31.07.2026
We are used to evaluating the development of the energy sector by the number of megawatts put into operation, kilometers of networks built, or the volume of investments in new generating capacities. However, in the coming decade, this will not be enough.
The competitiveness of energy companies will increasingly be determined not by the scale of their physical assets, but by their ability to manage the complexity of the energy system, work with data, integrate digital solutions and ensure flexibility.
That is why the discussion that arose after the publication of materials in The Times about the internal report Cornwall Insight, prepared for the UK system operator NESO, deserves much more attention than the usual analysis of a single technical incident.
For a professional audience — investors, developers, infrastructure operators and energy company executives – this story is a kind of look into the future. It shows what the key challenges of the energy business will be in the coming years.
A political debate quickly formed around the release of the report about the risks of decarbonization and Net Zero policies. However, the technical content is much more interesting than the political interpretations.
To summarize the published materials, Cornwall Insight actually says something else: modern power system management models are increasingly struggling to cope with the growing complexity of the system itself.
The mass distribution of solar generation, energy storage, electric vehicles, heat pumps and other inverter resources is radically changing the architecture of the network. At the same time, forecasting, telemetry and dispatching control tools remain largely a product of the era of centralized synchronous generation.
It is this discrepancy that is becoming a new source of systemic risks.
In my opinion, this is one of the most important management theses for the entire global energy industry: the problem is not the speed of the energy transition, but the speed of adapting management systems to the new reality.
For many years, the key issues in the development of the energy industry have been the construction of new capacities, modernization of networks and attraction of capital.
Today, this is no longer enough.
The energy transition is less and less a technological problem and is increasingly becoming a management problem.
Companies will compete not only with generation technologies, but also with the ability to integrate heterogeneous assets, work with large data sets, predict system behavior and quickly respond to its changes.
In other words, competition is moving from a fight for megawatts to a competition of management models.
This means a significant change in the requirements for the energy business.
If ten years ago the competitive advantage was access to financing, experience in implementing large infrastructure projects and effective construction management, today new competencies are added to this.
Managers Companies will increasingly make decisions based on digital models, predictive analytics, and real-time data. Investment committees will evaluate not only the cost of equipment or the forecast of electricity prices, but also the ability of assets to provide flexibility, rapid response, and integration into the digital architecture of the market.
That is why digitalization, artificial intelligence, telemetry, and analytics are no longer ancillary services. They are becoming part of the basic business model of energy companies.
Along with the transformation of the energy system, the criteria for evaluating investment projects are also changing.
Along with traditional indicators – CAPEX, payback period and electricity price forecast – other factors are becoming increasingly important.
Can the asset operate in multiple market segments?
Can it provide flexibility to the system?
Does it integrate into the digital processes of the system operator?
Does its architecture allow it to quickly adapt to future changes in market conditions?
In practice, this means that companies should already design their assets not only for the current market model, but also for the model that will be formed over the next ten to fifteen years.
These changes are best illustrated by the evolution of the role of energy storage systems.
If until recently, energy storage installations (Energy storage/BESS) were perceived mainly as a tool for integrating renewable generation or price arbitrage, today they are becoming one of the key elements of the system architecture.
It is storage that increasingly provides rapid frequency regulation, reserves capacity, voltage support, local elimination of network overloads and other services, without which the functioning of a modern power system becomes much more difficult.
Therefore, the business model of UZE must be evaluated not only through the income of an individual investor, but also through its role in shaping the new economy of the power system.
Another important lesson from the British case is often overlooked.
After the information about the internal report appeared, the independent regulator launched its own investigation. Its subject was not only technical aspects, but also the readiness of the system operator to work in the conditions of the new market architecture.
This is of fundamental importance for business.
400;”>Predictable rules of the game, an independent regulator, a strong system operator and transparency of information about the state of the networks are the same elements of investment attractiveness as access to financing or stability of legislation.
It is the institutional quality that will increasingly determine the speed of attracting capital into energy infrastructure.
This experience is especially valuable for Ukraine.
Unlike many European countries, we are not just modernizing the existing energy system – a significant part of the infrastructure will actually have to be created anew.
This opens a unique window of opportunity.
We can immediately integrate modern requirements for telemetry, digital management, energy storage, ancillary services and data openness, without going through a long path of gradual evolution.
In my opinion, the strategic focus should be on five areas:
It is this combination that can turn the energy transformation into a long-term competitive advantage for Ukraine.
The most important lesson of history with the Cornwall Insight report is not that the energy transition creates new risks.
It is that the rules of competition in the energy business have already changed.
400;”>The future will not belong to those companies that own the most megawatts, but to those that best manage complexity, work with data, provide flexibility to the system, and make investment decisions taking into account long-term market transformation.
It is at the intersection of technology, management, strong institutions, and strategic vision that new leadership in the energy business will be formed. And it is here that Ukraine has a chance not to catch up, but to get ahead.
