Designing Data Centers for Demand Response Through a Construction-Phase Readiness Index

Abstract

AI-driven growth is pushing data-center electricity demand from 415 TWh (2024) toward 945 TWh by 2030. Demand-response research has matured on operational levers but treats the physical envelope as largely exogenous, leaving construction-phase decisions that bound achievable flexibility unmodeled. This article integrates three previously separate bodies of literature (data-center demand response, grid-interactive efficient buildings, and stochastic optimal control under irreversibility) into a single framework that prices construction-phase flexibility as a portfolio of real options, pairing elicitation-derived (FAHP) weights with simulation-derived (Sobol) variance indices. None of the individual techniques is new; the contribution is their synthesis and the finding that architectural and site decisions carry the dominant financial leverage in the model, whereas a literature-grounded synthetic-persona prior (twenty-five LLM-simulated personas) prioritizes mechanical-electrical systems; a divergence we frame as a screening diagnostic between an LLM prior and the model. The Flex-by-Design Readiness Index (FDRI) is a nineteen-dimension taxonomy across architectural, MEP, and site-urban layers, weighted by Fuzzy AHP. The FDRI–ROV model formalizes the decision as stochastic optimal control under irreversibility. Calibrated to PJM, ERCOT, and CAISO (2024–2026) for a 100 MW plant at N = 10,000 paths over thirty years, it yields +$79 M net option value at Full FDRI for PJM (additive upper bound; substitution-corrected ≈ +$41 M, 1.7× CapEx; 2.4× CapEx PJM, 2.1× ERCOT, 2.8× CAISO); on both the additive (2.4–2.8×) and corrected (1.7×) bases the pre-registered H2 threshold of Vtotal/Ctotal ≥ 3× is not met. Sobol decomposition places architectural and site layers at ST ≈ 0.56 each versus MEP at 0.15, exposing waste-heat-export and regulatory-avoided-cost dimensions as under-recognized leverage. Out-of-sample validation against four hyperscale projects yields 11% MAPE, reported as an n = 4, single-period proof of concept.A pro-rata extrapolation across all ~43 GW of incremental U.S. capacity gives a nominal ~$34 billion through 2035, but this applies the single most optimistic scenario uniformly; applying the substitution-corrected per-plant value with competition, policy, and adoption decay multipliers, the defensible 2035 opportunity is ≈$3–$18 billion (central ≈$7 billion), with $34 billion retained only as an undecayed ceiling.