Managing Energy Projects Successfully

The Silent Project Killers: Inadequate Resource Planning and Overloaded Teams A few years ago, I was leading a high-stakes project in the energy sector. We had all the right resources—on paper. A well-funded budget, top-tier consultants, and cutting-edge technology. But as we moved into execution, cracks started to show. 💡 The team was stretched too thin—brilliant minds, but not enough capacity to execute efficiently. 💡 Materials arrived late, disrupting workflows and causing delays. 💡 The budget was burning faster than expected, yet progress was slow. That was when I had my aha moment: resource management is not just about having enough—balancing capability and capacity.   ✅The WHAT – Do we have the right resources or just more resources? ✅The WHEN – Are resources available when needed, or are bottlenecks forming? ✅The HOW MUCH – Are we optimizing costs, or just throwing money at inefficiencies? Once we restructured our approach, aligning skills, time, and materials strategically, execution transformed. Productivity skyrocketed, and we delivered on time and under budget. Lesson learned? Having resources means nothing if they’re not deployed at the right time, with the right people, at the right cost. Plan with purpose. Balance capability and capacity. Deliver with precision. ♻️ Repost to help your network build their hidden advantage 🔔 Follow🎙️Fola F. Alabi for strategic insights and project value delivery #FolaElevates #strategicleadreship #resourcemanagement #projectmanagement #PMtoCsuite

❗𝟵𝟱% 𝗼𝗳 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹* 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹❗   "𝗨𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻𝘀"   Overly simplistic? Perhaps. So let me double the complexity of my answer.   "𝗨𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝘂𝗻𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄𝗻𝘀"   Unknown unknowns are things where we have neither knowledge of the occurrence, nor knowledge of the impact.   🦜Will a bird survey reveal a rare species of parakeet? If it does, what area will become unbuildable? 🧑🌾Will the farmer on the western boundary be supportive? If not, how much will it reduce the development envelope? 🍃Will atmospheric turbulence limit turbine choice? If it does, which classes will be unsuitable? 🪖Will the military restrict tip height? If it does, what will be the restriction? 🔋Will national energy policy shift? If it does, where will it shift to?   At Wind Pioneers we've worked on hundreds of potential sites across 50+ markets. Our clients are some of the best developers in the world and what we've learnt is that successful developers don't focus on known qualities of a site. 𝗦𝘂𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗳𝘂𝗹 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗰𝘂𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗱𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁.   Here are our top tips for dealing with Unknown Unknowns: 𝟭) 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗮 𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁. Rank them by likelihood and severity. Be your site's own worst critic. 𝟮) Have a workflow that enables you to easily 𝗿𝘂𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀. 𝟯) 𝗥𝘂𝗻 𝗱𝗼𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝗳 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀. For all severe or likely risks, perform a desktop what if scenario. Hunt for scenarios that make the project unviable, and then spend your time understanding and mitigating those risks. 𝟰) 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗕𝘂𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝘀. Have 30-50% buffer on capacity at an early stage. If you want to build a 200MW project, have space for 300MW. When unknowns become known, they will eat away at your capacity. 𝟱) 𝗛𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗲𝘀. Allow 10-20% erosion in NetCF as unknowns become known and constrain the project. 6) 𝗕𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗢𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. "Optimisation" is an exercise in "optimism" until you have complete knowledge of all constraints on a site. Be pragmatic and realistic, not blindly optimistic. 𝟳) 𝗚𝗮𝗺𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝘆. Wind farm development is hard. Really hard. Understand that every site is a bet with long odds. Plan your portfolio to be hedged and spread your risks over multiple projects with diverse risk factors.   Come talk to us if you'd like a sympathetic ear to the challenges of wind farm development.   *95% is a guestimate that depends on definitions. The exact number is not important - what's important is that most sites will never become wind farms so we need to consider risks not just opportunities…

Most large energy projects don’t fail because the physics is wrong. They struggle because the delivery system isn’t mature enough to absorb complexity. I’ve spent two decades in oil and gas programmes. The recurring pattern isn’t technical incompetence. It’s coordination strain. As attention turns to nuclear, hydrogen, CCS and grid expansion, the debate often centres on technology. Reactor design. Efficiency. Safety engineering. Novelty. Those questions matter. But in large-scale infrastructure, the greater source of risk is usually elsewhere: • Interface management across multiple contractors • Regulatory sequencing and approval continuity • First-of-a-kind design changes during execution • Capital structures that assume schedule discipline • Political cycles intersecting with construction timelines The difference between modelled economics and realised capital cost is rarely thermodynamics. It is execution. And execution risk compounds quietly. Each year of delay increases interest during construction. Each restart interrupts learning curves. Each coordination failure widens capital exposure. In oil and gas, LNG and offshore development, this pattern has repeated for decades. There is no reason to assume nuclear or other emerging infrastructure will be different. Technology risk is often visible. Delivery risk is institutional. The systems that succeed will not simply have credible designs. They will have repeatable, disciplined delivery capability. I explore these execution patterns across energy infrastructure inside First Output — https://lnkd.in/eE7URUx6 focusing on capital allocation and institutional capability rather than headlines. From your experience, what has been the dominant risk driver: technical uncertainty, or delivery discipline?

You might hear a lot of excitement about the GW-scale announcements for offshore wind farms. Many players see it as a huge opportunity, but is it really that simple? It all comes down to one important aspect: Project financing. Securing the right support and managing risks effectively are key to success. Here’s a basic breakdown of what needs to be considered: A - Regulations & Permitting Risks: The complexity can vary significantly depending on the market. What most have experienced in the US, explains the risks are unpredictable when democracies take turn. B - Production Assumptions: From the initial resource assessment to long-term availability, energy yield estimation must be realistic. I have had long discussions with friends working in this area, and this is such a tricky and complex topic, for example, changes in turbine models or neighbouring wind projects can affect output. Accuracy here can make a significant difference, as even small errors in assumptions can impact long-term predictions. C - Construction Risks: How many days might be lost if things don’t go as planned? Bad weather or technical issues can lead to delays. Not a show stopper and no delays like nuclear projects here at least. 😉 D - Power (Market) Assumptions: Forecasting electricity prices is always a challenge. With more renewables entering the grid, predicting profitability requires considering a range of scenarios. The choice between CfD, PPAs, or merchant pricing strategies can also influence financial stability. E - Financing Risks: Geopolitical uncertainties and interest rate changes can influence financial outcomes. While these are often beyond control, planning for flexibility and building resilient financial models can mitigate some of the unpredictability. F - Operational Risks: Once built, maintaining reliable operations is essential. Even minor disruptions can affect profitability sometimes. Addressing this phase requires a lot of practical experience and proactive maintenance strategies to reduce downtime. Putting it all together: Now, if you want to put it into an equation, it might look something like this: Success = f (A + B + C + D + E + F) Where: A = Regulatory and Permitting Risks B = Production Assumptions C = Construction Risks D = Power (Market) Assumptions E = Financing Risks F = Operational Risks (often underestimated) The function f() here is a combination of experience, strategic planning, and risk management. Each element influences the others, and achieving project success requires balancing them thoughtfully. Success in offshore wind is about carefully understanding and managing the challenges that come with large-scale projects and as you see in the picture, there are always colourful possibilities, if done right. 😇 📌 💡 https://lnkd.in/e_T-UbP2 #OffshoreWind #ProjectFinance #RenewableEnergy

What actually makes an energy project “bankable”? It’s rarely the technology. In practice, energy projects fail to reach financing not because the solution doesn’t work, but because the system around it isn’t ready. From experience across gas, clean cooking, and energy-efficiency projects, bankability usually comes down to five fundamentals: 1. Clear regulatory alignment: Financiers need certainty. Licensing, safety standards, tariffs, and approvals must be clearly mapped — not assumed. 2. Predictable revenue streams: Whether it’s LPG distribution, CNG supply, energy-efficiency services, or digital energy platforms, revenue must be structured, measurable, and resilient to shocks. 3. Strong operating model: Banks finance operations, not ideas. Logistics, maintenance, customer management, and risk controls matter as much as the technology itself. 4. Local content and partnerships: Projects with credible local partners move faster, face fewer disruptions, and build long-term trust with regulators and communities. 5. Risk allocation that makes sense: Successful projects don’t eliminate risk — they allocate it realistically across sponsors, operators, financiers, and customers. This is why energy bankability is not created in the boardroom alone. It’s built on the ground through pilots, regulatory engagement, and disciplined execution. As Tanzania accelerates its energy transition — across clean cooking, gas solutions, and energy efficiency — the real opportunity lies in designing projects for bankability from day one. That’s how good ideas become investable projects. #EnergyFinance #EnergyTransition #BankableProjects #CleanCooking #LPG #CNG #EnergyEfficiency #LocalContent #Tanzania #PublicPrivatePartnership

📚 My Weekend Reading for Project Finance of Hydrogen projects The paper 'Bankability of Hydrogen Projects: Key Risks, Financing Challenges and Mitigation Solutions', published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies via this link: https://lnkd.in/dsiwEdVt This paper highlights the main lessons learned from successful hydrogen projects that have reached Final Investment Decision (FID), including the following points: 📌 Stable policy backing and long-term visibility NEOM in Saudi Arabia has benefited from clear national plans such as Vision 2030, strong government support, and consistent regulations. These factors helped the project secure billions of dollars in project funding. 📌 Securing bankable off-take agreements The 30-year fixed-price offtake agreement between NEOM Green Hydrogen Company and Air Products shifted the risk of changing market prices to a trusted partner, which made it easier to secure funding. In Europe, some projects have used contracts lasting 5-7 years instead of the usual 10 years or more. These shorter contracts often require investors to contribute about 50% more of their own money to cover the shorter period of stable income. Most funded projects have had reliable buyers or extra financial guarantees. 📌 Integrated infrastructure and value chain coordination The HySCALE project in Germany shows that placing hydrogen production close to factories in chemical parks can lower construction costs and reduce transportation risks. Projects that plan production, transport, and use of hydrogen together from the beginning are more likely to succeed because they reduce the risk of unused equipment. 📌 Effective risk mitigation instruments The Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain (HESC) project between Australia and Japan used major government grants and risk-sharing tools from both countries to handle early technology and market risks that commercial lenders would not have accepted on their own. Similarly, the European Investment Bank’s risk-sharing instruments have offered strong financial support, enabling projects to achieve bankable debt-to-equity ratios. 📌 Robust technical due diligence The REFHYNE project in Germany, which used a 10 MW PEM electrolyser at Shell’s Rheinland refinery, provided real-world data on performance, maintenance needs, and system integration. This information helped with the design and funding of larger projects later on. Careful checks of technology readiness, supply management, and system operation, supported by real-world testing, have made banks more confident in funding large project deployments.

Most energy transition projects that fail to progress beyond capital allocation have one thing in common. They do not have clear stage gates, and both risk and commercial viability remain unclear to owners and lenders. In the Middle East and Europe, pressure is mounting to deliver renewables at scale with measurable short-term value. As part of my end‑of‑year energy transition playbook, I am sharing an example of a four‑step process that links technical, commercial and procurement decisions directly to investment milestones. Effective capital allocation depends on three actions: 🔹 Run system studies early, validating demand, power and costs before any FEED spend. 🔹Stress‑test dispatchability and tariffs, matching supply scenarios to contract structures and finance models to secure bankable offtake. 🔹Apply risk filters from day one, mapping mitigation measures and confirming business model fit before procurement commitments. This sequence connects capital with accountability. Time, cost and risk each have a checkpoint, reducing the chance of overruns and stalled decisions. Key takeaways: ▪️ Link early planning to bankability. ▪️Use clear gates for faster approvals and lower risk. ▪️Align commercial terms with operational readiness. How are you ensuring capital stays aligned with delivery risk in your energy transition strategy? #CapitalStrategy #EnergyTransition #ProjectFinance #RenewableEnergy #MiddleEast

How you initiate a 110kV Substation Project (Part 1 of 2): (Some points as per my knowledge & experience for the benefit of engineering & construction community of Power/Energy sector) Project Initiation is very critical for the project, if its not controlled properly from the beginning, it will have negative consequences throughout the project. Here i will mention the list of steps to be followed and which you must take care, 1.         Take the technical & commercial handover from tendering team of your organization (Ask all your questions from them as once project is handed over to you, then you are responsible to lead and take the project in right direction, only in extreme cases you can refer back to them) 2.        Finish the Site handover from client as soon as possible (Mention your notes clearly during site handover, if any obstacles that can affect construction activities, that should be mentioned clearly in site handover in order to follow up further with client till its closure) 3.        Arrange the Kick off meeting with client as soon as possible, explain overall picture of the project, major milestone dates, major equipment details, major challenges , risk , opportunities involved in the project. Specially the issues which require more support from client should be discussed openly. 4.         Finalize the designer with in 2 weeks maximum once project is signed to initiate the design & engineering 5.         Request from client Job Order No, Plant number, Drawing numbers (2000 to 3000) and proceed for title block submission 6.         Finish the budget approval for the project from your concerned internal department, open the cost center for all internal procurement & supply chain activities 7.         Finalize the POs for major equipments (Power transformer, GIS, MV SWGR, C&P Panels, SAS, Telecom, Auxilary transformer) etc. Focus on those long lead items first like GIS & Power transformer which will come from out of country(As even after FAT , you normally require around 2 months for packing and delivery of these items). 8.        Proceed for Project Insurance on immediate basis as it will be required for upcoming invoicing process with client 9.        Proceed for advance payment from client if its applicable as per contract (Having advance payment for the project is very critical and give you good cash flow from the beginning, so you can initiate project is a proper way) 10.    Submit the organization chart to the client and take its initial approval (In the beginning Project Manager, Project Engineer, Technical Coordinators are critical). Later on you have to fill all positions as soon a possible like Safety officer, QA/QC Civil, Civil Site Manager, QA/QC Electrical, Electrical Site Manager, Site Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Etc) Regards Engr. Tabraiz Ahmed Alvi HV Projects Manager (SEC Approved) MS-EE, PMP 31-05-2024

Feasibility of a utility-scale BESS project: 1. Site Selection Location Suitability: Evaluate the site for physical space, accessibility, and proximity to the grid connection point. Consider factors like land ownership, zoning regulations, potential for expansion. 2. Grid Connection and Integration Interconnection Requirements: Analyze the technical requirements for connecting the BESS to the grid, including voltage levels, power capacity, and grid stability. Grid Compatibility: Ensure the BESS can handle grid dynamics, such as fluctuations in voltage and frequency, and assess the system’s ability to provide ancillary services like frequency regulation or reactive power support. 3. Battery Technology Selection Technology Suitability: Compare different battery technologies (e.g., lithium-ion, flow batteries, solid-state) based on energy density, cycle life, efficiency, and response time to ensure the project’s needs. Thermal Management: Consider the thermal management requirements of the selected battery technology, including cooling systems and potential for thermal runaway. 4. System Sizing & Scalability Energy & Power Requirements: Determine the optimal size of the BESS based on the project's storage and power output. This includes peak load demands, duration of energy discharge, and frequency of cycling. Scalability: Assess the potential for future expansion and whether the system design can be scaled up to accommodate increased demand or additional storage capacity. 5. Performance and Reliability Cycle Life & Degradation: Evaluate the expected cycle life of the batteries and their degradation rate over time, considering the impact on performance and maintenance costs. System Reliability: Analyze the reliability of the entire system, including power conversion systems, inverters, and control systems. Ensure redundancy and fail-safes are in place to maintain continuous operation. 6. Control & Communication Systems EMS: Evaluate the control systems responsible for managing the charge/discharge cycles, ensuring optimal performance, and integrating with the broader energy management strategy. Communication Protocols: Ensure compatibility with existing grid communication protocols and consider the need for secure, real-time data exchange between the BESS and grid operators. 7. Energy Efficiency & Losses Round-Trip Efficiency: Calculate the round-trip efficiency of the BESS, considering losses during charging, discharging, and energy conversion. This impacts the overall economic feasibility of the project. Self-Discharge Rate: Evaluate the self-discharge rate of the batteries and how it affects long-term storage efficiency, especially for applications requiring extended storage. 8. Integration with Renewables Renewable Energy Compatibility: If the BESS is intended to integrate with renewable energy sources (e.g., solar, wind), assess the compatibility of the system in terms of variability in generation and storage. #BESS #Powersystem #renewable