Published on 6 February 2026, the International Energy Agency’s Electricity 2026 examines electricity markets through 2030 and gives particular attention to grids and flexibility. Its demand outlook includes data centres alongside industrial activity, transport and buildings. For an infrastructure investor, that wider context matters: a facility competes for access to a physical system serving many other users.
Separate price from availability
A quoted electricity tariff answers a narrow question. It does not establish when a site can draw the required load, how much capacity is firmly available or what work remains before connection.
Our starting point would be a capacity schedule with three distinctions: what is energised today, what is contractually committed and what depends on further approvals or construction. Combining those categories into one headline megawatt figure hides the part of the plan that still needs to happen.
The evidence should be specific to the proposed location. Regional generation forecasts and a promising market outlook cannot settle a site’s connection date.
Model the cost of waiting
An infrastructure model should show what happens if energisation arrives later than equipment. The effect can extend to financing, reserved space, support coverage and commitments made to customers. A delay may also change which hardware generation is commercially attractive by the time the service becomes available.
A phased deployment can reduce exposure, provided the first phase is independently useful. It needs enough power, cooling, connectivity and operational cover to run the promised service. A partially finished site should not automatically be counted as partially productive capacity.
Make expansion conditional on evidence
We would tie each expansion decision to a clear set of conditions: confirmed capacity, an achievable delivery sequence, customer demand and a defined operating margin under less favourable assumptions. The investment review should also identify the point at which a different site or a smaller deployment becomes preferable.
This approach leaves room for growth without treating every planned connection as an existing asset. It also gives partners a more useful conversation: which dependency needs to be resolved, who can resolve it and what evidence allows the next commitment.
The IEA report supplies the market context. Site diligence, contractual review and the timing of capital deployment remain decisions that must be made for the particular project.