Key Highlights
- Non-utility industries are becoming active participants in grid discussions, focusing on infrastructure resilience and operational risks.
- Accurate data and digital twins are critical for reliable AI-driven grid planning and asset management.
- Early identification of subsurface and physical risks can prevent costly delays and safety issues in infrastructure projects.
I have attended many industry conferences this year, and the most interesting conversations weren’t always happening between electric utilities.
Across conference floors, a growing number of participants came from outside the traditional utility ecosystem, ranging from private equity firms and advanced manufacturers to logistics providers and hyperscale data center operators. What brought them there wasn’t curiosity about the power sector. It was the realization that their own growth now largely depends on electric utilities. Electricity demand is projected to surge nearly 50% by 2040, and it will take a massive effort to manage that growth successfully.
What brought them there wasn’t curiosity about the power sector. It was the realization that their own growth now largely depends on electric utilities.
A New Set of Voices in the Utility Conversation
One of the major shifts at industry events this year is that they don’t just have technology on display; they also give space to those asking the questions. Players outside of utilities and traditional energy companies are translating their reliance on electric utilities into action by becoming more active participants in the industry.
Those who once viewed electricity as a background service are now realizing that reliable, scalable power infrastructure is fundamental to their business models and future growth. As a result, they are engaging more directly in conversations about infrastructure, resilience, and long-term grid planning.
And they are asking entirely different kinds of questions.
Instead of focusing primarily on where to invest, many stakeholders are asking deeper operational questions about how the system works, such as how infrastructure data is managed, where hidden project risks exist, and how quickly the grid can scale to meet growing demand. Those questions are what will ultimately help shape the next phase of electric modernization.
From Opportunity to Understanding
Recently, there has been a growing realization that the biggest constraints in the energy transition are often infrastructure realities, not just capital availability. Funding cannot instantly bypass physical limitations.
Procuring the equipment and capacity needed to support and scale electricity infrastructure has been an ongoing problem, and it won’t be fixed overnight. Right-of-way is often a challenge to acquire, requiring new construction methods and grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) to unlock capacity on existing footprints. All the while, global supply chain interruptions continue to constrain equipment access, making local manufacturing even more critical.
The sheer scale of the challenge cannot be ignored. ERCOT has 85 GW of generating capacity online today, yet they have nearly 430 GW sitting in the interconnection queue. If even 10% of that queue comes to fruition, it would represent a massive 50% increase in production. Capital alone cannot build out that volume; execution will require engineering, data, and physical resources.
As non-utility businesses confront the reality of these physical bottlenecks, they are no longer waiting on the sidelines. Instead, they’re shifting the dialogue from high-level market opportunities to asking the hard, practical operational questions.
Question #1: Do utilities have the data needed to power AI and grid planning?
AI and advanced analytics are quickly becoming central to grid planning discussions. However, these technologies depend on accurate data about the physical environment.
Without accurate data, digital models can produce unreliable insights, AI-driven planning tools may misinterpret system conditions, and capital investments may be directed toward the wrong priorities. This creates a severe trust challenge across the industry. If the underlying data regarding asset health and spatial constraints is flawed, the automated outputs will follow suit.
To bridge this trust gap, utilities are turning to advanced digital transformations. For instance, deploying highly accurate, intelligent digital twins at the 132kV Bunning Lake substation in Perth, Australia, helped support the city’s growing electricity demands and ensure reliable power supply for transport operations. This transformation demonstrates how robust data structures can safeguard project execution, ensuring that physical assets match their digital counterparts and allowing AI tools to execute grid planning with precision rather than approximation.
Question #2: Where are the hidden infrastructure risks?
When non-utility stakeholders look at project timelines, they are increasingly focused on identifying fatal flaws before the shovel even hits the dirt. A primary, yet frequently overlooked, risk is subsurface uncertainty, which can be detrimental to projects like underground transmission, substations, transmission towers, and undergrounding initiatives.
Incomplete or fragmented information about subsurface conditions can lead to construction delays, cost overruns, project redesigns, or safety concerns. When large engineering projects move forward without clear visibility into what lies beneath the surface, civil works stall and budgets collapse. Moving risk identification to the earliest stages of design is critical to keeping megaprojects on schedule. For all parties involved, understanding these risks earlier in the planning process has become a top priority.
Question #3: Can the grid scale fast enough for the next wave of demand?
One of the most persistent questions we heard from outside industries at recent events was about future capacity. Artificial intelligence and large-scale data centers are rapidly increasing electricity demand. In fact, roughly 100 GW of new data centers will be added between 2026 and 2030, effectively doubling global capacity. That means utilities are being engaged earlier and more directly in infrastructure discussions because non-utility business models depend on reliable access to large amounts of power.
Deciding whether the grid can scale quickly enough to support the next generation of economic growth will require improvements in infrastructure planning, data visibility, cross-industry coordination, and project delivery speed. The pressure is already forcing businesses to look for alternative solutions. Data center operators are increasing behind-the-meter power arrangements and exploring battery storage because the average wait time for a grid connection in top data center markets is 4+ years. These wait times mean power access, not location or cost, will be the main site selection criteria. Operators can’t wait for traditional timelines, driving them directly to utility planning discussions.
What These Questions Mean for Utilities
As industries outside of electric utilities enter the conversation, discussions are expanding to include infrastructure transparency, system-level resilience, new grid architectures, and long-term scalability. Utilities that engage with these topics proactively will be better positioned to support both energy transition goals and broader economic development.
However, the challenges ahead are centered on a first-of-its-kind scale and complexity. We are seeing groups convening that have not worked together in the past or have historically been at odds with each other. As they collaborate, it is crucial that they acknowledge they are working towards a common goal and outcome: reliable, resilient energy while avoiding unintended consequences. If that level of collaboration doesn't take place, we risk significant overhead and project delays.
Utility providers also need to look beyond traditional partnerships to include those in the supply chain and those who have direct access to technology itself. Because equipment often takes years of lead time, combined with current supply instability, we need more stakeholders synchronized at the state, local, and federal levels. Broad cooperation gives stakeholders the flexibility to move quickly, and in certain frameworks like ERCOT, that can mean pivots in weeks rather than the anticipated years.
Ultimately, technological innovation will continue to transform the grid, but the next phase of modernization will be shaped by who is asking the right questions. As electricity-dependent industries become active participants in the ecosystem, their perspectives on risk and resilience are pushing utilities to think more broadly about how infrastructure is designed, built, and managed. Radical collaboration is no longer just an ideal; it will define how the power system evolves to support tomorow's demand.
About the Author
Brad Johnson
Brad Johnson is market development director at Bentley Systems.
Facts Only
* Non-utility industries are becoming active participants in grid discussions focusing on infrastructure resilience and operational risks.
* Accurate data and digital twins are critical for AI-driven grid planning and asset management.
* Early identification of subsurface and physical risks prevents delays and safety issues in infrastructure projects.
* Electricity demand is projected to surge nearly 50% by 2040.
* ERCOT has 85 GW of generating capacity online, with nearly 430 GW in the interconnection queue.
* Digital twins deployed at substations can support electricity demands and ensure reliable power supply.
* Subsurface uncertainty in areas like underground transmission and substations causes construction delays and cost overruns.
* Wait times for grid connection in top data center markets can be 4+ years.
* New data centers are projected to add approximately 100 GW between 2026 and 2030.
Executive Summary
Non-utility industries are increasingly participating in grid discussions, focusing on infrastructure resilience and operational risks because their growth is dependent on reliable electricity. This shift involves stakeholders from private equity, manufacturers, logistics providers, and data center operators engaging with the utility conversation. They are asking operational questions about infrastructure data management, risk identification, and grid scalability rather than solely focusing on investment.
A key constraint in the energy transition appears to be physical infrastructure realities, not just capital availability. Acquiring necessary capacity, such as right-of-way for transmission, is challenging, necessitating new construction methods and grid-enhancing technologies (GETs). The immense scale of future demand, driven by factors like AI and data centers, requires significant infrastructural execution beyond simple capital investment.
The focus has shifted from high-level market opportunities to practical operational concerns regarding system functionality, data accuracy, and physical limitations. This demands broader collaboration among utilities, supply chain partners, and technology providers to ensure reliable energy systems that can support future economic growth.
Full Take
The narrative shifts from a utility-centric view of infrastructure planning to one driven by the constraints imposed by physical reality and future demand. The emergence of non-utility stakeholders, motivated by dependency on energy infrastructure, forces a re-evaluation of how systemic bottlenecks are addressed—specifically data integrity, risk visibility, and physical scalability. The emphasis on digital twins demonstrates a pathway for aligning physical assets with planning models, but this technology's effectiveness hinges entirely on the quality and synchronization of underlying spatial data.
A critical pattern emerges in the tension between abstract capital availability and concrete execution constraints. When non-utility entities demand operational answers—like where hidden risks lie or how quickly capacity can be deployed—the system forces a confrontation with the fact that physical limitations dictate economic possibilities, not just financial flows. The call for radical collaboration reflects an understanding that large-scale transitions require moving beyond traditional, siloed partnerships to integrate supply chain and technology expertise directly into infrastructure governance.
The tension lies in synchronizing timelines across disparate actors—from raw material suppliers to grid operators—to achieve necessary speed for adaptation. If the focus remains on incremental technological solutions without addressing the systemic coordination challenges, the pursuit of resilience will remain fragmented. The implication is that the next phase of modernization requires embedding operational concerns into the foundational design principles rather than treating them as subsequent externalities.
Sentinel — Human
The text reads like a well-researched industry analysis, effectively synthesizing complex infrastructure challenges and stakeholder shifts through a narrative progression.