offline demo

Scenario

Policy choice

Policy cost cut (reform)45%
↑ This is an assumption you set, not a calibrated result — it drives the Reform/Sunset line live.

Assumptions

Capacity growth100%
Project attrition45%
Flexibility adoption0%
Discount rate3%
But-for (additionality) default70%

Optional extra costs illustrative

These add to the wider societal cost (Impact tab) — they don't change the validated fiscal headline.

Data & method

Seed 20260619 · reproducible
42 states · 1,510 facilities
back-test PICP 0.80 (4/5, n=5)

Data-center tax incentives: what they cost, what they bring, and who pays

★ The only data-center policy tool whose per-year fiscal cost is back-tested against what actually happened — measured ranges, not a counterfactual guess. (The 10-year figure compounds that base under stated assumptions.)

Should a state keep, tighten, or end its data-center tax incentives? Bloom shows what each choice costs over 10 years, who pays (down to $/household), and how sure we are — a back-tested engine that informs the decision, not makes it.

✓ back-tested fiscal base: PICP 0.80 · n=5 · 95% CI 0.38–0.96 ✓ probabilistic what-ifs — P(reform beats doing nothing) ✓ who-pays down to $/household ✓ grid-aware (ERCOT vs PJM) ✓ two-sided cost + benefit ledger ✓ 17 clickable sources ✓ informs, doesn't decide
Every figure is tagged: ✓ validated back-tested against real outcomes · ≈ illustrative decision-support context, not back-tested. We never let the validation halo bleed onto an assumption.
How often our range was right
0.80
4/5 inside · n=5 · 95% CI 0.38–0.96
Typical single-guess error
36%
we give a range, not one number
Facilities tracked
1,510
100,725 MW · FracTracker
National cost ’25–’30
$72B
external est., 36 states (Good Jobs First)

Why a model, not a spreadsheet

In 2008 Virginia estimated its exemption would cost $1.54M a year. It became $1.9 billion — off by 125,000%. A single best-guess number fails badly here; Bloom gives a range that actually contained the real cost.

✓ validated
$1.54M$1.9B

Virginia data-center sales-tax exemption: official 2008 estimate vs FY2025 actual. Georgia, Ohio, and Texas missed by 665–1,085%.

The decision

Keep it, tighten it, or attach flexible-power conditions — move any control and watch who gains and who pays update live.

Move a control to compute a scenario.

Try a "what-if"

See how the 10-year cost changes if were

What each choice costs over 10 years

The fiscal cost (foregone revenue), built from the per-year base our back-test validates, compounded over 10 years under stated assumptions. Keep the incentive (do nothing) vs tighten it vs attach flexible-power conditions. The line is the middle estimate; the band is the likely range. Wider power/health costs are shown separately as an illustrative layer, not stacked here.

✓ back-tested base
Do nothing Reform Flexibility

Who gains and who pays

Every dollar lands on someone. Green bars are groups that come out ahead; red bars are groups that bear the cost.

≈ illustrative

Who's affected

Who actually feels this — which groups pay, a fairness check for lower-income households, and the honest jobs picture.

Cost channels & opportunity cost

Fiscal is the validated headline; Power/Health/overlays are an illustrative wider-cost layer — not back-tested. Scales with the scenario. costbenefitcontext

≈ illustrative
What the do-nothing cost equals

Two-sided ledger — cost vs benefit

Industry's side, counted: the public cost set against the estimated economic benefits (jobs, construction, tax base). Benefits are illustrative, not back-tested like the cost.

≈ illustrative

Equity & environmental justice

How the electricity-bill increase lands across income groups (lowest fifth → highest fifth). We flag it as unfair when the lowest-income group is hit more than 1.25× the average.

≈ illustrative
Health figures are a model estimate — Virginia's studied air-quality burden scaled by the state's data-center capacity, not a measured per-state result.

Megadeals — the extreme case

Your current scenario sized against named real-world deals (worst-case stress tests).

≈ illustrative
DealIncentiveContext
Amazon — Indianaup to $8.0B> Indiana's entire HHS budget ($5.7B)
Amazon — Oregon$1.0B= 11 years of the county budget
Big 4 hyperscalers$360B capex (2025)~50% on-time · queues overstated 3–5×

Rigor & trust

How we know the numbers hold up — ranges tested against what really happened, what drives them, every source, and how the tool is governed.

Validation — official estimate vs actual

How we tested it: predict each state's most recent year from earlier years only, then check the real cost against our range.

✓ validated

Sources — every number is checkable

Each figure in Bloom traces to a public source. Click to open the original.

✓ sourced

What drives the cost most

The inputs that change the 10-year cost the most, biggest first — so you know which assumptions matter.

≈ illustrative

Governance & guardrails

Who's accountable for the tool, its non-partisan charter, and why you can't export a one-sided "cost-only" chart.

governance · security
Intended useUS state legislative / regulatory fiscal analysis
Out of scope (named)siting · facility profitability · federal levers (FERC/ITC) · tribal/rural-specific impacts · non-US jurisdictions
Transferabilitymethod ports to other jurisdictions via a country/currency/grid config (this build is the US instance)
Alignmentsupports SDG-tracked public-finance transparency & subsidy accountability
Accountable ownernamed PUC / budget economist (RACI)
Known biasEPRI dependence; structural-break under-prediction
Review cyclequarterly recalibration (EIA / PJM)

"Grid-and-fiscal analysis under current law, not advocacy." Best / expected / worst shown with equal prominence; every number cites a source.

🔒
Export cost-only chart — blocked. The equal-prominence lock makes a one-sided artifact structurally impossible.

Ask the data

A built-in assistant answers in plain language from this run's numbers, cites its sources, and won't recommend a policy — that's your call.

Docked at the bottom of every tab — ask anytime, or tap a suggestion to begin.

Every reader, answered

The kind of reader, the question they bring, and where Bloom answers it.

ReaderWhat they askWhere to look
Fiscal analystsdefensible range + sourced assumptions?Overview · Decision
PUC / advocatessurvives cross-examination?Decision · Who's affected
Legislatorswhat happens to my district?Winner / loser
EJ / communitywho actually pays?Equity + health overlay
Grid plannersphysically credible?Flexibility · grid dynamics
Industry / econ-devare benefits counted?Dual-sided + jobs reality
Academicsback-test + failure mode?Rigor & trust
Responsible AIaccountable + non-partisan?Governance + lock
Journalistsone stat, one chart?Overview hero
Hackathon judgesreasoning + impact + RAI + demo?all · Ask the data

Open-the-file demo using a seeded model that mirrors the validated Python engine; when the live engine is connected the numbers come straight from it. The back-test is real (see Rigor & trust). Key external figures are sourced — re-confirm before publication.

Ask the data · answers from the live run