Power grids: opportunities in the energy transition?

power grid opportunities in the energy transition

This article summarizes our conclusions into power grids and power electronics, across all of Thunder Said Energy’s research. Where are the best power grid opportunities in the energy transition?

Power grids move electricity from the point of generation to the point of use, while aiming to maximize power quality, minimize costs and minimize losses. Broadly defined, global power grids and power electronics investment must step up 5x in the energy transition, from $750bn pa to over $3.5trn pa. This theme gets woefully overlooked. This also means it offers up some of the best opportunities in the energy transition.


(1) Electrification is going to be a major theme in the energy transition, a mega-trend of the 21st century, as the efficiency and controllability of electrified technology is usually 3-5x higher than comparable heat engines. It is analogous to the shift from analogue to digital. 40% of the world’s useful energy is consumed as electricity today, rising to 60% by 2050 (note here — our best overview of the upside in grids) propelling the efficiency of the primary global energy system from 45% today to 60% by 2050 (note here). Power demands of a typical home will also double from 10kW to 20kW in the energy transition (data here). Electricity demands of industrial facilities are aggregated here.

(2) Electricity basics are often misunderstood? If we have one salty observation about power markets, it is that many commentators seem to love making sweeping statements without understanding much at all. It is the energy market equivalent of wandering in off the street to an operating theater, and without any medical training at all, simply picking up a scalpel. This is a little bit sad. But it also means there will be opportunities for decision makers that do understand electricity and power systems. As a place to start, our primer on power, voltage, current, AC, DC, inertia and power quality is here.

(3) Power generation costs 5-15c/kWh. But variations within each category are much wider than between categories (note here). So generation will not be a winner takes all market, where one “energy source to rule them all” pushes out all the others. This view comes from stress testing IRR models of wind, offshore wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, gas CCGTs, gas peakers, coal, biomass, diesel gensets and geothermal. And from 400-years of energy history. The average sizes of power generation facilities are here, and typical ramp rates are here.

(4) Transmission is becoming the key bottleneck on renewables and electrification in the energy transition. Each TWH pa of global electricity demand is supported by 275km of power transmission and 4,000km of distribution (data here). Connecting a new project to the grid usually costs $100-300/kW over 10-70km tie-in distances (data here). But bottlenecks are growing. The approval times to connect a new power plant to the grid have already increased 2.5x since the mid-2000s, averaging 3-years, especially for wind and solar, which take 30% and 10% longer than average (data here). Avoiding these bottlenecks requires power grids to expand. Spending on power grids alone will rise from $300bn pa to over $1.2trn pa, which is actually larger than the spending on all primary energy production today (data here).

(5) Power transmission also beats batteries as a way of maximizing renewable penetration in future grids. Rather than overcoming intermittency — solar output across Europe is 60-90% inter-correlated, wind output is 50-90% inter-correlated — by moving power across time, you can solve the same challenge by moving them over a wider space. A key advantage is that a large and extensive power grid smooths all forms of renewables volatility, from a typical facility’s 100 x sub-10-second power drops per day to the +/- 6% annual variations in solar insolation reaching a particular point of the globe. By contrast, different batteries tend to be optimized for a specific time-duration, while at long durations, the economics become practically unworkable. A new transmission line usually costs 2-3c/kWh per 1,000km (model here). Additional benefits for expanded power grids accrue in power quality, reliability and resiliency against extreme weather. These benefits will be spelled out further below…

(6) Upside for transmission utilities and suppliers? Our overview of how power transmission works is here. Operating data for high voltage transmission cables are here. Leading US transmission and distribution utilities are screened here. Leading companies in HVDCs are here. Offshore cable lay vessels are screened here. We have also screened Prysmian patents here. But the opportunity space is also much broader, which becomes visible by delving into how power grids work…

(7) Cabling materials. As a general rule, overhead power lines are made of aluminium, due to its light weight and high strength. Conversely, HVDC cables and household wiring are made of copper, which is more conductive. HVDCs are also encased in specialized plastics. New power transmission lines add 3-5MTpa of demand to aluminium markets, or 5-7% upside (note here). But we are more worried about bottlenecks in copper (where total global demand trebles) and silver.

(8) Transformers and specialized switchgear are needed to step the voltage up or down to a precise and prescribed level at every inter-connection point in the grid. The US transmission network operates at a median voltage of 230kV, which keeps losses to around 7%. Energy transition could double the transformer market in capacity terms and increase it by 30x in unit count (note here, costs and companies screened here), surpassing $50bn pa by 2035. Downstream of these transformers, the power entering industrial and commercial facilities will often remain at several kV, which requires specialized switchgear to prevent arcing. We see the MV switchgear market trebling to over $100bn pa by 2035.

(9) AC and DC. Wind and solar inherently produce DC power, but most transmission lines are AC. Hence they must be coupled with inverters and converters. At the ultimate point of use, AC power also usually needs to be rectified back to DC and bucked/boosted to the right voltage for each machine or appliance. The same goes for EV charging and EV drive trains. DC-DC conversion, AC-DC rectification and DC-AC inversion are effectively consolidating around MOSFETs. And we think one of the most interesting incremental jolts for the energy transition is the 1-10pp higher efficiency and rising market share of SiC MOSFETs. Leading companies in SiC and MOSFETs are screened here.

(10) Inertia and frequency regulation. All of the AC power generators in the grid are running in lockstep, ‘synchronized’ at around 50 Hertz in Europe and 60 Hz in the US. But the frequency of all the power generators in the grid changes second by second. If there is a slight under-supply of power, then what prevents the grid from collapsing is that energy can be harvested from the rotational energy of massive turbines weighing up to 4,000 tons and spinning at 1,500 – 6,000 rpm, as they all slow down very slightly. This sorcery is called ‘inertia’. Wind and solar do not inherently have any inertia (no synchronized spinning). But there are ways of partially mimicking inertia or adding synthetic inertia to the grid through flywheels, supercapacitors, synchronous condensers, batteries, smart energy. Our grid models reflect growing demand for infrastructure in all of these categories.

(11) Reactive power compensation. Apparent power (in kVA) consists of two components: real power (in kW) and reactive power (in kVAR). Inductive loads consume reactive power as the creation of magnetic fields draws the current behind the voltage in an AC wave. This lowers power factor in the grid, amplifies the current that must flow per unit of real power, and thus amplifies I2R losses. Large spinning generators have historically provided reactive power to energize transmission lines and compensate for inductive loads. Again, wind and solar do not inherently provide reactive power compensation and have historically leaned on the rotating generators. Renewable heavy grids will need to add reactive power compensation, expanding this market by a factor of 30x. The best opportunities are in STATCOMs and SVCs (leading companies screened here), capacitor banks at industrial facilities and Volt-VAR optimization at the grid edge.

(12) Electric vehicle charging: find the shovel-makers? Each 1,000 EVs will likely require 40 Level 2 chargers (30-40kW) and 3 Level 3 fast-chargers (100-200kW), so our numbers ultimately have $100bn pa being spent on EV charging in 2025-50. But we wonder whether EV chargers will ultimately become over-built, and the best opportunities will be in supplying components and materials to these chargers, rather than owning the infrastructure itself. Our best single note on this topic is here. Economics of EV charging stations and conventional fuel retail stations make a nice comparison.

(13) Motor drivers are another huge efficiency opportunity. There are 50bn electric motors in the world, consuming half of all global electricity. But most motors are inefficient, rotating at fixed speeds determined by the frequency of the AC power grid, rotating faster than they need to, which matters as power consumption is a cube function of rotating speed. One of the best efficiency opportunities in the grid expands the role of variable frequency drives to optimize motors (note here). Economics are screened here and leading companies are covered here. All of our work into electric motor efficiency and reliability is linked here.

(14) Without reliable and high-quality power grids, frankly, things will break. This is a statement made in patents and technical papers, again and again, discussing how lagging power quality enhances maintenance and breakage costs of expensive equipment. Fundamentally, this is why we think that commercial and industrial power consumers will increasingly invest more in power electronics, and there are so many hidden power grid opportunities in the energy transition.

(15) Power electronics is the broad category of capital goods that encompasses effectively everything discussed on this page. And this summary has hardly even scratched the surface. We think pure power electronics spending trebles from $300bn pa to $1trn pa by 2035 (model here). It is the same group of companies coming up again and again in this space (best note here). For example, we have attempted to break down Eaton’s revenues across 10,000 SKUs in 200 different categories here. We do think that the complexity in power grids and power electronics creates opportunity for decision makers that can grasp it.



All of our research — PDF research reports, data-files, economic models and company screens — into power grid opportunities in the energy transition is summarized below, in chronological order of publication.


Grid-forming inverters: islands in the sun?

The grid-forming inverter market may soon inflect from $1bn to $15-20bn pa, to underpin most grid-scale batteries, and 20-40% of incremental solar and wind. This 11-page report finds that grid-forming inverters cost c$100/kW more than grid-following inverters, which is inflationary, but integrate more renewables, raise resiliency and efficiency?

Duck curves: US power price duckiness over time?

In solar-heavy grids, power prices trough around mid-day, then ramp up rapidly as the sun sets. This price distribution over time is known as the duck curve. US power prices are getting 25-30% more ducky each year, based on some forms of measurement. Power prices are clearly linked to the instantaneous share of wind/solar in grids.


The famous duck curve shows how intra-day power prices are impacted by the rise of solar, rising gently in the morning, troughing in the middle of the day, then rising rapidly in the evenings after the sun has set. Apparently this looks like a duck. But is the duck curve getting more ducky over time, as solar gets built out?

This data-file aims to measure the duckiness of duck curves, over time, across the big five US grid regions: CAISO, ERCOT, MISO, PJM and SPP. On average, over the past 3-years, pricing ramps from c$40/MWH at mid-day to $65/MWH at 6-8pm, partly due to solar generation profiles, and partly due to other demand patterns.

3-year average wholesale marginal price for the Big-Five US grid regions.

The duckiness of the duck curve has risen over time, across these grid regions, as solar scaled up from 3% of US electricity in 2020 to 6% in 2023. In 2021, power pricing at 6-8pm was 30% higher than at 11am-1pm, in 2022 it was 45% higher, in 4Q23 it was +56%, and in 3Q24 it was +110% higher (chart below).

Duckiness of US power prices from 2021 to 3Q 2024. Measured as the increase from noon to evening power prices.

However, there is a vast amount of volatility in the data. Other cuts show a less clear increase in duckiness, as shown below, averaging across our big-five regions.

Wholesale average marginal power prices by quarter for the Big-Five US grid regions.

California makes for the most direct case study of duck curves, as utility-scale solar comprises 25% of its electricity mix in 3Q24, up from 15% in 3Q21. In the past, we have looked at individual nodes in California from CAISO, as compared apples-to-apples in individual months, which does appear to show rising duckiness.

California electricity price change between August 2021 and August 2023
California IntraDay Wholesale Power Prices in 2023 and in 2021

But again, other cuts show a more volatile pattern for CAISO, with strong seasonal effects. Perhaps duckiness has also been muted by a large battery build-out, doubling every year, with batteries supplying an average of 3GW from 8-9pm in 3Q23 and an average of 6GW from 8-9pm in 3Q24 (chart below).

CAISO TTM grid share by generation source from 3Q 2021 to 3Q 2024

The most significant driver of power prices that we can find in the file is the call on non-wind and non-solar generation. Prices spike when renewables are not generating and markets must be balanced by ramping up gas peakers or disincentivizing demand.

Power prices depending on renewables grid share for ERCOT and CAISO.

As a simplified rule of thumb, average power prices rise (fall) $2-3/MWH for every 5% decrease (increase) in the share of renewables in the grid. In CAISO, when marginal prices fall below $10/MWH it is almost always associated with wind and solar supplying >80% of the grid, and when prices rise above $100/MWH, wind and solar are usually supplying <10%.

We do think power grids are growing more volatile over time. This is yet another tracker, breaking down the hour-by-hour patterns and duckiness.

Kraken Technologies: smart grid breakthrough?

Kraken Technologies is an operating system, harnessing big data across the power value chain, from asset optimization, to grid balancing, to utility customer services. We reviewed ten patents, which all harness big data, of which 65% optimize aspects of the grid, and 40% are using AI. This all supports electrification, renewables and EVs.


Octopus Energy is a private UK utility, founded in 2015, with 3,000 employees, serving 8M customers, offering the UK’s largest “smart-tariff” where prices are adjusted according to time-of-use.

Kraken Technologies is an operating system, developed by Octopus, harnessing big data from increasingly digital power networks and smart meters, in order to enable utility solutions, from asset optimization to improved customer services (details in the data-file).

This Kraken technology review explored ten patent families in Espacenet, and how they are being used to enable Virtual Power Plants, Grid Balancing, Frequency Support, Reactive Power Compensation, Fault Localization, Grid Monitoring, Customer Support and Energy Savings. It is a long and impressive list, which shows the potential of smart grids.

For example, electric vehicles, heat pumps and residential solar arrays collectively represent large loads, but are all individually too small to participate in balancing markets. One of the Kraken patents receives data from smart meters, filters noise, prioritizes data that matter, calculates flexible load within 5 seconds, then relays back balancing instructions to individual devices.

Effectively all of the patents that we reviewed focused on what can be achieved by aggregating more big data within power grids, 65% looked at optimizing various aspects across the utility value chain using the data, and 40% are using AI.

Our observations on the patent library are also discussed in the data-file, while we have summarized six of the patents in particular detail. We have argued that greater digitization of historically dumb power networks will unlock an additional c10% integration of wind and solar, beyond the natural limits suggested by their volatility.

Global electricity: by source, by use, by region?

Global electricity supply-demand is disaggregated in this data-file, by source, by use, by region, from 1990 to 2050, triangulating across all of our other models in the energy transition, and culminating in over 50 fascinating charts, which can be viewed in this data-file. Global electricity demand rises 3x by 2050 in our outlook.


Global electricity demand stood at 30,000 TWH pa in 2023, equivalent to 37.5% of global useful energy consumption. The breakdown is 40% industrial, 25% residential, 17.5% commercial, 6% agriculture, as disaggregated by region in the data-file.

Global electricity demand surpasses 90,000 TWH by 2050, in our outlook, which effectively means that 100% of all net growth in global useful energy consumption through 2050 is electricity demand growth.

Total electricity demand is seen growing at a 4% CAGR through 2050, of which the largest contributors are in new energies areas such as electric vehicles, CCS and within batteries. Largest growth in absolute terms, are in producing metals and materials for the energy transition and in demand-side technologies unlocked by solar.

Global electricity demand by end use from 1990 to 2050

Rising living standards are the biggest driver of the growth. For example, residential electricity consumption is currently 2.4 MWH pp pa in the developed world, and just 0.7 MWH pp pa in the emerging world, which still only rises to 1.4 MWH pp pa by 2050 on our numbers, or around half the level in the developed world today.

Residential electricity use per capita by country from 1990 to 2050. We project energy use to go up.

Global electricity generation grows by 3x by 2050, including a 25x ramp for solar, 5x for wind, 2x for gas, 2.5x for nuclear and 1.5x for hydro, while coal-fired power falls by 30%. This outlook sees wind and solar ramping to 60% of all global electricity by 2050, stretching their economic limit. These data are all broken out by region on the Generation tab.

Electricity generation from gas does need to rise, even with this large renewables build-out, in order to displace coal. Our numbers have gas consumption for power generation rising from 150bcfd in 2023 to 300bcfd by 2050, which also boosts demand for gas turbines. Fuel use for coal, gas and oil, by region, and over time, are broken out on the ShareOfCommodities Tab.

The CO2 intensity of global electricity generation falls from 0.54 kg/kWh today to 0.15 kg/kWh by 2050 on these numbers, ranging from <0.1 kg/kWh in the developed world to 0.2 kg/kWh in the emerging world. These numbers are on a gross basis. Capturing and offsetting the CO2 would be necessary to reach Net Zero. These calculations are shown by region and by contributor on the CO2 tab.

Global electricity-supply-demand is broken down by source, by use, by region and over time, across the entire data-file, which draws from all of our other energy transition research and models.

US power generation under development over time?

An all-time record of 180GW of new power generation is currently under development in the US in 4Q24, enough to expand the US’s 1.3TW power grid by almost 15%. This data-file tracks US power generation under development, as a leading indicator for gas turbine, wind, solar and battery demand. Gas turbines and battery co-deployments are accelerating in 2024, while wind and solar initiations are slowing on grid bottlenecks?


This data-file captures the development pipeline of new US power capacity, based on 860M reports from the EIA, which cover all existing and proposed generating units of >1MW of greater. As a leading indicator for wind, solar, gas turbine and battery demand, we have aggregated the data in these c110 monthly reports, from 2015 to 2024, to track the pipeline over time, and how expectations have progressed.

Over the past decade, an average of 4 GW of new power generation projects have been added to the queue each month. 1 GW of previously proposed projects have been abandoned each month. And another 2.2 GW of projects have been completed each month. Hence, the overall project queue has grown 0.8 GW larger per month, rising from 90 GW in September-2015 to 183 GW in September-2024 (charts above).

New power generation capacity projects initiated in the US from Q3 2015 to Q3 2014.

Fears over power grid bottlenecks and rising interconnection times are strongly supported by the data. 75% of the increase in the overall pipeline size is in projects that have not yet commenced construction and are thus effectively sitting in a queue.

Development times have not changed materially, although they have always been quite variable. In the data-file, we have tracked 1,715 projects from the time they were first proposed, to the time when they were completed. Their average construction time was 0.8 years, with an average delay of 0.4 years versus initial estimates. These are shorter than the development times for other energy infrastructure.

Looking across the life-cycle of projects that entered the 860M reports during the planning stage (rather than later), the average development time was 2.1 years, including 0.9 years of planning, 0.3 years of permitting, 0.8 years of construction, and an average delay of 0.6 years versus initial estimates. Larger projects tend to take longer.

Development times vs planned capacity of gas, solar, and wind power projects in the US

Delays in constructing power generation facilities are also heavily skewed, as 10% of the projects comprise 50% of the delays.

Distribution of delays in start-up times for gas, solar, wind, battery, and other power projects versus their originally planned timelines

In 2024, renewables momentum has slowed, gas has re-accelerated, but grid-scale battery activity is accelerating fastest and now making an all-time peak, based on tracking new projects being added to the EIA’s 860M filings. Numbers are in the data-file for TSE clients.

Gas, solar, wind, and battery power projects initiated in the US from 2016 to 2024. Each data point is for the trailing twelve months

Again this supports the notion that bottlenecked power grids are hindering the ramp of wind and solar, while we specifically see battery co-deployments as a route to expedite bottlenecked projects. The re-acceleration of natural gas projects also supports our outlook on US natural gas and our outlook on gas turbines. We will continue updating this data-file over time.

Power generation: asset lives?

Asset lives of different power generation sources.

Power generation asset lives average c70-years for large hydro, 55-years for new nuclear, 45-years for coal, 33-years for gas, 20-25 years for wind/solar and 15-years for batteries. This flows through to LCOE models. However, each asset type follows a distribution of possible asset lives, as tabulated and contrasted in this data-file.


Asset lives of power generation infrastructure are tabulated in this data-file, covering both the design life and age at retirement, for coal, gas, wind, solar, batteries, nuclear and hydro.

Average lives are c70-years for large hydro, 55-years for nuclear, 45-years for coal, 33-years for gas, 20-25 years for wind/solar, 15-years for batteries. However, the numbers follow a distribution, as can be quantified based on data in the data-file.

Distributions of lifetimes for different power generation assets.

Thus, the capexย of c$1,000/kW for wind, solar and batteries is not necessarily cheaper (per year)ย than $1,000-1,500/kW for gas or $3,000/kW for hydro. These very long-run costs/benefits are not well captured inย LCOE models.

Our personal perspective is that long-term infrastructure has huge hidden value within stable, developed world countries. Their public benefits continue long after their capex costs have been forgotten. Our favorite example is the Brooklyn Bridge, completed for $15M in 1883, yet still standing today.

Some power plantsย can also be replaced and re-fitted, piece by piece, like Theseus’s Ship. It might cost $650/kW toย extend a nuclear plant’s lifeย by a further 20-years (attractiveย for data-centers, and stoking the order books ofย nuclear contractors, such as Westinghouse, now owned byย Cameco).

Likewise for new energies, there may be upside in the 2030s for module-makersturbine-makers and battery materials and manufacturers, as existing assets need to replace failing components.

Purchasing power: what are generation assets worth?

Fair value of generation assets which hinge on their remaining life, utilization, flexibility, power prices, rising grid volatility and CO2 credentials.

There has never been more controversy over the fair values of power generation assets, which hinge on their remaining life, utilization, flexibility, power prices, rising grid volatility and CO2 credentials. This 16-page guide covers the fair values of generation assets, hidden opportunities and potential pitfalls.

Prysmian E3X: reconductoring technology?

Patent assessment of Prysmian E3X technology.

Prysmian E3X technology is a ceramic coating that can be added onto new and pre-existing power transmission cables, improving their thermal emissivity, so they heat up 30% less, have 25% lower resistive losses, and/or can carry 25% increased currents. This data-file locates the patents underpinning E3X technology, identifies the materials used, and finds a strong moat around the technology.


In 2018, Prysmian acquired General Cable in a $3bn deal, apparently outbidding China’s Hengtong, plus Nexans and NKT, who were also interested. Prysmian thus gained access to General Cable’s E3X technology, which has exciting potential for reconductoring transmission lines.

E3X is a thin yet durable ceramic coating, with 0.9x emissivity factor and 0.2x solar absorptivity factor, that can be applied to the outside of power transmission cables, thereby helping the conductors to dissipate heat. This matters as hot cables are more resistive and also tend to sag causing electrical hazards.

For comparison, note that bare aluminium cables have a notoriously poor heat emissivity factor, around 0.16x, which is one of the key reasons they heat up and hit sag limits.

Hence compared to other cables operating under the same conditions, E3X cables have 30% lower temperatures, which can improve conductivity and lower operating losses by 25%; or it can allow for 25% increased ampacity within the same sag/loss limits. Data in our chart below come from testing of E3X at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Test results of Prysmian E3X cable coating.

At least 20 North American utilities have now trialed or deployed Prysmian E3X technology to improve the carrying capacity of their network. It is also included as standard for one of the leading manufacturers of advanced conductors. Hence this technology looks interesting.

How does Prysmian E3X technology work and is it locked up with patents? Our answers to this question are based on locating the underlying patents and reviewing them. Our findings are in this data-file.

The patents behind E3X score very well on our patent assessment framework, for reasons in the data-file. And we can also guess at the composition of E3X ceramic coatings, which interestingly, will pull on demand for silicon carbide?

Full details are available in this data-file, while for clients with TSE’s written subscription, we have added some conclusions into our research note into advanced conductors.

Transaction prices for power generation assets?

Transaction prices average $1,000/kW for power generation assets that have traded hands over time

Transaction prices for power generation assets are tabulated in this data-file, capturing 65 deals for gas plants, wind, solar, hydro and nuclear, globally and over time. Median prices are c$1,000/kW, but range from <$400/kW in the lower decile to >$2,500 in the upper decile.


Transaction prices for power generation assets vary widely in different contexts. This data-file helps to understand prices paid, and how they are changing over time.

Transaction prices for gas generation assets have been lowest among the different categories, averaging $500/kW over the past decade, which is actually below the costs of constructing new CCGTs at c$950/kW.

Low prices attribute to overcapacity and higher gas prices, especially in Europe and in 2014-2015. However the value of gas plants has been increasing over time, and recent deal prices have surpassed $1,000/kW.

Transaction prices for wind assets and solar assets have been highly variable, ranging from $400/kW to $4,000/kW. It all hinges on the strike price and duration of power purchase agreements.

For example, a pair of solar assets in Japan transacted at $4,000/kW in July-2017, backstopped by 25-28c/kWh PPAs lasting for another 19-years. Conversely, renewable assets transacting at $400-600/kW tended to sell their power on a merchant basis.

Transaction prices for low-carbon baseload generation, such as hydro plants and nuclear plants were highest, averaging $1,500-2,000/kW, however fewer assets in these categories change hands.

In some cases, nuclear deal prices have been distorted to the downside by the assumption of decommissioning liabilities. And we think the value of these assets may be higher than measured in the data-file.

Transaction prices for power generation assets are tabulated in this data-file, capturing over 65 transactions, sorted by region, acquirer, seller, deal price (in $M), generation capacity (MW), transaction price ($/kW), plus notes contextualizing each transaction.

Note, this database was last updated in August-2024, and contains 10 data-points for 2024, which are not shown in the title chart above.

Copyright: Thunder Said Energy, 2019-2025.