Free Market Electricity: BYOP Update
By Robert Bradley Jr. -- October 16, 2026Editor Note: Glen Lyons and Travis Fisher have expanded the public policy debate regarding electricity with Advocates for Consumer Regulated Electricity (CRE). Their advocacy program, Bring Your Own Power (BYOP), proposes privately funded, “islanded” off-grid utilities that bypass public-utility regulation. CRE’s last quarterly report focused on the practical case for reform; the latest report (below) goes from “concept to campaign.”
Recent Developments: The strongest activity came through original commentary, testimony, state bill filings, and practical arguments for letting large new loads bring their own power without shifting costs or reliability risks to existing customers. Core message: Let new large loads bring their own power. Let private capital carry the risk. Protect ratepayers. Keep growth on the table.
In the States
Texas became the leading BYOP battleground as data center growth collided with transmission, permitting, landowner, and reliability concerns. State activity broadened from New Hampshire to Kentucky, Missouri, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Mississippi, and others. The policy footprint now includes bills in six states plus the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.
1. Direct CRE/BYOP Advocacy
July 4 — A Declaration of Electricity Independence — Glen framed CRE/BYOP as electricity independence: large new customers should be free to bring their own power rather than be forced through monopoly utility structures. Original
July 2 — Kentucky needs better tools — Joseph Verruni argued that officials may want data centers to pay their own way, but existing utility law gives them limited tools. CRE creates a lawful off-grid path. Original
July 7 — Missouri ratepayer protection — Avery Frank argued that private electricity grids can protect households while letting data centers finance new power investment. Original
July 8 — Mississippi: do not socialize the cost — The Mississippi Center for Public Policy made the “pay your own way” case for private, consumer-regulated producers. Original
July 19 — CRE protects customers while supporting data centers — Travis, Michael Abi-Nader, and Sam McNamee connected AI infrastructure growth with ratepayer protection through private electricity networks. Original
July 21 — New Jersey should choose abundance — Travis and Audrey Lane argued that New Jersey should allow large users to develop private, off-grid systems rather than manage scarcity. Original
July 22 — “School choice for the grid” — Marc Oestreich’s analogy helped explain CRE: large users should have an exit option from the monopoly model when they bear their own risk. Original
2. Texas BYOP: The Leading Battleground
August 20 — Texas House State Affairs testimony — Glen’s written testimony presented BYOP as a Texas solution for speed, grid planning, ratepayer protection, voluntary land use, and economic growth. Original
September 7 — Texas rapid-response advocacy — Texans for Reasonable Solutions began organizing supporters for the 2027 Texas session. If you want to support us during the session and you live in Texas, reply to this note so you can be added to the list. Original
September 21 — Texas should supercharge private grids — Travis argued that Texas should allow fast-moving private grids rather than stretch one public grid to its limits. Original
October 1 — Texas Senate Business & Commerce — Glen explained that BYOP addresses affordability, transmission pressure, reliability, economic development, and ratepayer protection. Original
October 5 — BYOP enters the Texas legislative conversation — Texas Political Spotlight placed BYOP in the same policy discussion as 765-kV transmission, landowners, reconducting, and demand charges. Original
October 7 — Texas law limits private multi-customer grids — A16Z highlighted the legal gap BYOP is designed to fill: private power networks that can serve multiple customers outside ERCOT. Original
3. State Momentum Beyond Texas
August 2 — Kentucky: let data centers build their own grid — Travis and Joseph Verruni argued that islanded systems impose no costs, strain, or stranded-cost risk on other ratepayers. Original
August 3 — Pennsylvania: pay your own way — Travis and Joshua Schubert framed CRE as the cleanest way for large customers to finance independent power rather than fight over grid cost allocation. Original
August 9 — AFP Kentucky explains CRE — Liam Gallagher translated CRE into simple public-facing language for voters, legislators, and local officials. Original
September 16 — New Hampshire has a better alternative — Former Rep. Michael Vose and Glen argued that New Hampshire should promote HB 672 instead of pursuing a data center moratorium. Original
September 21 — New Jersey introduces a CRE bill — A5431 would exempt qualifying off-grid systems from public utility regulation, including systems serving multiple customers. Bill
October 9 — Missouri private-grid case continues — Avery Frank argued that private grids can attract investment without taxpayer subsidies or utility-rate socialization. Original
4. A4CRE Analysis: Why the Case Is Stronger
Reliability — NERC’s 2026 report shows the two-way risk of large computational loads: the grid must serve them and survive sudden drop-offs. CRE keeps more of that risk private. Source
Utility opportunity — National Grid Ventures’ Joulent investment shows CRE is not anti-utility; utility owners can compete outside the monopoly model. Source
Competition beats regulation — The Louisiana/Entergy controversy illustrated A4CRE’s broader point: regulators cannot substitute for real competition. Source
Cost isolation — A Harvard Law discussion reinforced that CRE isolates data-center costs more cleanly than regulatory cost-allocation fixes. Source
Private risk — A4CRE argued that uncertain data-center utilization, AI spending, and infrastructure needs should be borne by private investors, not captive ratepayers. Source
Market discovery — Posts on Wyoming competition, DOE grid spending, blue-collar jobs, and 3-D printed turbines all point to the same lesson: let markets test faster ways to serve new load. Source
5. Bills Filed: CRE/BYOP Legislative Footprint
CRE/BYOP-style reform has now been filed in multiple states and in Congress:
| Jurisdiction | Bill | Status / purpose |
| New Hampshire | HB 672 / RSA 374:3-c | Enacted; allows off-grid electricity providers. |
| Maryland | SB 26 / HB 1190 | Exempts certain off-grid electricity providers from utility provisions. |
| Colorado | HB26-1246 | Creates consumer-regulated electric utilities for new nonresidential loads. |
| Illinois | HB 4163 | Exempts qualifying off-grid electricity providers under specified conditions. |
| Louisiana | SB 490 | Provides for private-use electrical networks. |
| New Jersey | A5431 | Exempts qualifying off-grid systems, including multi-customer systems. |
| U.S. Senate | S. 3585, DATA Act | Exempts consumer-regulated electric utilities from federal regulation. |
| U.S. House | H.R. 8400, DATA Act | House companion to the Senate DATA Act. |
| ALEC | Model policy | Model state bill: Act to Allow for Consumer Regulated Electric Utilities. |
How You Can Help
Please share this update with potential supporters and introduce us to useful contacts. CRE and BYOP are nonpartisan policy ideas: let large new loads bring their own power, protect existing ratepayers, and give states a faster path to economic growth.
