Grid Resilience Solutions

For the last part of my Energy Resilience series, we have to talk about the worst-case scenario – when the lights actually go out. Earlier this year we saw that happen in Spain and Portugal. A major blackout left millions without power. Trains stopped, shops couldn’t take card payments, hospitals and factories switched to backup. A wake-up call that modern life depends on electricity in ways we often forget until it is gone.   This is what happens when grids are pushed to the edge by fast-moving disturbances or extreme conditions. A couple of years ago, South Australia experienced a state-wide blackout after severe weather took out multiple transmission lines. Investigations showed the system lacked enough inertia to stay stable through the shock. Part of the solution was to install synchronous condensers – giant flywheels that give the grid “weight” and stability. Siemens Energy delivered two of them as part of the response. Not the only measure of course – adapting regulation is also essential – but it showed something important: without resilience in the system, recovery is slow and uncertain. So what do we actually need if we want a fast ramp-up after a major incident? From my perspective, it comes down to three things. 1️⃣ Standardize before the crisis: When parts fail, every minute spent interpreting drawings or debating specifications is a minute the lights stay out. Standard equipment and uniform processes mean teams can move quickly because they are working with tools they already know. Recovery begins long before the fault happens. 2️⃣ Design power plants with failure in mind: A fast restart depends on assets built to recover quickly, not just run efficiently. That means black-start capability, smart redundancy where it matters and systems that can restart without waiting for the wider grid. In the U.S. for example we supported a power plant with a battery system that enables multiple restart attempts within one hour – resilience designed into the plant itself. 3️⃣ No improvisation in the dark: A blackout is the worst moment to negotiate who does what. Good restoration plans spell out which assets come back first, how to stabilize small sections of the grid and when to reconnect them safely. Regular drills with operators, authorities and major customers turn these plans into routine rather than theory. These steps matter because in any major incident skilled people are often the scarcest resource – grid operators, field crews and technical specialists. That is why preparation matters so much. Clear roles, common standards and trusted partnerships mean limited teams can do more in less time. Because when the worst happens what people remember is how long it stayed dark. I hope you have found this mini-series useful. I know social media is often about speed and short takes but sometimes – especially on important topics like this – I find it worthwhile digging into the detail together.✍️ I’d be interested to hear if you agree.

One data point worth pausing on… According to the latest Sightline Climate (CTVC) analysis (https://lnkd.in/ezEChF5h), TDK Ventures was the most active corporate VC in climate tech in 2025 by deal count. In that context, being at the top of the list feels less like an accolade and more like a mirror held up to the market. At this point, the scale of what is happening in energy is no longer debatable. AI-driven power demand, grid modernization, electrification, and industrial transformation are converging fast. The need for clean, firm, and resilient energy is no longer cyclical or thematic. It’s structural. Against that backdrop, being highly active shouldn’t feel exceptional. It raises a different question: if this opportunity is so clear, who is choosing not to lean in, or not to stay the course? Most of the technologies that truly move the needle — grid infrastructure, long-duration storage, advanced materials, power electronics, and AI-enabling systems — do not fit neatly into short funding cycles or hype-driven timelines. They demand endurance paired with conviction. We see this firsthand across our 2025 investments and broader portfolio: - Grid-scale and long-duration storage with Peak Energy, including a $500M+ deployment agreement reshaping the economics of the grid - Advanced grid infrastructure and power electronics through Amperesand’s $80M raise for solid-state transformer technology - AI infrastructure at the physical layer, from photonics with Mixx Technologies Inc’ $33M Series A to inference compute with Groq’s $750M recent funding round (and $20B moment) - Electrification at scale, from industrial systems to mobility, including Ultraviolette Automotive’s electric motorcycles in India - Edge and systems intelligence, with EdgeCortix as our first investment in Japan, bringing AI closer to where energy and data meet - Data center and logistics infrastructure, from Nubis Communications’ acquisition by Ciena to Starship Technologies’ $50M Series C for autonomous delivery What is emerging across the ecosystem is a clear divide: 🔹 Plenty of capital is willing to show up early 🔹 Far less capital is willing to remain engaged when progress is nonlinear, engineering-heavy, and occasionally quiet At TDK Ventures, we invest with urgency because the transition demands action, but we approach the work with endurance, mindful that only patient capital has the chance to compound over time. Conviction without endurance fades. Endurance without conviction stalls. From that perspective, this moment is less about volume than about consistency: the responsibility to remain engaged in sectors that matter, even when they are capital-intensive, technically complex, or temporarily out of favor. The work continues. And so does the commitment.

Can you double the capacity of a transmission line without building a single new tower? Yes. And it has already been done. I'm talking about reconductoring. It replaces existing transmission cables with advanced conductors that can carry roughly twice the power on the same structures. No new right of way. No new towers. No 10-year permitting battles. The concept is straightforward. Traditional transmission cables use aluminum strands wrapped around a steel core. As current increases, the aluminum heats up, expands, and sags. That sag limits how much power you can push through the line before you violate clearance requirements or risk thermal damage. Advanced conductors solve this by replacing the steel core with a composite material, typically carbon fiber or ceramic fiber. The composite core is lighter, stronger, and barely expands under heat. That means less sag at higher operating temperatures, which means more current capacity on the same towers. But the real advantage is not just physics. It is logistics. Building a new transmission line in the United States takes 10 to 15 years when you account for permitting, environmental review, land acquisition, and construction. Reconductoring an existing line takes 18 to 36 months. In some cases, much less. Minnesota completed a reconductoring project near Minneapolis in approximately three months from approval to energization. Texas reconductored two 240-mile transmission lines along the Gulf Coast after the 2011 winter blackouts exposed how badly the southern grid needed more capacity. The project doubled the line ratings, finished eight months ahead of schedule, came in under budget, and caused zero service disruption. Right now, roughly 2,500 GW of clean energy projects across the country are sitting in interconnection queues waiting for grid capacity that does not exist. New transmission construction is growing at about 1% per year. At that rate, the grid will fall further behind every year. Reconductoring will not solve everything. It does not help where no transmission corridor exists at all. It is best suited for lines under 50 miles, although longer lines can be reconductored in segments. And utilities are still cautious because the technology is relatively new in North America, even though it has been deployed successfully in Texas, Nevada, California, Belgium, and across parts of Asia. But for the hundreds of thousands of miles of existing transmission lines that are thermally limited today, this may be the fastest, cheapest, and least disruptive path to unlocking grid capacity. If your utility or developer is struggling with interconnection timelines, how seriously has reconductoring been evaluated as an alternative to new construction?

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗔𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗮 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘀𝘆𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗴𝗿𝗶𝗱-𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀   On 30 September 2025, Transgrid announced a tender for about 1 GW of grid-forming battery (GFM BESS) system-strength services – the first step towards 5 GW.  The design is simple but transformative: 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗽𝗮𝘆𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, 𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆-𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. Here’s why and how Australia is changing gears.   𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁  - 𝗗𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗱 – High-renewables grids now lack “system-forming strength + flexibility”, not more spinning steel.  - 𝗠𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶-𝗿𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀 – GFM BESS delivers strength while earning from arbitrage, frequency regulation and congestion relief, cutting total cost.  - 𝗟𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 – Placed at Renewable Energy Zone (REZ) and bottlenecks to lift connection capacity directly.  - 𝗦𝗼𝗳𝘁𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗲𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 – Firmware updates enable droop control, black-start and fault-ride-through to match new standards.   𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀  - 𝗙𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀 – GFM current limits demand adaptive protection coordination.  - 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 – Model alignment, parameter tuning and hold-point testing across scenarios.  - 𝗠𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 & 𝗽𝗮𝘆𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 – Defining verifiable “system-strength capability” and enforceable performance terms.  - 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 – Weak-grid voltage control and relay integration.  - 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻 – Long-lead parts, EPC interfaces and controller updates.   𝗥𝗼𝗮𝗱𝗺𝗮𝗽  - 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁 (1–3 yrs) – Hybrid mix: renewables + condensers + GFM BESS. Condensers anchor VAR and faults; GFM builds stability.  - 𝗠𝗶𝗱 (3–7 yrs) – GFM-led fleet with condensers at critical nodes. Mature the “standard – testing – payment” loop.  - 𝗟𝗼𝗻𝗴 (>7 yrs) – GFM + digital protection replace most new condensers, keeping rotating back-up only where needed.   This is not about “opposing condensers” but “buying the right capability”. As the grid’s challenge shifts from “generating power” to “ensuring stability and usability”, assets must evolve from single-function to programmable multi-capability.   ✅ 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆  Australia’s system-strength strategy is entering a phase where GFM BESS complement synchronous machines – with payments finally reflecting true grid value.    🤔 𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻  Which barrier is most critical for large-scale GFM BESS rollout – testing, fault-levels, or performance verification?   #TechToValue #GridForming #BESS

With electricity demand surging, the U.S. transmission system is approaching its limits. Yet building new lines often takes 5 to 15 years due to permitting, environmental reviews, and land-use constraints. ⚡️Reconductoring offers a faster, lower-impact alternative. By upgrading existing lines with advanced conductors like ACCC or ACCR, utilities can double or even triple capacity—without building new towers or acquiring new rights-of-way. These high-temperature, low-sag (HTLS) conductors use materials such as carbon fiber to minimize sag and maximize throughput. 👉🏽 Why it matters: * Up to 3x current-carrying capacity using existing infrastructure. * Deployment in 18 to 36 months—far quicker than new construction. * 98% of U.S. transmission lines are viable for reconductoring. GridLab estimates reconductoring alone could provide over 80% of the additional transmission capacity needed to reach U.S. clean electricity goals by 2035. Yes, challenges like precision tensioning, splicing, and structural assessments remain, but they’re manageable with current tools, standards, and workforce skills. This is a proven, scalable solution that deserves greater attention. What’s your take? 👇🏽

🔴 The Spanish power system collapsed within seconds following a double contingency in its interconnection lines with France. First, a 400 kV line disconnected, and less than a second later, a second line also failed, suddenly isolating Spain while it was exporting 5 GW of power. The frequency rose abruptly, triggering the automatic disconnection of approximately 10 GW of renewable generation, programmed to shut down when exceeding 50.2 Hz. This led to a sudden energy shortfall, a sharp frequency drop, and within just nine seconds, a total system blackout. 🪕 The causes of the incident are attributed to low rotational inertia (only about 10 GW of synchronous generation online), identically configured renewable protections that reacted simultaneously, reserves that were inadequate for such a high share of renewables, and an under-dimensioned interconnection with France. Could this have been avoided? Several measures could help prevent similar situations in the future, such as requiring synthetic inertia in large power plants, reinforcing the interconnection with France, and establishing a fast frequency response market, among others. 💡 In this context, Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) are more essential than ever. These systems can provide synthetic inertia, ultra-fast frequency response, and backup power in critical situations—capabilities that today’s renewable-dominated system cannot ensure on its own. By reacting in milliseconds, BESS help stabilize the grid during sudden frequency deviations, preventing massive disconnections and buying time for other reserves to activate. Their strategic deployment, combined with appropriate regulation, would make these systems a cornerstone of a more secure and resilient future power system. ... ✋️Please note that this post was written based on the information published on or before its release. Root cause analysis is still ongoing and updates will be released with the outcomes of the investigation. The goal is to show the features that can be provided by BESS within the wide portfolio of solutions applicable in these cases. All inisghts are highly welcome and appreciated in order to enrich our collective understanding. ... 📸 Reid Gardner Battery Energy Storage System (Nevada, USA) A real-world example of how BESS ensures grid stability by delivering synthetic inertia and fast frequency response—essential in a renewable-heavy energy mix.

This week alone, we’ve replaced 4 transformers across different sites—each less than 5 years old. We’ve also rebuilt 2 switchboards that suffered flashovers, and we’ve already got the orders in to completely renew them. All of them were tied to solar sites. All of them were avoidable. Let’s stop pretending this isn’t happening. Too many of these substations were built as an afterthought—thrown in cheap to hit grid connection deadlines and satisfy investors chasing returns, not long-term reliability. We’re seeing: Switchgear that’s corroded beyond repair in under 60 months Inverters dumping harmonics back onto the network with no mitigation Poorly specced protection schemes that offer no selectivity or grading Transformers undersized, under-ventilated, and overstressed from day one No provision for future battery integration or reactive power compensation This isn’t about bad luck. It’s about bad design. And it’s happening across the country. Some of these sites will never make it to year 10 without major intervention. Many will fail long before their PPA matures. And every time it’s the same story: “we didn’t think it needed to be that robust,” “we had a tight budget,” “we assumed it would last.” You don’t build a resilient energy future with assumptions. At Johnson & Phillips, we’ve built our reputation on fixing what others cut corners on. But make no mistake—our goal isn’t just to repair. It’s to raise the standard. Power distribution infrastructure matters. Substations are not just connection points—they’re the backbone of performance, safety, and scalability. If you build them like an afterthought, they will fail. And they are failing. This isn’t a warning. It’s already happening. If you’re operating, investing in, or building solar and storage sites—make your substation a priority. The quality of your entire system depends on it.

April 6th: A bright spring day in Germany, one that perfectly illustrates the need for battery storage systems. Like so many other sunny days, PV generation in Germany covered a large portion of the electricity demand for several hours in the middle of the day, thanks to the cloudless sky and millions of solar modules. But there is a darker side to the sunshine. Large amounts of daytime solar can overload the grid and cause severe electricity price fluctuations: on April 6th, intraday electricity prices dropped to -200€/MWh at their lowest point. In cases where more electricity is generated from solar energy than the grid can handle, grid operators regularly require solar installations to curtail their production. This means that energy that could otherwise be made available to consumers cannot be used. And when the sun goes down, most of the demand must quickly be met with flexible sources. This adds an extra layer of complexity: deciding which conventional power plants can be shut down during the day and switched on again in the evening is a careful balancing act. This is precisely the situation where battery energy storage systems (BESS) can bridge the gap, with several advantages: - By storing part of the solar energy at peak generation times and dispatching it later, BESS can help shift the curve to more closely align with evening demand. - Better management of volatile generation from renewables also helps keep prices stable. - Provided they are close to the overproducing solar systems, BESS contribute to grid stability by helping balance supply and demand. Of course, there is no one-size-fits-all technology. A secure and flexible energy system needs a diverse mix. But batteries are playing an increasing role, especially as they become more and more affordable. We at RWE are harnessing the benefits: we have 1.2 GW of installed BESS capacity worldwide, of which nine systems totalling 364 MW of capacity operate in Germany alone. We’re scaling fast, with new large-scale projects recently commissioned in Germany and the Netherlands. And we have just decided to build a BESS facility in Hamm with an installed capacity of 600 megawatts. So, let’s continue to make the most of those sunny days — by creating the right framework conditions to build up affordable and flexible support.

As grid operators and planners deal with a wave of new large loads on a resource-constrained grid, we need fresh approaches beyond just expecting reduced electricity use under stress (e.g. via recent PJM flexible load forecast or via Texas SB 6). While strategic curtailment has become a popular talking point for connecting large loads more quickly and at lower cost, this overlooks a more flexible, grid-supportive strategy for large load operators. Especially for loads that cannot tolerate any load curtailment risk (like certain #datacenters), co-locating #battery #energy storage systems (BESS) in front of the load merits serious consideration. This shifts the paradigm from “reduce load at utility’s command” to “self-manage flexibility.” It’s BYOB – Bring Your Own Battery and put it in front of the load. Studies have shown that if a large load agrees to occasional grid-triggered curtailment, this unlocks more interconnection capacity within our current grid infrastructure. But a BYOB approach can unlock value without the compromise of curtailment, essentially allowing a load to meet grid flexibility obligations while staying online. Why do this? For data centers (DC’s), it’s about speed to market and enhanced reliability. The avoidance of network upgrade delays and costs, along with the value of reliability, in many cases will justify the BESS expense. The BYOB approach decouples flexibility from curtailment risk with #energystorage. Other benefits of BYOB include: -Increasing the feasible number of interconnection locations. -Controlling coincident peak costs, demand charges, and real-time price spikes. -Turning new large loads into #grid assets by improving load shape and adding the ability to provide ancillary services. No solution is perfect. Some of the challenges with the BYOB approach include: -The load developer bears the additional capital and operational cost of the BESS. -Added complexity: Integrating a BESS with the grid on one side and a microgrid on the other is more complex than simply operating a FTM or BTM BESS. -Increased need for load coordination with grid operators to maintain grid reliability. The last point – large loads needing to coordinate with grid operators - is coming regardless. A recent NERC white paper shows how fast-growing, high intensity loads (like #AI, crypto, etc.) bring new #electricty reliability risks when there is no coordination. The changing load of a real DC shown in the figure below is a good example. With more DC loads coming online, operators would be severely challenged by multiple >400 MW loads ramping up or down with no advanced notice. BYOB’s can manage this issue while also dealing with the high frequency load variations seen in the second figure. References in comments. 

The fastest fix for the U.S. interconnection backlog is battery storage technology that's already cheap and quick to build, paired with a small tweak to how "capacity" gets defined. The core problem: connecting new generation to the grid now takes up to eight years in most U.S. markets, because interconnection studies model worst-case, full-output conditions years into the future and bill developers for every upgrade needed to survive them. More than 2,000 GW of proposed projects are stuck in queues nationally, enough to double the size of our grid. A generator or battery storage system sited right next to a data center, industrial load, or Wal-mart store can supply real capacity to that specific load even if it looks like a plain "energy-only" resource to the wider grid operator. The system operator's capacity-accreditation process wasn't built for this arrangement, so today's interconnection rules treat it as more red tape than it needs to be, even though the physical reliability benefit is real and local. Batteries are uniquely suited to unlock this fast. A BESS project can be permitted and built in 12–18 months, versus years to even procure a gas turbines or build new transmission. It's dispatchable to the minute, which is exactly the property that lets it opt into the "connect and manage" style of access Texas already uses. This means a lighter safety study and accept curtailment if the transmission grid is "full". For a battery, curtailment isn't even much of a compromise; it's how it operates today. In PJM alone, standalone battery storage totals about 67.5 GW of proposed capacity across 349 projects, the second-largest category behind natural gas. Yet PJM's own pilot cycle shows the bottleneck in action: only about 1.9 GW of that battery capacity actually reached a signed interconnection agreement, taking nearly two years even under the "fast" reformed process. The projects should all be greenlighted this year to respond to this crisis. Two federal proposals are converging on the fix. Sen. Martin Heinrich's new bill would create "BASED" service (Basic Access Service for Energy-Only Delivery) nationally — any new plant, including batteries, could connect fast on an energy-only basis and upgrade to full capacity status later. The Energy Cost Fairness and Reliability Act (S.4559) targets the colocated case directly: fast, non-firm energy access for a battery or generator serving a nearby large load, while requiring that any capacity pulled off the public grid be backed by real replacement generation, so other customers aren't left exposed. At the FERC/PJM conference next week, they need to unlock these batteries to provide the capacity required to get through the new few years while everyone waits for other technologies to come online after 2031.