Deploying Grid Enhancing Technologies: Unlocking Grid Capacity
Welcome!
April 2, 2026
TURN TO SOMEONE NEXT TO YOU
Demo Group Announcement!
Smart Wires
GridRaven
OUR PRESENTERS
Dr. Joshua Rhodes
Research Scientist, Webber Energy Group
University of Texas at Austin
Eddie Lucio III
Former State Rep
Current Attorney
Energy Policy Advisory Council
From Gridlock,
to Gridgrowth.
Eddie Lucio III
Texas Transmission Project
Dr. Joshua Rhodes
Webber Energy Institute, IdeaSmiths and EPAC
Discussion
Readings: What are Grid Enhancing Technologies? (Watt Coalition)
Part 1: The Problem
Why a transmission buildout isn’t enough
The Problem: Growing Fast, Falling Behind
Surging Demand
Power demand projected to nearly double by 2030, driven by data centers, AI, crypto mining, LNG, and electrification.
ERCOT projects an additional 40 GW of load growth vs. prior forecasts. Texas added 474,000 people in a single year — triple the national rate.
~2x
demand growth by 2030
Billions in Congestion Costs
Congestion costs exceeded $7 billion from 2022–2024 ($15 billion over the last decade). Power can't efficiently move from where it's generated to where it's needed.
During Winter Storm Uri, over 5,000 MW was stranded — enough to power about 1 million homes.
$15B
in congestion costs (2015–2024)
Without action, Texans face an unstable grid, higher costs, more outages, and less economic growth.
Why It’s So Hard to Build Transmission
Transmisison infrastructure requires more liner space than other parts of the electric system
Permitting & Approval
# of years average
from planning to energization.
ERCOT reliability studies, PUCT approval, landowner negotiations — each adding years.
Regulators: PUC + ERCOT both for studies and approvals
Cost & Financing
$2-5M per mile
for overhead high-voltage lines.
New 345kV line*: ~$2M/mile
New 765kV line**: ~$4-5M/mile
$6-15M per mile
for underground cables in urban areas.
Total greenfield costs can be higher
~$10M/mile when considering: substations, reactive power equipment, rights of ways, inflation…
Siting & Opposition
Paths are often litigated at the PUC
Challenges include:
property rights, visual impact, environmental concerns and agricultural disruption.
Siting transmission often requires crossing multiple landowners, areas, etc.
The 765-kV Permian Basin backbone alone requires 434 miles of new right-of-way through ranching and farming communities.
The result: Texas needs transmission faster than the current system can deliver it.
Transmission is built with 1 of the 3 criteria in mind:
A Quick Reminder:
Transmission Planning
A Quick Reminder:
Transmission Cost Allocation
A Quick Reminder: Congestion
Picture
What This Means for Texans
The Perryman Group found that inadequate transmission could cost Texas up to $159.8 billion in lost economic output and nearly 696,500 job-years through 2040.
Unstable Grid
Aging infrastructure can't handle growing demand
Higher Costs
Congestion forces reliance on expensive local generation
More Outages
Extreme weather exposes grid vulnerabilities
Stunted Growth
Businesses turned away due to insufficient power delivery
A $12.7 billion investment in transmission could generate $160 billion in economic growth.
What if we could unlock 20–40% more capacity from the lines we already have?
Part 2: Status and Some Solutions
What’s everyone doing about it?
What if we could unlock 20–40% more capacity from the lines we already have?
Grid-Enhancing Technologies (GETs) are software and hardware tools that squeeze more power through the transmission lines we already have without waiting a decade or spending billions.
Months
to deploy vs. years for new lines
<10%
the cost of new transmission
Proven
in 100+ deployments across the U.S.
Eddie on the Road
Grid-Enhancing Technologies: The Five Tools
Tech that lets you push more power through the system you already have
Dynamic Line Rating
Sensing + Real-Time Capacity
Traditional line ratings assume worst-case weather. DLR changes the rated capacity of lines and transformers based on current actual conditions, not worst-case scenario conditions
Typical gain:
10–30% more capacity on rated lines.
Deploy time:
6–18 months.
Best for:
Lines consistently derated below true capacity.
Power Flow Control
Smart Routing for Electrons
Devices installed on lines to redirect power flows away from congested paths onto underutilized lines. Like GPS navigation for the grid.
Typical gain:
20–40% congestion reduction on target corridors.
Deploy time:
12–24 months.
Best for:
Parallel paths where one line is overloaded.
Topology Optimization
Optimize Grid Switching
Software analyzes the grid’s switching configuration in real time and recommends optimal open/close states to minimize congestion. No new hardware needed.
Typical gain:
15–25% reduction in congestion costs.
Deploy time:
3–12 months (software-only).
Best for:
System-wide congestion relief at lowest cost.
Grid-Enhancing Technologies: The Five Tools
Tech that lets you push more power through the system you already have
Voltage supports & capacitor banks
Allow wires to push more power from weaker parts of the system
Advanced conductors
Better lines
Different conductor technologies, carbon cores, etc., that don’t heat up as much (less losses, less sag) and can move more power in the same right of way
What the Research Shows: Duke Energy Study
Study Overview
Duke Energy deployed Dynamic Line Rating
across a 500-mile transmission corridor, one of the most comprehensive utility GETs pilots in the U.S.
The study measured:
capacity gains, return on investment, deployment time, and grid reliability impact.
Results were validated independently and published as an industry benchmark for GETs performance.
15%
average capacity gain across the corridor
40%
peak capacity gains under optimal conditions
4:1
return on investment — $4 saved per $1 deployed
Deployed in under 18 months vs. 10+ years for a comparable new line.
ERCOT’s own market monitor has recommended GETs since 2022.*
“We’re solving a 21st-century problem with a 40-year-old playbook.”
During Winter Storm Uri, Rep Eddie Lucio III and other Texas legislators on the House State Affairs Committee watched in real time as the grid failed.
The Hardware
Modern sensors and smart devices already exist.
The Software
AI-driven optimization tools are commercially ready.
A couple of them are in the room now!
The Rules
Regulatory frameworks haven’t caught up.
What GETs Can and Cannot Solve
✓ GETs Can Address
Operational Congestion
Power flow bottlenecks where lines have capacity but flows are not optimally routed. The West Texas-North Texas corridor binds regularly; power is stranded while Dallas demand unserved.
Thermal Congestion
Lines derated below true capacity due to conservative static ratings.
Renewable Curtailment
Wind and solar blocked from delivering because congested paths prevent flow.
Redispatch Costs
Expensive out-of-merit generation dispatched to work around grid bottlenecks.
✗ GETs Cannot Address
Voltage Stability Issues
Problems requiring reactive power support
Missing Infrastructure
If no transmission exists to reach a generation source, GETs can’t help — you need new wire.
Transient Stability
Fault-related stability issues that require physical grid reinforcement.
Long-Run Load Growth
GETs buy time but cannot substitute for new lines Texas will ultimately need.
How GETs Integrate Into ERCOT’s Planning
HB 5200 requires ERCOT to evaluate grid-enhancing technologies alongside traditional options during annual regional transmission planning. Here’s how that process works:
1
Identify Congestion
ERCOT flags high-congestion corridors in annual planning.
2
Evaluate GETs
DLR, PFC, and Topology Optimization assessed as candidate solutions.
3
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Compare GET cost vs. congestion savings over 10+ year horizon.
4
Deploy & Monitor
Approved solutions deployed; performance tracked in real time.
5
Report to PUCT
Annual results reported; cost allocation and rate treatment resolved.
GETs: A Complement to Transmission, Not a Replacement
GETs Can...
✓ Reduce operational congestion
by optimizing power flow on existing lines.
✓ Relieve thermal congestion
by detecting actual line capacity in real time.
✓ Deploy in months
vs. 10 years for new lines.
✓ Lower costs
at a fraction of new construction.
GETs Cannot...
✗ Solve voltage stability issues
physical infrastructure is still needed.
✗ Deliver power where lines don’t exist
generation stranded without a wire.
✗ Replace aging infrastructure
that is deteriorating and must be rebuilt.
✗ Eliminate all congestion
some requires new physical lines.
Texas needs both: GETs for immediate congestion relief, and new lines for the long-term 765-kV backbone.
How can GETs help in ERCOT?
Part 3: Policy History
What legislation have we seen in the last two sessions?
HB 5200 — Anchía
Advanced Transmission Technologies
Grid-Enhancing Technologies & High-Performance Conductors
What It Does
Requires the PUCT to ensure ERCOT considers grid-enhancing technologies (GETs) and high-performance conductors when evaluating economic and reliability projects during annual regional transmission planning. ERCOT retains discretion — this is an incentive, not a mandate.
Goals
~$3B
estimated congestion cost savings from broad ATT adoption (2022–2024)
AES reconductored a 240-mile line, doubling capacity and saving customers $15M annually.
Status: Passed House with bipartisan support in 2025.
HB 5200 — Supporters, Opposition & Tradeoffs
Supporters
Opposition Concerns
What the Bill Does Well
What Could Be Stronger
How the TCOS Rate Structure Inhibits Software-Based GETs
How TCOS Works Today
Transmission Cost of Service (TCOS)
is the rate structure utilities use to recover transmission investment costs from ratepayers.
It rewards capital investment:
The more physical assets a utility builds, the larger its rate base and the more revenue it earns.
Physical wire = revenue.
Substations, transformers, and new lines all qualify. Software subscriptions do not.
This creates a structural bias toward building new infrastructure even when software could solve the same problem faster and cheaper.
The GETs Problem
OpEx GETs (like Topology Optimization software) reduce congestion without adding to rate base. Utilities have little financial incentive to deploy them — even when cost-effective for consumers.
The Policy Fix
Create a defined OpEx cost recovery mechanism for PUCT-approved GETs. Allow utilities to pass through GET subscription costs to ratepayers, removing the disincentive to deploy.
HB 3044 — Darby
Generic Transmission Constraint Elimination
What Are GTCs?
ERCOT uses Generic Transmission Constraints to artificially limit power flow between grid areas to maintain stability. While necessary for safety, GTCs prevent available power from reaching consumers — creating bottlenecks that reduce supply and force ERCOT to dispatch more expensive generation.
What HB 3044 Does
Requires the PUCT to adopt rules directing ERCOT to eliminate each GTC within 10 years of its establishment date. Current protocols require reporting solutions within 180 days but set no implementation deadline — rendering them largely ineffective.
7 → 22
Active GTCs have tripled since 2015
$7B+
Congestion costs 2022–2024
"The grid has really become fully utilized." — ERCOT CEO Pablo Vegas
HB 3069 — Darby
Improved Economic Planning
The Problem
ERCOT currently evaluates the cost/benefit of transmission projects over just 3 years — while other grid operators use at least 15 years. This short-sighted approach means only 2 of 24 ERCOT-recommended projects over the past decade qualified under economic criteria, even as congestion costs totaled $15 billion.
What HB 3069 Does
Establishes criteria requiring a comparison of estimated project costs vs. congestion savings over at least 10 years (with a 3% discount rate after year 5). This longer planning horizon better captures the true value of transmission investment and aligns Texas with national best practices.
Current: 3 Years
Only 2 of 24 projects qualified under economic criteria in the last decade.
Proposed: 10+ Years
A Brattle study showed a $291M project generated $1.1B in benefits — a 2.4:1 ratio.
50% of congestion value comes from just 5% of hours — a broader time horizon captures this reality.
Part 4: Key Recommendations
What should Texas do next to build a smarter, more affordable grid?
Key Considerations
1
Pass HB 5200
Require ERCOT to evaluate grid-enhancing technologies in annual regional transmission planning. Faster relief at lower cost — no mandate, just accountability.
2
Reform TCOS Rate Structure
Create an OpEx cost recovery mechanism for PUCT-approved GETs. Remove the financial disincentive that discourages utilities from deploying software-based solutions.
3
Set GTC Deadlines (HB 3044)
Enforce a 10-year elimination timeline for Generic Transmission Constraints. Require ERCOT to implement solutions — not just report them.
4
Extend the Planning Horizon (HB 3069)
Adopt a 10-year cost-benefit standard for transmission projects. Stop evaluating 50-year infrastructure over a 3-year window.
Supplementary Slides
Extended Action Plans: How GETs Fit In
What Are EAPs?
Extended Action Plans (EAPs)
are ERCOT’s mechanism for managing persistent, long-running transmission constraints that aren’t resolved through normal planning cycles.
When a Generic Transmission Constraint (GTC)
remains unresolved, ERCOT develops an EAP identifying solutions and responsible parties.
Current process:
ERCOT must report a solution within 180 days — but there’s no enforcement deadline for implementation. GTCs can persist for years without resolution.
HB 3044 would add a 10-year elimination deadline, creating real accountability.
GETs as EAP Solutions
GETs could become approved EAP remediation tools — addressing congestion faster than new construction while longer-term infrastructure is planned.
Open Policy Question
Should a deployed GET count as “resolving” an EAP? If so, PUCT rules must define what qualifies — and ensure the GET actually delivers the expected congestion relief.
Viability
CapEx GETs (e.g., DLR sensors):
Traditional utility investment model. Added to rate base. Typical payback: 2–4 years.
OpEx GETs (e.g., software):
Subscription or service-based. Lower barrier to entry but doesn’t build rate base — reducing utility incentive.
Key challenge:
ERCOT’s TCOS rate structure rewards capital investment. Software-only GETs lack a clear cost recovery path.
Policy fix needed:
A new rate mechanism for OpEx GETs would unlock software-first solutions.
Feedback Survey (Attempt 2)
First few responses