The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →In Scioto Analysis’s October 2026 estimates, banning new data-center construction in Ohio produces greater net benefits than continuing current policy over 2027–2034. But the ban is not the study’s top-ranked option: requiring new centers to supply their full load with behind-the-meter power that is 90% renewable scores higher. The results are modeled estimates—not a finding that a ban has been enacted or that any scenario’s outcomes are guaranteed.
What did the study find?
Scioto Analysis estimates a net present value (NPV) of $35 billion for a construction ban, compared with $2.4 billion under the status quo, for the modeled 2027–2034 period. The ban’s benefit-cost ratio is 2.7, versus 1.04 for current policy. The 90%-renewables requirement ranks above both, at $43 billion NPV and a 2.9 benefit-cost ratio. These are central estimates for impacts within Ohio, not a complete accounting of national or global welfare.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
The report’s historical estimate is that Ohio data centers generated $62 billion in net social benefit from 2013 through 2026. For that period, it estimates $77 billion in benefits—largely employment-related, including about 96,000 jobs and $75 billion in wages—against $15 billion in costs. That past estimate does not mean every additional facility delivers the same balance of benefits and costs.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Which policy options were compared?
The October 2026 report models five alternatives for 2027–2034. “Behind-the-meter” means onsite or co-located generation supplying a facility rather than direct reliance on the statewide grid.
| Modeled alternative | Net present value | Benefit-cost ratio |
|---|---|---|
| Status quo | $2.4 billion | 1.04 |
| Ban on new construction | $35 billion | 2.7 |
| Behind-the-meter supply: 90% natural gas, 10% renewables | $35 billion | 2.2 |
| Behind-the-meter supply: 50% natural gas, 50% renewables | $39 billion | 2.5 |
| Behind-the-meter supply: 10% natural gas, 90% renewables | $43 billion | 2.9 |
All figures in the table are Scioto Analysis estimates for the modeled 2027–2034 policy period. NPV summarizes estimated benefits minus costs in present-value terms; the benefit-cost ratio compares estimated benefits with estimated costs. A ratio above 1 means benefits exceed costs in that scenario’s central estimate.
What would the proposed ban cover?
The report models a proposal to prohibit construction of facilities used for digital data processing with aggregate monthly or peak load above 25 megawatts, applying to projects planned for 2027 and later. It is not modeled as a ban on every data center or on digital services. The report says petitioners aimed to put the amendment before Ohio voters in November 2027. Its legal and ballot status is not established here, so the modeled ban should not be read as current law or a confirmed future ballot measure.
Why does the ban outperform current policy?
Scioto Analysis attributes the difference to retaining most employment benefits from centers already operating while avoiding some additional electricity-price and emissions costs associated with new construction. The report says counties receive much of their job gains from their first data centers, so later facilities add relatively fewer employment benefits against rising costs.
Electricity prices and air pollution
For 2027–2034, the report estimates $16 billion in higher electricity-price costs to Ohio ratepayers under current policy. It estimates about $41 billion in costs from local air pollutants in the status-quo scenario, compared with $220 million from carbon. The carbon figure counts only Ohio’s share of global carbon costs; it is not the full worldwide cost of those emissions.
Rank #3
The report also projects that if all planned projects arrive by 2028, the number of facilities would rise by 50%, while electricity use and annual carbon emissions would more than triple. These are conditional projections, not a statement that all planned projects will be built.
Scale of electricity use
Scioto Analysis estimates Ohio data centers used enough electricity in 2026 to power 5.7 million homes, compared with 5.4 million homes in the state. It projects capacity equivalent to nearly 21 million homes by 2034. These comparisons translate electricity use and capacity into household equivalents; they do not mean that those numbers of homes actually receive the power.
Why does the 90%-renewables option rank first?
Among the modeled alternatives, requiring new centers to supply their full load with behind-the-meter generation that is 90% renewable has the highest central NPV and benefit-cost ratio. It also has the strongest reported result in one uncertainty test: it is the only alternative with a positive NPV in at least 95% of the report’s Monte Carlo trials across the full 2013–2034 period. That period differs from the 2027–2034 comparison in the table.
This is a modeled policy condition, not evidence that facilities currently meet it or that a specific implementation plan has been adopted. The report compares the requirement’s modeled effects with the other scenarios; it does not establish how a mandate would be enforced or what projects would be built under it.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How uncertain are the estimates?
The report’s central ranking depends heavily on assumptions, especially how much data centers affect employment and earnings. Scioto Analysis says that if it overestimates those employment effects, even a ban or the 90%-renewables requirement could have negative NPV. If it underestimates them, every alternative looks better.
The report also ran 10,000 combinations of key assumptions. In that exercise, the median status-quo NPV for 2027–2034 was negative $6.7 billion, despite the central estimate of positive $2.4 billion. The report says status-quo NPV turns negative if centers operate closer to full capacity than assumed or if new water facilities cost more to build. A central estimate is therefore not a guarantee that the modeled outcome will occur.
The analysis centers on Ohio residents, ratepayers, Ohio-based businesses, and Ohio shareholders, and limits its main results to impacts experienced within Ohio. Data-center owners and users of digital services may be elsewhere, and effects beyond Ohio are not fully captured in these state-focused estimates.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Quick Recap
Sources
- Scioto Analysis, “Data Center Policy in Ohio: A Cost-Benefit Analysis” (October 2026)
- Scioto Analysis report release and summary
- Ohio Capital Journal, Marty Schladen, October 8, 2026
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
