Nama Electricity Distribution Company (NEDC), one of Oman’s leading utility providers, is critical in powering the nation by delivering electricity across the Sultanate of Oman, excluding Dhofar. Serving over 1.4 million customers, NEDC maintains an extensive network of over 51,000 transformers and nearly 47,000 km of power lines. As the sole licensed distributor, NEDC’s mission includes powering homes and businesses and safeguarding public and asset security through innovation. Recently, the company adopted Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to transform its asset inspection and security practices, positioning itself as a leader in operational excellence and safety.

CHALLENGE

Safety has always been a priority for NEDC, yet aging infrastructure and rising electricity demand have made it increasingly difficult to manage asset inspections and repairs effectively. When the Authority for Public Services Regulation (APSR) levied record fines due to safety violations, NEDC knew they needed a more robust solution. The traditional inspection processes—time-consuming, manual, and prone to oversight—were no longer viable. With APSR’s audits highlighting critical safety issues like exposed cables, insufficient substation security, and missing padlocks, NEDC recognized the need for a reliable system to proactively identify, track, and resolve asset-related risks in real-time.

“We were facing substantial fines and safety challenges. It was clear we needed a solution that provided visibility across our asset base.” Mazin Al Salmani, General Manager of Operations and Maintenance.

Inspection of Mini Feeder Pillar (MFP) in Progress for Asset Security Campaign.

The campaign began with about 100 field engineers conducting systematic inspections. Each engineer was assigned specific substations and was responsible for checking all associated assets, including feeder pillars, transformers, and meter panels. Using GIS-linked maps, engineers updated asset statuses from “In Progress” to “Completed,” ensuring seamless coverage and eliminating redundancy. If an engineer identified a defect, such as an unsecured padlock or an exposed cable, they logged the issue with a photo in ArcGIS Survey123. Real-time updates allow office-based teams to track progress instantly on a dashboard, providing unmatched transparency and operational efficiency.

“GIS is far more than a tool for data storage; it’s a solution that empowers us to monitor and maintain our assets in ways previously unimaginable.” Majid Saleem Al Abrawi, Acting Head of GIS Development.

Mobile Workers Utilizing GIS to Identify and Address Unresolved Defects.

Asset Security Dashboard: Real-Time Statistics and Issue Tracking

RESULT

The GIS-enabled Asset Security Campaign has significantly enhanced asset safety and regulatory compliance. With over 15,000 substations inspected across Muscat and South Al Batinah, NEDC swiftly addressed immediate hazards while developing a strategic approach for long-term maintenance. By standardizing asset management processes, NEDC reduced APSR-imposed fines and bolstered its public safety record and organizational reputation.

NEDC Inspection Collection Team Briefing for Asset Security Campaign

BENEFIT

The campaign demonstrated that GIS technology is more than an asset register; it’s a proactive management tool. Field and office staff leveraged mobile applications to track and resolve issues, resulting in a coordinated, transparent inspection process. ArcGIS Dashboards provide real-time visualizations of repair statuses, allowing teams to prioritize critical issues efficiently. This initiative set a new operational standard for NEDC, optimizing field resources and promptly addressing all safety issues.

Enhancing Transparency: Mobile Application Use by Field and Office Workers.

NEXT STEPS

Having successfully implemented the campaign in Muscat and South Al Batinah, NEDC plans to extend the GIS-enabled process to other regions in Oman. The company aims to standardize GIS-based inspections for future asset management endeavors, setting a sustainable, long-term course for public and operational safety.

“GIS provided NEDC with a sustainable, efficient means of executing our Asset Security Campaign and transformed our asset management approach.” Saif Mohammed Al Rawahi, GIS Manager.

Originally published here.

Every utility board and commission is wrestling with the same tension right now: bills are going up, and the reasons keep piling up faster than customers can absorb them.

Grid hardening after another rough storm season. Transmission and distribution upgrades that were deferred for a decade. And now, for some utilities and co-ops - a wave of new customers — data centers, EV charging hubs, crypto miners, electrified industrial plants — all wanting hundreds of megawatts of new capacity, fast.

None of that is optional spending. But none of it is free, either. The question every utility finance and rate team is being asked right now is simple to state and hard to answer: who pays, and how much can customers actually absorb before "reasonable rates" starts to mean something different for different people?

Why This Moment Feels Different

Affordability pressure isn't new — utilities have always balanced infrastructure needs against customer bills. What's different now is the size and speed of the newest driver. A single large-load customer can add more incremental cost to a utility's system in eighteen months than a decade of normal residential growth. If that cost gets spread across the whole rate base the way ordinary growth is, existing customers end up subsidizing infrastructure built for one company's benefit.

That's why rate design work focuses toward isolating large-load costs rather than socializing them — dedicated infrastructure riders among them, minimum-bill and take-or-pay provisions, and cost-recovery structures built specifically so growth pays for growth. Done right, this actually protects affordability for everyone else. That is what much of the reporting ignores. But, done poorly it can quietly shift real cost onto residential customers who never signed up for it.

The Other Side of the Same Coin

At the same time, rate design itself is under scrutiny for its own affordability effects. The long-running debate over fixed vs. volumetric rate structures isn't just an engineering question — it determines whether a low-usage household or a fixed-income customer ends up paying a fair share or an outsized one. Lifeline rates, LIHEAP coordination, and targeted low-income rate design exist precisely because "average" affordability numbers can hide real hardship for a meaningful slice of customers.

What This Means Going Forward

There isn't a single fix here, but there is a common thread across the utilities handling this well: they're treating cost causation seriously. Large loads that drive new infrastructure are being asked to fund a meaningful share of it directly, rather than relying on general rate base recovery. Rate structures are being reexamined with an explicit eye toward who actually bears the burden of fixed cost recovery. And regulators are asking harder questions earlier in the process, rather than discovering affordability problems after rates are already set.

None of this makes the underlying math easier — the infrastructure still has to get built, and someone still has to pay for it. But utilities that are deliberate about matching costs to the customers who cause them are in a much stronger position, both with regulators and with the public, than utilities hoping the averages work out.

This is a topic we'll keep coming back to as large-load growth accelerates and affordability stays in the headlines. If your utility or co-op is navigating either side of this — large-load cost recovery or rate design for vulnerable customers — it's worth getting ahead of it now rather than reacting to a rate case later.

About the Author

Russ Hissom, CPA is a principal of UtilityEducation.com, a firm that provides power and utilities rate and expert witness services, and on-demand professional education classes in co-op and utility accounting, finance, ratemaking, artificial intelligence, and management.

Russ was a partner in a national accounting and consulting firm for 20 years. He works with electric investor-owned and public power utilities, electric cooperatives, and gas, water, and wastewater utilities. His goal is to share industry best practices to help your business perform effectively and efficiently and meet the challenges of the changing power and utilities industry.

Contact Russ at [email protected]

The material in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal or accounting advice provided by Utility Accounting & Rates Specialists, LLC or UtilityEducation.com. You should seek formal advice on this topic from your accounting or legal advisor.

Coal‑fired power plants across North America are operating beyond their original design parameters, as aging assets contend with higher maintenance costs, constrained supply chains, and growing environmental obligations.

But for many owners, decisions about the future of these assets still feel distant. As long as units remain critical to system reliability, it can seem easier to keep operating and defer hard questions about transition or closure.

Our experience shows that waiting often narrows options rather than preserving them. In the Coal to clarity report, we examine how early planning changes outcomes for coal asset owners, not by forcing decisions sooner but by creating the time and evidence needed to make better ones.

The problem with delayed decisions

Coal assets rarely move straight from full operation to closure. Instead, they sit in long periods of uncertainty, where incremental upgrades and ongoing capital spend keep units running safely while owners contend with shifting regulatory requirements, increasing community scrutiny and growing long-term liabilities.

When planning is deferred, decisions tend to be triggered by pressure rather than strategy, with failures, regulatory deadlines, or policy shifts forcing action after options have already narrowed and costs have begun to escalate.

Late decisions also carry human consequences. Delayed decision‑making shifts risk onto communities and workforces, with engagement occurring after options are constrained and positions have hardened. Early planning allows transitions to be shaped deliberately rather than managed under pressure.

Planning early doesn’t lock you into one pathway

One of the most persistent misconceptions we see: Early planning commits an owner to closure or transition before the system is ready, but the opposite tends to play out.

Planning early creates the time, data, and optionality needed for deliberate decision-making. It establishes a clear baseline of asset condition, closure liability, and environmental and social constraints. Assumptions are replaced with evidence, and uncertainty is addressed before decisions become urgent. This baseline gives owners control without locking them into a single outcome.

With a clear foundation in place, owners can assess multiple strategic pathways in parallel, using a common evidence base rather than competing assumptions.

Four pathways, one common advantage

In Coal to clarity, we describe four practical pathways coal assets typically face as they approach end of life. These pathways are not mutually exclusive, and many portfolios move between them over time.

• Continued operation with more targeted sustaining capital: Assets remain critical to reliability and investment decisions should support performance without locking in unnecessary long‑term exposure.

• Partial transition or hybrid models: Some units or systems retire while others continue operating, requiring careful sequencing to manage risk, cost, and disruption.

• Repowering with alternative generation: Leveraging existing sites and infrastructure where feasible, while addressing technical, regulatory, and workforce constraints early.

• Planned and managed closure: End‑of‑life is defined in advance to improve cost certainty, manage environmental liabilities, and support workforce and community transition.

Each pathway carries different cost, risk and value implications. The common advantage of early planning is that it provides a shared evidence base, allowing trade‑offs to be understood and compared before options narrow and decisions become constrained.

Why budgets matter before decisions are final

One of the most overlooked aspects of early planning is its role in capital protection. Closure liabilities, particularly around environmental management, can extend decades beyond the end of generation. Provisions can be frequently underfunded when these liabilities are poorly understood.

Early analysis brings the full scale of these obligations into view while there is still time to act, strengthening cost and schedule confidence and reducing the risk of sudden balance‑sheet exposure.

This can support better decisions, regardless of the path. Whether an asset continues operating, transitions in stages, or moves toward closure, understanding liabilities early allows capital to be allocated deliberately rather than reactively.

From pressure to clarity

Waiting often feels like the simpler choice for asset owners, but in hindsight it can create more challenges. Early planning does not require owners to predict the future, but it allows them to be ready for it. By starting early, owners retain flexibility, protect capital and create space for meaningful engagement with communities, regulators, and workforces.

Pressure is unavoidable, but clarity is gained.

Download the full Coal to clarity report to explore the evidence, pathways, and practical insights that help coal asset owners move from reactive decisions to deliberate outcomes.

India's engagement with bioenergy is not new. According to the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), biomass and biogas promotion programmes have existed in various forms since the 1980s and 1990s. What is changing now is the move from small, decentralised applications to larger commercial compressed biogas and waste-to-energy ecosystems.

👉 Read the full story: https://www.indoen.com/news/indias-biogas-ambition-faces-its-next-challenge-making-plants-work-efficiently

For decades, electric utilities operated within a stable and predictable framework.

Load growth was incremental. Planning cycles were long. Infrastructure investments were methodical and deliberate. This model prioritized reliability and certainty—and for the environment it was designed to serve, it worked.

Then AI arrived.

Unlike traditional demand, AI infrastructure scales in step-function increments—hundreds of megawatts at a time—and compresses timelines. At the same time, the energy footprint of data centers is growing rapidly. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), global data center electricity demand is projected to increase from ~415 TWh in 2024 to ~945 TWh by 2030, effectively more than doubling within the decade.  [iea.org]

This is not simply growth—it is a structural shift in how power is consumed.

The result has not been a failure of infrastructure.

It has been an exposure of underlying assumptions.

Today, one of the grid’s most significant constraints is not a lack of capacity, but the operational frameworks used to access and deploy it.

Across the industry, utilities are finding that the challenge is not always a lack of infrastructure; it is understanding how much capability already exists within the system. Traditional transmission ratings were built around conservative assumptions tied to worst-case conditions, providing an essential foundation for reliability. But as operating conditions become more dynamic and visibility improves, those assumptions may not always capture the full range of capability available within the system.

The opportunity is not theoretical. According to EPRI, utilities implementing ambient-adjusted ratings typically realize 3–7% additional transmission capacity, while dynamic line ratings can increase usable capacity by 20–40% by aligning thermal limits to actual weather conditions rather than static worst-case assumptions.     [EPRI.com]

Historically, this gap was intentional.

It provided a margin of safety in environments with limited data and limited real-time visibility.

But as demand accelerates—particularly from AI, electrification, and high-density loads—that same conservatism can become a constraint.

This creates a new kind of question for the industry:

Not just: “How do we build more capacity?”

But increasingly: “How do we better understand and utilize the capacity we already have?”

The next phase of grid evolution may not be defined solely by construction.

It may be defined by visibility—real-time awareness of system conditions—and the ability to operate infrastructure with greater precision than the grid was originally designed for.

Global Transmission Report’s 2nd Annual Conference on Energy Needs of Data Centers South will take place on October 15, 2026, in Atlanta. The conference convenes at a time when the industry’s focus is shifting from realization to strategic implementation. It will examine grid readiness, interconnection processes, innovative power strategies, infrastructure development, and policy frameworks.  

As data center growth across the South continues to accelerate, the ability to translate planning into execution will be critical.Join us to engage with industry experts and take part in timely conversations on the solutions that will define the next phase of energy and infrastructure development.

Conventional wisdom suggests using residential demand response (DR) to help offset growing electricity demand from data centers. We wanted to test that assumption - and also examine the impact of rapidly growing EV ownership.

Our analysis produced two surprising results:

• Residential DR does not reduce the utility peak associated with data center growth because residential and data center peak loads occur at different times. Rebound effects largely offset temporary residential load reductions.

• Managed EV charging produces the opposite result. Under every G&T cost structure evaluated, the program generated net savings after program costs—and in some cases reduced annual residential electric costs by nearly $8/residential customer base while avoiding $40/residential customer base in unmanaged EV costs.

 For example, an electric cooperative with rate Structure II serving a suburban residential customer base of 20,000 with 10% EV ownership could increase annual revenue/reduce customer prices by $93,000.  

Study results are based on the MAISY® Utility Customer Database, Grid Impact Model analysis and industry EV data. Our paper includes the complete methodology, assumptions, and example calculations for four representative G&T cost structures and is available at https://maisy.com/dcevrates.htm

Global Transmission Report will host the 8th Annual Conference on EV Charging Infrastructure US on October 28–29, 2026, in New York City. 

The conference will provide a timely opportunity to evaluate where the market stands, where it is heading, and what is required to ensure that the next phase of EV charging infrastructure development is efficient, resilient, and aligned with long-term system needs. It will bring together key stakeholders to review current realities, share insights, and explore strategies aligned with a more mature and performance-oriented market.

Global Transmission Report is pleased to host the 4th Annual Conference on Port Electrification East on November 18-19, 2026, in New Jersey. The conference will bring together port authorities, terminal operators, utilities, technology providers, policymakers, and investors to examine the policies, technologies, partnerships, and business models needed to accelerate port electrification across the East Coast. 

Join us to be part of the conversations advancing clean, connected, and resilient port operations in the Eastern US.

The 8th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy (Biofuels 2027), scheduled to be held from April 22-23, 2027, in Kraków, Poland, and proudly co-organized with “Cracow University of Technology”, builds upon previous successful editions and continues to serve as a leading international platform for advancing innovation in the biofuels and bioenergy sector. the conference will bring together researchers, policymakers, industry leaders, investors, technology experts, and sustainability professionals to exchange ideas, build meaningful collaborations, and advance solutions for a more sustainable energy future.

Under the theme “Advancing Biofuels and Bioenergy: Innovation for a Sustainable Future,” Biofuels 2027 will showcase the latest developments shaping the future of sustainable energy systems. The conference will explore emerging developments across advanced biofuels, sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), circular bioeconomy, waste-to-energy technologies, biomass valorisation, carbon reduction strategies, AI-enabled process optimization, and next-generation biorefineries etc.

Biofuels 2027 is all about creating a dynamic global platform for research, innovation, and the industry to convert concepts into tangible results, driving forward sustainable development and the future of clean, resilient, and renewable energy sources.

“Join the Global Biofuels Community to Explore Research, Showcase Innovation, and Build Meaningful Connections – Biofuels 2027 | Krakow, Poland”

Market prices for conventional power prices for future delivery are in the range of R$ 240/MWh (~USD 46/MWh).

This figure aligns with the marginal cost of expansion (CME) that I routinely calculate for my clients, which serves as a "technical" benchmark.

The CME is primarily driven by the interest rates demanded by investors, the project's investment cost, and the amortization period.

Coincidentally, the CME falls within that same R$ 240/MWh range. This indicates a state of equilibrium between supply, demand, and the internal rate of return on investments.

It is an unusual scenario—one that both electricity sellers and buyers should capitalize on.

A few years ago, I began working with a company building demand flexibility technology, the kind that lets utilities call on distributed energy resources during moments of peak demand. The technology was genuinely differentiated, but the market around it was getting crowded fast, and almost nobody outside the utility world had heard of them. Their own executives were not yet recognized voices in the conversations shaping where the industry was headed.

We spent the next stretch of time building two things at once: sharpening what actually made their approach different so it would not get lost among a dozen similar sounding competitors, and putting their executives in front of the right audiences consistently, not just when there was news to announce. Bylines in the trade press. Speaking opportunities. Real engagement with the analysts and journalists covering demand flexibility and grid modernization.

It took time, but the payoff showed up in the ways that matter most for a growing company: coverage in publications their target buyers actually read, and executives who started getting called by reporters trying to understand where the market was headed, instead of the other way around.

That is not a communications success story so much as a business one. It is what happens when a company treats visibility as infrastructure to build early, not a milestone to chase once the technology speaks for itself.

The Communication Gap in Energy Innovation

Energy companies often prioritize technical milestones, such as product validation, operational efficiency, and regulatory approvals, in their early stages of growth. Communications is treated as a secondary need, something to pick up after launch or when there is news to announce.

But waiting until after key milestones to establish clear messaging leaves a critical gap. Audiences including investors, regulators, and communities form impressions with or without your input. New technologies and business models get misunderstood, which slows adoption. And the early window to shape public perception and build momentum closes whether or not you used it.

I know a cleantech founder who waited until she was in the middle of a Series A raise to start building her media presence. By then, the journalists she needed relationships with did not know her. The analysts covering her space had already published market maps without her company on them. Investors doing diligence were searching her name and finding almost nothing. She closed the round, but she told me afterward that the communications gap made everything harder than it needed to be.

What Strategic Communications Looks Like Early On

Strategic communications at early stages doesn't require big budgets or flashy campaigns. It means defining your narrative so it's clear what problem you solve and why it matters, aligning internal and external messaging so employees, partners, and investors tell the same story, and preparing leadership to speak confidently about complex solutions in ways that resonate beyond technical audiences.

Companies that embed communications strategy early are better positioned to navigate regulatory reviews, attract funding, and drive project acceptance.

Key Areas to Focus Early in Communications Strategy

• Stakeholder Mapping: Know who your critical audiences are and what they need to hear.

• Message Development: Explain your technology or solution clearly, for the audience in front of you.

• Executive Visibility: Put leadership in front of media, speaking opportunities, and community conversations before there's news to announce.

• Scenario Planning: Prepare for hard questions before someone asks them.

Build the Foundation Before You Need It

Building a strong communications foundation doesn't require a large team at the outset. It requires thoughtful strategy, consistent execution, and the discipline to anticipate how different audiences will respond to new ideas and new technologies, well before a launch date or a funding round forces the question.

The companies that treat communications as infrastructure, not promotion, are the ones still standing when the regulatory review gets tougher, the funding environment tightens, or a competitor tries to define the category first. In a sector where technology changes fast but trust builds slowly, early communications strategy isn't optional. It's an investment in long-term success.

I'd be curious how others here have seen this play out. Has anyone worked at a company that waited too long to build a communications presence, or one that got it right early? What made the difference?

Data center load shifting is an effective demand flexibility strategy to minimize peak demand for data centers through aggregate conservation.

Last November, CNBC reported that data centers alone are projected to consume between 6.7% to 12% of total U.S. electricity by 2028. Further research suggests that data center growth can lead to 25-50 GW of additional fossil fuel generation by 2030.

These challenges are compounded by electrification efforts, increasingly erratic weather events and temperature extremes, and supply chain and tariff issues, which further challenge the infrastructure development needed to meet rising demand. Research indicates that if data centers can shift load by 25-50% during peak events, that U.S. utilities can reduce the need for costly infrastructure developments

Defining Data Centers

Data centers have existed for roughly 75 years. Starting in the 1950s, data centers were developed to support computing power, which was scarce and resource intensive. Over time, data centers evolved to satisfy several purposes, from purpose-built systems designed to support specific functionality or cloud computing.

With the advent of large language model (LLM) AI, modern data centers have taken on a new social and environmental role across the country. These centers support AI learning, which requires substantial resources to power and cool, creating fresh challenges for electric utilities.

Types of Data Centers

Below is a brief overview of the most common types of data centers.

• AI data centers – Massive and energy hungry hyperscale data centers designed to support AI products like corporate cloud-scale workloads and manage big data.

• Edge data centers – A smaller and decentralized facility located in near proximity to end users, designed to process data local and support real-time data applications.

• Colocation data centers – A co-use facility that allows smaller businesses to lease available space at lower operational cost.

• Managed services data centers – Third-party managed data centers that companies can lease rather than buy.

• Enterprise data centers – Company owned and operated data centers often located on corporate campuses and designed to serve internal users.

The Value of Load Shifting

Load shifting refers to efforts taken by electric utility professionals to aggregate and shift load to off-peak hours of usage. Load shifting manifests in demand flexibility initiatives like virtual power plants (VPPs), demand response, or EV managed charging.

These strategies function by aggregating distributed energy resources (DERs) like solar, battery energy storage systems (BESS), electric vehicles, EVSE chargers, and smart home devices like thermostats or water heaters. These DER assets are controlled through a distributed energy resource management system (DERMS).

Likewise, time-of-use (TOU) rates or behavioral demand response represent alternative forms of load shifting, both of which operate by strategically leveraging customer participation in decreasing energy usage to avoid higher costs.

Reliable Energy is Critical

As noted, data centers serve many functions, many of which require a continuous load to realize. Because of that, some data center operators may be hesitant to participate in load shifting demand flexibility initiatives.

Software like Topline Demand Control (TDC) support those concerns by combining AI, model predictive control (MPC), forecasting, and Grid-Edge DERMS to allow for real-time granular device optimization. With TDC, data centers can participate in load shifting grid-events with the confidence that load shed does not interfere with device output. Put differently, data center operators, program managers, and grid operators can rest assured that through TDC, they can bank on a reliable load shifting outcome, without compromising functionality.

Defining the Data Center Challenge

According to the Pew Research Center, there are currently around 3000 data centers in operation in the U.S., with projects for about 1500 more. These projects are complicated by factors including:

• A grid interconnection queue – Currently the grid interconnection queue has 7,954 projects in the works, accounting for nearly 1.74 TW of projects upon completion and connection to the grid.

• Supply chain constraints & tariffs – Between supply chain constraints that have led to wait times on critical devices like transformers of up to 4 years, and tariffs on materials, new infrastructure development is both costly and takes longer than it used to.

• Public response – Broadly speaking, Americans don’t want data centers, which has led to political and regulatory challenges for utilities, and even lengthier wait times on data center projects in development.

Demand Flexibility Defers Infrastructure Costs

Research indicates that even an energy curtailment of 10% of total demand, could unlock 76 GW of capacity in the U.S., or, put differently, 10% of total U.S. peak demand. Demand flexibility programs achieve this curtailment, by aggregate DER control, load shifting energy consumption to off-peak periods of usage —typically 4 PM – 8 PM— to decrease energy demand through conservation. Further studies indicate that the aggregate load shifting possible through demand flexibility initiatives can lead to estimated savings on capital, operational, and energy market costs ranging between $40-$150 over the next decade.

Data Center Load Shifting Conclusion

Due to rising costs, logistical constraints, and public feedback, data centers have opened up to the potential for the use of load shifting demand flexibility initiatives… if that expedites their operational deployment. For utilities, these pressures may lead to more opportunity to engage data centers and potentially more commercial and industrial (C&I) clients to participate in load shifting strategies.

By solving these pressures, utilities can help data centers to lower costs and accelerate development, while simultaneously decreasing customer rates and energy market purchases, and enhancing grid resiliency.

Smart meters have been deployed for decades at U.S. electric, water, and gas utilities, delivering business value from the customer to the operations side. One persistent challenge: the cellular networks that underpin smart metering don't stand still. When networks evolve, spectrum gets refarmed, or coverage shifts, single-carrier SIMs cannot adapt. The result is truck rolls, lost telemetry, and rising operational costs compounding across millions of devices over a 15–20 year deployment lifecycle.

New SGP .32 eSIM (eUICC) standards enable full coverage with multiple profiles and future-ready connectivity — but they introduce a critical tradeoff: power-intensive network switching can compromise the battery life that smart meters depend on to remain operational for decades.

In this exclusive Energy Central PowerSession, a telecom industry analyst and a IoT connectivity subject matter expert will explain how the new standard resolves this tradeoff — enabling resilient connectivity without sacrificing battery life, managed via a unified connectivity management platform (CMP). We'll explore how a North American water utility deployed a new generation of meters across a geographically dispersed service area — including underground vaults and remote sites where physical SIM replacement is both disruptive and costly — and how the eSIM is paving the path forward.

 We hope you can join us for this live PowerSession on August 4th.
Panelists:

• Mike Smith, Moderator

• Steffan Sorrell, Chief of Research, Kaleido Intelligence

• Jerome Coppens, Product Director, IoT Connected Services, Semtech Corporation

Register Now

Over the past several years, utilities have invested heavily in modernizing grid infrastructure, digitizing assets, and improving operational visibility.

As these efforts mature, another concept has rapidly gained attention: the digital twin.

The promise is compelling. A virtual representation of physical assets, networks, or even entire grid operations that can provide real-time visibility, predictive insights, and scenario-based decision support.

But amid the growing enthusiasm, an important leadership question remains:

Are digital twins delivering measurable value, or are they becoming another technology buzzword in the grid modernization journey?

Beyond the Buzzword

Most utilities already possess elements of what many would describe as a digital twin:

• Asset models

• GIS platforms

• SCADA and EMS environments

• Operational analytics

• Asset performance management systems

The challenge is not creating another model. The challenge is creating a living, connected representation that remains synchronized with operational reality. That distinction matters.

A static model provides information. A digital twin should provide insight.

The Real Value Proposition

When implemented effectively, digital twins can help utilities move beyond historical analysis toward proactive decision-making.

Potential applications include:

• Asset health monitoring and predictive maintenance

• Grid planning and capacity analysis

• Storm preparedness and restoration simulations

• DER integration studies

• Workforce training and operational readiness

The value is not simply in visualization. The value lies in reducing uncertainty before decisions are made. In many ways, digital twins represent another step in the industry's progression from visibility to operational intelligence.

Why Many Digital Twin Initiatives Struggle

Despite the promise, many organizations find it difficult to scale digital twin initiatives beyond pilots. A common misconception is that a digital twin is primarily a technology project.

In reality, success depends on:

• Data quality and governance

• Asset model accuracy

• Integration across OT and IT systems

• Clear ownership and lifecycle management

• Defined operational use cases

Without these foundations, even sophisticated digital twin environments can quickly become disconnected from reality. And once trust erodes, adoption follows.

The Trust Challenge

Like AI and decision intelligence, digital twins ultimately depend on confidence. Operators, engineers, and planners must believe that the representation accurately reflects the state of the physical system.

The question is not: Can we build a digital twin?

The more important question is: Can we maintain trust in it over time?

That requires continuous synchronization, governance, and accountability.

From Technology Asset to Operational Capability

One of the most common mistakes is treating digital twins as standalone technology investments. Leading organizations are increasingly approaching them differently.

Rather than asking: How do we build a digital twin?

They ask: What operational decisions are we trying to improve?

This shift changes the conversation from technology deployment to business outcomes. The digital twin becomes a means to an end, not the end itself.

Strategic Necessity or Hype?

The answer is neither simple nor universal. Not every utility needs a highly sophisticated digital twin environment today. However, as grid complexity increases through distributed energy resources, electrification, resilience requirements, and AI-enabled operations, the ability to model, simulate, and predict system behavior will become increasingly valuable.

The question is no longer whether digital twins have potential.

The question is where they create the greatest value and how utilities can operationalize them effectively.

Closing Thought

Digital twins are unlikely to transform utilities simply because they exist. Their value will be determined by how well they improve planning, operations, and decision-making. Like many aspects of digital transformation, success will depend less on technology and more on execution, governance, and trust.

The future may not belong to the utilities with the most sophisticated digital twins. It may belong to those that use them most effectively to make better decisions.

AAAS: "Being a taller tree doesn’t doom you to drought after all."

"Despite their stature...tall trees move water through their lengthy wooden bodies with surprising efficiency—so much so that a new study argues they may not be as susceptible to drought as once thought." Dipterocarps are a tropical tree group that dominates the rainforests of Southeast Asia. "Height doesn’t seem to stymie these trees’ ability to transport water, the researchers found: Taller dipterocarps appear to show the same reaction to drought stresses as their smaller counterparts."

Forest ecologist Amy Bennett was lead author of a 2015 paper that found that larger trees suffer most in droughts worldwide. Bennett says the new paper shows there are important exceptions. “I don’t think it overturns the idea that large trees are more vulnerable in many forests,” she added, “[but] perhaps height isn’t the [only] fundamental driver.”

Cardiff University forest ecologist Paulo Bittencourt, new study’s lead author, journeyed into Malaysia’s Kabili Sepilok Forest Reserve on the island of Borneo to study the role of height. " Over the course of 3 months in 2022, the team collected branches and trunk core samples from 38 different dipterocarp trees representing five different species, with heights ranging from 7.1 to 71 meters."

The trunk core samples revealed tall dipterocarps had wider vessels at their bases to compensate for the extra resistance involved in moving water up a greater distance. At the base of a 70-meter tree, vessels are more than twice as wide as those at the base of a 10-meter tree.

"In another adaptation, the leaves at the top of the tall trees were more resilient to a lack of water supply—they could maintain their ability to photosynthesize in drier conditions than those on the trees’ lower branches." The researchers tested the dehydration thresholds of the tissues by inducing embolisms—blockages formed by air bubbles—within the tissues’ water vessels, which can occur in trees as a symptom of drought. "They found that the tissues of smaller and taller trees responded to dehydration similarly, suggesting a tree’s height isn’t directly related to its vulnerability to these types of embolisms."

This botanic complexity in tree tissue fairly boggles the mind, does it not? Or it should.

PIOMAS: "PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume."

I met Andy Lee Robinson more than a few years ago, online that is. Last I heard he was in England. I do remember I paid him in British pounds sterling [£] for the lifetime privilege of using this image. This graph begins in 1979. Pertinent in comprehending this is realizing several points.

First, sea ice forms on the ocean surface, with contributions both from the salty ocean surface + fresh snowfall. Separate from the ice floes calving off tide-water glaciers.

Second, April—the light green line—is the maximum extent of sea ice, the end of Arctic winter of course.

Third, September—the black line—is the minimum extent of sea ice, in this case coincident with the end of Arctic summer.

The pictures you have often seen of the fluctuating surface area of Arctic sea ice represent just that, while this graph is a measure of total volume, more pertinent in understanding climate effects. When + where sea ice disappears, more dark blue ocean water absorbs far more solar energy, which is a main reason that the Arctic is warming up faster than the world as a whole.

It should be apparent to the naked eye where all of this is headed, with huge implications for geoscience, fishing, extinctions, navigation, territorial claims, seafloor mining, extraction of fossil fuels—and the survival of whales. Yes, whales, since with dwindling sea ice, pods of orcas have migrated north to predate on Arctic whales such as belugas + narwhales.

I post this every couple of years, + suggest somber contemplation. Especially if you work in a fossil fuel industry.

Federal clean energy incentives are (mostly) gone—but “the glass is more than half full,” according to a new report.

• A new MIT report modeled the US power sector under two scenarios through 2035: 1) the Trump administration's One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBBA) and 2) the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act. The results paint a surprisingly rosy picture for renewables: More than two-thirds of the clean energy gains and emissions reductions from the original IRA survive attempts to roll them back under the OBBBA.

• The details: 74% of new clean energy capacity and 71% of new clean generation remain under the OBBBA. Fossil generation, though, jumps 19% higher—largely from running existing coal and gas plants more. 

• The big picture: MIT argues the bottleneck to clean energy isn’t necessarily the loss of demand-side subsidies. Instead, it’s the pace of permitting, siting, and interconnection. 🐢 To speed things up and lower costs, we need…you guessed it, permitting reform and more transmission capacity.