improving. Georgia's PSC now requires any new load of 100 MW or more to sign a customized contract with financial guarantees, terms up to 15 years and minimum payments (in force since 1 February 2025), and in December 2025 approved roughly 10 GW of new generation, about 80 percent to serve data centres, with cost protections for residential customers. Access is managed and selective but genuinely open.

See it on the Offtake Grade →

US Southeast (Atlanta): some room at system level, rising demand pressure

Some room 63/100

System-level room, not local capacity

Local capacity: not assessed. We have found no operator publication of area or substation capacity for this market, so whether the bus serving a candidate site can take the load is an open question. Absence of a finding here is not evidence that capacity exists.

Two reads for a grid planner: how much room the system as a whole looks to have (Some room), and how hard demand is already pushing (Rising). The first is a market-level estimate from connection ease, forward adequacy and reliability margin. It is not local deliverability. Capacity at a specific substation is not assessed for this market, and a market can look roomy while the bus you want has nothing available. Confirm local capacity with the utility before relying on it.

Generation and storage queue

153 GW requested; about 38.2 GW likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal. The gap is speculative pipeline. This counts generation and storage seeking to connect, not load.

Demand growth

Fast load growth in our read, the pull on your system.

Future firm supply

Future firm supply: adequacy flagged for a large new load.

Load Pipeline Reality → Where demand is hungry → Connection friction →

Grid Risk Annex BETA

Sound

Manageable with normal diligence · grid strength 59/100

A cited, dated grid-risk read on US Southeast (Atlanta) for a capital provider, the banks and private-credit lenders, infrastructure funds and insurers holding or underwriting a power or data-centre exposure here. Drop it into a credit memo and watch each factor over the life of the exposure.

Read it against your asset. For a load asset (Buy), weight connection access and energization timing. For a generation or offtake asset (Sell), weight offtake demand, curtailment (when a plant is told to stop feeding the grid) and cost realisation. For a grid or transmission asset (Move), weight load-pipeline reality and buildout risk.

Rating and track record

PGIQ Tier 2 Strong, outlook Positive, Med confidence. Scored on a public, dated, falsifiable record you can cite in a credit memo.

Delivery reliability

Minor flags found in the bulk and local outage record we reviewed.

Future firm supply

Future firm supply: adequacy flagged.

Cost certainty

Recurring cost about $72/MWh (band $60 to $88) for the standard 100 MW case, basis modelled. Excludes connection capital.

Regulatory / stroke-of-pen

Execution risk

153 GW in the generation and storage queue, about 75% historically withdrawn, the risk the project or load actually energizes on time.

Ongoing monitor

Track this market's rating actions and the Global Power Index as a covenant-style monitor over the life of the exposure.

Monitoring plan

Covenant-style triggers to watch over the life of the exposure: a change in the PGIQ rating or outlook; a dated regulatory move (stroke-of-pen risk); a capacity-auction or cost-band shift; a forward firm-supply adequacy warning; and a rise in queue drop-out or connection friction. Track them on this market page and the Global Power Index, or as Analyst Desk alerts.

Sources: North American data-center records, CBRE

This is a directional grid-risk screen, not a credit rating, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice.

The formatted, cited Grid Risk Annex export is an Analyst Desk feature.See the Grid Exposure Monitor →

Regulatory momentum

The regulatory and permitting environment is increasingly the binding variable for a new large load.

Mixed↑ improving

Why: Georgia's PSC now requires any new load of 100 MW or more to sign a customized contract with financial guarantees, terms up to 15 years and minimum payments (in force since 1 February 2025), and in December 2025 approved roughly 10 GW of new generation, about 80 percent to serve data centres, with cost protections for residential customers. Access is managed and selective but genuinely open.

What would change the read: The customized-contract regime and the April 2026 Customer Identified Resource programme delivering firm, predictable connection at scale.

The five pillars behind the tier

The pillar signature: Access, Availability, Cost, Momentum, Carbon, taller is stronger. The same shape repeats across every market so peers compare at a glance.

Access30%65

Workable access: faster than PJM, with utility-led connection and active large-load accommodation.

Availability25%60

Moderate availability: Southern Company is adding gas and solar to keep pace with the build.

Cost25%72

Reasonable cost: mid-range wholesale, cheaper than the coastal hubs.

Momentum15%88

Very high momentum: ~2 GW under construction, a top-three NA market by inventory growth.

Carbon5%60

Carbon moderate (~270 g), gas-and-nuclear with rising solar.

Default weights, which lean toward cost and access rather than carbon: Access 30 · Availability 25 · Cost 25 · Momentum 15 · Carbon 5. Momentum reflects the data-center build already underway, not just stated intentions.

Seller view: Read these the other way: momentum is your customer pipeline, cost is your revenue ceiling, and access is how hard it is to build and sell here, not only to connect.

Reliability overlay

Reliability adjustment: the five-pillar score of 69 is reduced to 65, a deduction of 4 points, reflecting the delivery-reliability and firm-supply risks flagged below. Reliability is reported as five separate layers, never as one combined label, because they answer different questions and a strong answer on one does not cover a gap in another: what has actually failed on the bulk system, what a forward assessment expects of firm supply, how the local network performs, what your contract actually promises, and what your site is designed to ride through. Any one of them can cap the tier.

Historical bulk-system performance: Minor flags found

Winter Storm Elliott (Dec 2022) forced rolling blackouts at TVA (its first ever) and Duke Energy in the Carolinas when cold knocked out coal and gas generation; imports prevented wider outages.

What this means: A large new load faces occasional exposure here. Monitor conditions and keep a contingency plan.

event-based · FERC Dec 2022 Winter Storm Elliott review

Historical utility-territory delivery performance: No reliability flags found

Average customer interruption (SAIDI) of 127.94 minutes per year in 2024, excluding major event days as filed.

measured · EIA Form 861, Schedules 3B and 3C (annual electric power industry report) (IEEE 1366 major-event treatment, customer-weighted blend of 1 utilities, regional context only)

Role not yet declared. We have not recorded whether this is one operator’s filing or an average across several, so read it as context until we do. major event days identified by IEEE 1366 (2.5-beta method). It is a territory-wide history and is silent on: performance at a specific substation or feeder; transmission-level service, which is a different product from distribution service; the industrial or large-load customer class specifically; N-1 or other redundancy architecture at the supplying substation; contractual curtailment rights the utility may hold over the load; power quality and momentary interruptions, which this metric excludes by construction; on-site UPS, storage or generation; forward adequacy: it is a record of what happened, not a forecast.

Forward resource adequacy (assessed): Adequacy flagged

Winter generation adequacy under extreme cold is the main forward risk; largely vertically integrated utilities are adding capacity.

What this means: A large new load faces occasional exposure here. Monitor conditions and keep a contingency plan.

modelled

Contractual service terms: firm with take or pay

Since 1 February 2025 a new customer whose expected peak demand is 100 MW or more, at one site or contiguous tracts, may no longer take the standard large-power tariffs (PLL-18, or the standard price option of TOU-SC-15) at all. It must negotiate a customised contract under a rule the Georgia commission approved on 23 January 2025. Service is firm: there is no curtailment obligation attached, which distinguishes this from ERCOT or Ireland. The exposure is commercial instead. Contracts now run up to 15 years, against a previous maximum of 5, and carry minimum billing, so the customer pays a set amount each month whatever it actually consumes. Before construction begins the utility may require collateral, a security deposit or a letter of credit, to secure recovery of what it spends preparing to serve. Ending early can require repaying the distribution, transmission and generation investment made to get ready. Every contract at or above the threshold must be filed with the commission at least 30 days before signature, which creates a review window but also means the terms are individually negotiated and not public: there is no template to price against. As of late 2025 the utility had signed 29 large-load commitments, of which 6 are named and 22 remain confidential.

What the service contract promises, as distinct from how the system has performed · Georgia Power Rules and Regulations tariff, large-load provisions (2025)

Designed site resilience: not applicable at market level

Utility feeds, UPS, storage, on-site generation, islanding, black start and the residual energy you still expect to lose are properties of a specific site design, not of a market. This layer only exists once there is a site, and we never assert it for you.

Confidence: Med-High. Each input is labelled as measured, modelled, or drawn from a specific event, and is framed as a risk to a prospective large new load, not as a verdict on any utility or grid operator. Forward adequacy is an assessment of what is expected, not a measurement of what has happened; it is a forecast and is labelled as one.

Seller view: Tight forward capacity (firm supply promised for future years) is scarcity that firm generation and storage get paid for; an adequacy flag is a demand signal for new supply, not only a risk to a load.

Supply relief outlook

Will the power crunch ease before your load energizes? This nets the demand racing for capacity against the new supply likely to arrive and the old supply leaving. A cross-side read, using the same data a seller sees the other way.

Easing

Demand pressure

Fast load growth competing for the same capacity.

New supply in motion

About 38.2 GW of the generation and storage queue is likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal.

Can new supply arrive

Regulatory momentum mixed, improving.

Future firm supply

Future firm supply: adequacy flagged.

What this means: The supply crunch looks likely to ease for a new load energizing here in the coming years.

Reliability metrics

Delivery reliability (measured)

The average customer loses about 127.94 minutes of power per year (2024). This is the standard regulator outage measure (SAIDI); lower means a more reliable grid.

Source: EIA Form 861, Schedules 3B and 3C (annual electric power industry report) (IEEE 1366 major-event treatment, customer-weighted blend of 1 utilities, regional context only)

Hard, cited measures behind the reliability overlay above: the regulator outage series (SAIDI, measured, published with a lag) and the forward resource-adequacy assessment (a measured forecast). Framed as risk to a prospective large new load, not a verdict on any utility.

Interconnection queue

These are generation and storage interconnection queues. They show how congested the interconnection system is. They do not measure how long a new large load waits, and their withdrawal rates are not load withdrawal rates. At the end of 2025, generation and storage projects totalling about 2,060 GW were actively waiting in United States queues, down 10% from a year earlier. Of the capacity that entered between 2000 and 2020, about 75% withdrew before connecting and only about 13% reached operation by end-2025. The typical project built in 2025 waited about 61 months from request to operation (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Queued Up 2026). Figures below are refreshed quarterly; each is labelled measured or modelled.

Active queue depth

153 GW

Typical wait

50 months

The full queue analysis for this market, which covers the share of projects that give up and leave the queue (the withdrawal rate), how much of the queue is data centers, and the sources, is available through /api/v1/queue/us-southeast with a paid key. These are generation and storage queue figures: they show interconnection-system congestion, not a typical large-load connection wait.

Seller view: A deep queue is both your own time-to-revenue and a moat against competing supply; what matters is the effective supply likely to complete after withdrawal, not the headline queue.

Realized cost band

What a large electricity user pays for power here on one declared case, 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service, per megawatt-hour. Not the wholesale price and not the sticker tariff: energy plus the grid, delivery and other charges that land on the bill. It is a range, because real contracts vary, and it is labelled by how it was built.

Recurring cost, delivered

$60 to $88 per MWh

Midpoint about $72 per MWh

How this band was built

modelled

From 2 public fragments

What sets this band

There is no wholesale spot market here, so the band is not an energy-plus-network stack. It is set by the regulated tariff levels below.

$72

$60$88

Regulated industrial tariff (bundled)$72 /MWh

A vertically integrated industrial rate set by state commissions such as Georgia and the Carolinas, bundling energy, capacity and network into one rate. It varies by utility and rate case rather than a market price.

These are the regulated tariff levels that define the band, not an additive cost stack. The band width reflects differences across utilities and large-load contracts, not a spot market. Anchored to published figures (Industrial electricity prices (EIA)).

Where the cost lands

$72

Low $60Midpoint $72High $88

A band, not a single price: the cheaper end is a well-structured contract on favourable terms, the higher end a less optimised one. The midpoint is our best central read.

What is in the number: A regulated, vertically integrated industrial tariff set by state commissions, bundling energy, capacity, and network into one rate.

The Southeast is served by regulated, vertically integrated utilities, so a large load pays a bundled industrial tariff rather than a market price. Bands are steadier than in the organized markets, and are set through rate cases at the state commissions.

This market's band is free here; the ranked cross-market table with every market's precise midpoint is the Analyst Desk. See the ranked view.

Basis: triangulated from public sources, in US dollars per MWh delivered to a large high-load-factor load, excluding refundable taxes. Sources: Industrial electricity prices (EIA).

Seller view: This delivered price is the level a competitive supply offer must beat, and the revenue ceiling a merchant plant works against here.

Data provenance and freshness

What we hold for this market, field by field. Each tier below is assigned from the evidence actually held for that field, with provenance. A low tier means we looked and it is thin; it is not a verdict on the market.

cost: M1connection: M2reliability: M2carbon: M2regulatory: M2local capacity: not_assessed

Against a Standardized Project Case, the binding field is cost, connection, reliability. That is what a standardized case would turn on here; a readiness result for your own project depends on your own requirements, siting and utility, which this market-level read does not know.

Read against other uses: Discovery and monitoring: M1 · Market comparison: M1 · Project Case with a carbon requirement: M1 · Conditional site diligence: insufficient.

Depth is not a rating strength, a confidence score or a feasibility conclusion. An aggregate is only ever shown for a named use case, and equals the lowest tier across that use case's required fields. Definitions v1.0. See the full coverage matrix.

How solid the data behind this rating is, on two separate axes plus recency. Source reliability is how measured the numbers are, as opposed to triangulated or modelled. Coverage is how many of the decision-relevant data dimensions (reliability, connection, and cost) are compiled for this market. The two are kept apart because they answer different questions: a market can have strong sources on the little that is covered, or broad coverage that still leans on models. Neither grades the rating itself. The rating is a cited opinion, graded separately and falsifiably by the public track record and baseline measurement plan.

Source reliability

Moderate

2 of 3 data layers measured

Coverage

Full

3 of 3 dimensions: reliability, connection, cost

Last reviewed

June 2026

per-layer vintages below

Layer	Method	Vintage	Freshness	Source
PGIQ Rating opinion	opinion	June 2026	Current	PGIQ methodology
Reliability	measured	2024	Fresh	EIA Form 861, Schedules 3B and 3C (annual electric power industry report) (IEEE 1366 major-event treatment, customer-weighted blend of 1 utilities, regional context only)
Interconnection queue	measured	end-2025 (LBNL 2026)	Fresh	LBNL Queued Up 2026
Realized cost	modelled	2026	Fresh	Industrial electricity prices (EIA)

Freshness reflects each layer's refresh cadence: reliability annual to three-yearly, capacity-auction and queue yearly, tariffs every year or two. The full cross-market freshness dashboard is at /data-quality.

What this market can and cannot answer yet

No market-level read closes a project case on its own, and saying only that would waste the evidence we do hold. Below is what is established, what is open, and what to do next.

What is established

Recurring cost band $60 to $88 per MWh, midpoint $72, basis modelled, against the 100 MW archetype
Historical utility-territory delivery performance 127.94 minutes per year (2024)
Historical bulk-system performance (event-based)
Forward resource adequacy (assessed)
Contractual service terms (reported)
Typical interconnection wait about 50 months (generation and storage queue, not a load wait)

What is open

Designed site resilience
local_capacity evidence

Who would actually serve you

Territories in this market, each with its own filed record: Georgia Power Co. Which one serves a given site depends on where that site is.
Who runs the connection process: not yet compiled for this market. This is wayfinding rather than evidence, and its absence is a gap in our compilation, not a fact about the market.

Credible ranges today

Cost $60 to $88 per MWh, midpoint $72 (modelled)
Schedule: interconnection queues here run about 50 months for generation and storage; a large load follows a different process and we do not hold its measured distribution

What could disqualify this market

Availability keeping pace with rapid build.
Summer cooling peaks.

Five questions for the utility or system operator

What is the available capacity at the bulk supply point and substation that would serve this site, and what would a 100 MW request do to it?
What are the milestone dates from a complete application to full firm energisation, and which network upgrades would a 100 MW load trigger?
What is the all-in delivered rate for 100 MW at a 95% load factor, including demand, network and rider charges, under the tariff that would actually apply?
What is your own territory's SAIDI and SAIFI for the industrial class, on which major-event standard, and what redundancy serves the candidate substation?
Is firm service available at 100 MW, and what curtailment rights would you retain over us once we are energised?

Documents that would advance the case

The area or substation capacity study, and the current queue position list.
The interconnection or system impact study, and a specimen connection offer.
The current tariff sheet with all riders, and any large-load contract terms.
The utility's own reliability filing and the substation single-line diagram.
The applicable large-load tariff or the draft electric service agreement.

Outlook drivers

↑ Upgrade triggers

Sustained 2 GW-plus build energizes on schedule.
Vogtle nuclear and solar lower carbon and firm supply.

↓ Downgrade triggers

Supply additions lag the build and tighten availability.
Local opposition to large loads.

Key risks

Availability keeping pace with rapid build.
Summer cooling peaks.

Peer comparison

Trades like

Phoenix (fast-building, mid-cost)

Ahead of

Northern Virginia on cost and access

Behind

ERCOT on openness

Evidence behind this rating

The real-world events that test our Tier 2 call for US Southeast (Atlanta): 1 supports it. Each is dated and cited, so you can check the rating against what is actually happening on the ground.

Atlanta reaches ~2 GW under construction ✓ Supports the rating

2025MomentumMateriality: low

The US Southeast is now a top-three North American market by build, with Southern Company adding gas and solar.

Source: CBRE ↗

Cited, dated developments tagged to the pillar they bear on, and whether they support or challenge the current tier. A material item flags the market for analyst review and may drive a rating action.

🔔 Get alerts for US Southeast (Atlanta)

Be notified the moment this market's PGIQ Rating, outlook, or a material development changes. Free while we validate demand.

Rating history

June 2026

New ratingNew rating: Tier 2 Strong assigned.

🔒 The full time series behind US Southeast (Atlanta), how its score, recurring cost, and interconnection queue have moved month by month, is part of the Analyst Desk. The rating actions above are always free.

Every rating action is dated and explained, and the log is only ever added to, never edited. Reviews happen on a regular schedule and whenever a significant event occurs. "Affirmed" means we reviewed a development and the tier held; "Under review" means a significant item is being assessed and the rating could change.

Score history

How US Southeast (Atlanta)'s reliability-adjusted score and tier have moved, month by month. Part of your Analyst Desk.

Loading history…

How does US Southeast (Atlanta) compare to the other 78 markets?

This page is our full read on US Southeast (Atlanta) alone, and it is free. To decide where a large load should actually go, you need every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the history and alerts when your shortlist moves. That is the Analyst Desk.

With your Analyst Desk, compare US Southeast (Atlanta) against every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the full history and shortlist alerts.

+ Add to your shortlist Recurring cost, ranked Connection friction, ranked Get the Analyst Desk →

Cite as: PowerGridIQ Rating, "US Southeast (Atlanta)" (Tier 2 Strong), as of June 2026. A proprietary, directional screen for siting a large electricity load; not a connection guarantee, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice. Sources and methodology at powergridiq.com/methodology. © PowerGridIQ.