Identify energy business opportunities, compare portfolios and support investment and design decisions. The aim is to find the best trade-offs between returns and risk through hybridisation and integrated systems synthesis.
An integrated process: from business opportunities to support for front-end engineering design.
Two independent hybrid energy sitesTwo flat, front-view illustrations on a light background. Site A combines photovoltaic panels, battery cabinets, conversion equipment, a building and an electricity pylon. Site B combines wind turbines, storage and a building with energy demand. These are examples of independent installations for portfolio assessment; no electricity interconnection between plants is depicted.
Different resources. One joint assessment.A / B
SITE A01
Solar PVBatteriesDemandLocal grid
SITE B02
WindBatteriesDemand
One shared portfolio
Joint financial assessment of independent installations.
Conceptual illustrations. Each location can have its own grid connection.
Once opportunities have been identified, how should available capital and risk exposure be allocated across two installations in different locations? The aim is a robust, stable portfolio, with individual profitability and risk measured at both site and portfolio level.
Available capitalto invest in an energy portfolio
2 projectsin different locations
How much in each?considering returns and risk exposure
01
Across two locations
Assess how resources, generation, demand and market exposure complement each other. Compare capital allocations according to the investor’s objectives and risk tolerance.
02
Within each location
Combine generation and storage according to local needs. The starting point is solar PV, wind and lithium-ion batteries, with scope for other renewable and non-renewable sources and other storage technologies.
At each location, economic benefits and supply resilience are assessed, taking resources, demand, grid access, costs, reliability and local constraints into account.
Why · What for
From analysis to concrete decisions.
The aim is to compare alternatives and decide what is worth developing, with assumptions, uncertainties and constraints documented.
Demand, grids and uncertainty.
Cryptocurrency mining, electrification — including electric vehicles — and data centres add new uses of electricity. Global uncertainty also contributes to fluctuations in energy and raw-material prices.
Expanding the grid, particularly through new high-voltage lines, requires investment, years of development and permits. Exploring solutions starts with asking which resources each location offers and how to combine them usefully.
A ranking of opportunities and potential portfolios by viability, complementarity and potential to create value.
02
Capital and risk
Alternative capital allocations, with expected returns, potential losses and combined risk exposure.
03
Each plant’s configuration
Architectures, equipment and design parameters consistent with the resources, needs and constraints of each location.
04
Contracts and operation
PPA options, agreements between parties and operating strategies, assessed for their effects on the whole system.
The global project
From business opportunities to project definition.
A journey linking opportunity identification and selection with validation and support for front-end engineering design (FEED support).
Established technologies and models
Known solutions and business models with prior experience of application.
New solutions and business models
More complex technologies, emerging combinations and ways to create value that the market, investors and developers may have overlooked.
The proposed development process follows these stages:
01
Identify opportunities
Identify needs, resources, assets and business models, both established and emerging.
02
Assess complementarity
A preliminary match examines which opportunities could form a portfolio and how their resources, operation and risks relate.
03
Establish a ranking
Rank opportunities and portfolios by returns, risk and complementarity, according to available capital and the investor’s objectives.
04
Select one or more opportunities
Choose opportunities of interest and request more information, presented anonymously at this stage.
05
Request Validation Support
Request development and validation of the selected opportunities: data, assumptions, individual viability and portfolio viability.
06
Progress towards FEED support
If the analysis justifies proceeding, advance to support for front-end engineering design and project definition.
An integrated synthesis
From the energy contract to each equipment decision.
Decision variables are assessed jointly because the choice of a contract, a piece of equipment or an operating strategy can change which other decisions are suitable.
Contracts
Which PPA type is suitable, its contractual limits and agreements between the parties.
Equipment
Which manufacturer and model to select for the main equipment, considering performance and compatibility.
Physical design
Which topology and parameters to use, from battery–inverter architecture to spacing between PV rows.
Operation
How to operate the systems and shift loads in buildings while respecting service and comfort requirements.
Explore the technical foundationsModels · Objectives · Risk · Time
Select a topic to explore its technical foundations.
Investment · Design · Operation · Agreements
Co-optimisation
Nonlinear, multiobjective co-optimisation: connect capital allocation, design, equipment, contracts and operation, considering their technical and economic effects across multiple timescales.
Original nonlinear relations
Original nonlinear models · No linearisation
Retain the original nonlinear models defined for the components and their interactions, including conversion efficiencies and losses, without replacing them with linearised versions in the synthesis formulation.
Logical and technical consistency
SMT · Satisfiability modulo theories
Express and check compatibility conditions, operating rules and logical restrictions alongside mathematical relations. This supports the identification of configurations that satisfy the conditions represented in the model.
Multilevel · Initially bilevel
Interdependent decision levels
Organise optimisation into linked decision levels. The initial bilevel structure relates upper-level decisions to optimal lower-level responses, connecting strategic choices with their operating and economic consequences.
Target: a global Pareto-optimal front
Multiobjective optimisation
Seek a global Pareto-optimal front within the modelled feasible space: a set of non-dominated alternatives that exposes trade-offs between objectives, rather than prescribing one solution through fixed weights.
The global Pareto front is a methodological objective. Claims of global optimality require suitable solution methods and verification.
Deterministic / Stochastic / Worst-case / Robust
Risk to inform investment decisions
Deterministic analysis uses specified inputs; stochastic analysis represents probabilistic scenarios; worst-case analysis examines the most adverse admissible conditions; robust optimisation seeks decisions that remain viable across the uncertainty considered. These approaches support the comparison of capital allocations by returns, potential losses and the installations’ combined exposure.
From operation to asset life
Multiple timescales
Link operational analysis at hourly or subhourly resolution, where appropriate, with seasonal patterns and asset-life assessment. Rolling-horizon approaches are considered to revise operating decisions as information changes.
Configuration and performance
Architectures, losses and reliability
Compare equipment configurations in terms of conversion losses, availability, failure exposure and economic implications. The aim is to connect the choice of architecture with energy delivery and investment value.
Current pilot project
Australia–Sweden.
An Australia–Sweden pilot is being developed to apply this journey to two installations: identify opportunities, study local hybridisation and assess capital allocation according to portfolio returns and risk.
The initial case considers solar PV, wind and lithium-ion batteries. Technology and configuration choices respond to the resources and conditions of each location.
The analysis connects contractual decisions, specific components, plant architecture and operation.
AUAustralia
SESweden
Resources, demand, infrastructure and market conditions are compared to study when combining the installations could add value.
Would you like to learn about the pilot?
I can explain the approach, the decisions under study and the risk analysis in more detail, with no obligation on your part.
Which decisions are assessed together: some examples
Some examples of the decision variables assessed jointly, within the alternatives and admissible limits of each case.
PPA type and contractual limits
Which type of power purchase agreement is suitable and which limits to set within its terms, such as price, committed energy or risk exposure limits, where applicable.
Equipment manufacturer and model
Which manufacturer and model to select for the main equipment among the alternatives considered, taking performance, compatibility, efficiency, reliability and costs into account.
PV topology and row spacing
How to arrange and connect modules, inverters and other plant components, including physical parameters such as row spacing and its effects on shading, energy output and site use.
Battery–inverter architecture
The selection of batteries, inverters and conversion equipment; their coupling, system connections and parameters for power, capacity, efficiency and operation.
Load shifting in buildings
Which flexible loads to shift in time and by how much, while respecting service schedules, comfort requirements and the building’s operating constraints.
Agreements between parties
Options for allocating roles, revenues and risks among participants, within the admissible conditions of the case.
These decisions are linked with capital allocation and sizing within a single co-optimisation process, with objectives, constraints and multiple timescales.
Before you go further.
Does a portfolio need a physical connection?
No. Sites can remain physically and operationally independent while being evaluated together financially. Complementarity does not imply that electricity can be transferred between them or that risk will automatically fall.
Does this replace a feasibility study or engineering design?
Synthesis provides an analytical basis for deciding what is worth developing and supporting its definition. Detailed feasibility studies, local regulatory checks and engineering design remain necessary.
Which energy sources and storage are considered?
The starting point is solar PV, wind and lithium-ion batteries. The approach can incorporate other renewable and non-renewable sources, as well as other storage technologies, where they fit the resources, needs and constraints of each case.
What stage is the initiative at?
The Australia–Sweden pilot is underway. The service journey describes the proposed stages from identification to FEED support. In a direct exchange, I can explain the pilot’s status and the current scope of each stage. This phase seeks feedback on the approach’s usefulness.
Feedback and contact
Share whatever matters to you.
Please feel free to share ideas, criticism, questions, experience or anything you consider relevant. There are no required questions or prescribed format; a few lines are useful too.
If you would like more details before commenting, please email me with no obligation on your part.
Sharing feedback or requesting information creates no commitment to invest, purchase a service or participate further.
How I will use your responses
I will treat your responses confidentially and use them to review and improve the project and answer your enquiries. I will not sell them, publish or share them with third parties, or use them as a testimonial or endorsement by your organisation without your permission. Your email will not be added to marketing campaigns.
Identification is optional
For this initial exchange, you may leave out your name and organisation or use a pseudonym. If you write by email, I will be able to see the sender address: this channel does not provide complete technical anonymity.
Optional prompts for your area of experience
Only if helpful, you can explore these questions for guidance. You are free to share anything and do not need to follow them.
Would this help you compare opportunities across your assets?
Feedback from owners of buildings, parking areas, transport hubs, energy plants, marinas and other assets can help connect the synthesis approach to real energy needs.
Which decisions would need better support?
Which site constraints should carry more weight?
What would make the proposed outputs useful?
Please avoid including third-party confidential information in this first exchange.