Delivering battery energy storage projects with confidence

Every successful BESS project begins with an honest assessment of internal capability. Overestimating capacity can expose teams to risks they can’t handle, while underestimating it can lead to unnecessary costs and missed opportunities.

There are three primary delivery approaches that each suit different organisational profiles:

• Turnkey EPC provides maximum certainty with minimal internal resource requirements. It’s ideal for organisations entering the storage market or those with limited project management capacity. The trade-off is higher cost and reduced control over technical specifications.
• Split contracting provides greater cost control and technical flexibility. It requires strong internal coordination and experienced project managers who can integrate multiple contractors effectively.
• Integrated teams offer full control over specifications, vendor relationships and execution. This model suits organisations with deep in-house expertise and multi-project pipelines.

These models aren't permanently fixed choices. Many organisations strategically evolve their approach as their internal capabilities mature. Some begin with EPC to gain market experience, then transition to split contracting as they build project management expertise.

The key takeaway is that delivery strategy must align with organisational reality, not aspirational capability. Projects fail when organisations choose models that demand skills or resources they don't possess.

Once delivery strategy is set, commercial structure becomes the next critical alignment point. Without clear and predictable revenue streams, even technically sound projects may struggle to secure financing. Revenue models must reflect both market maturity and the technical implications of the delivery approach.

BESS projects typically follow one of three commercial models, each suited to different market conditions and risk profiles:

• Merchant strategies offer maximum revenue flexibility through energy arbitrage and ancillary services but require sophisticated market analysis and a high tolerance for price volatility. These models work best in markets with strong price signals, such as ERCOT in Texas or Australia's National Electricity Market.
• Contracted approaches provide predictable cash flows through long-term agreements, making them attractive to lenders and institutional investors. One example is Ontario's Long-Term 2 (LT2) program, which demonstrates how contracted revenue can accelerate project development.
• Hybrid models combine multiple revenue streams to maximise returns but demand advanced control systems and deep understanding of market rules. These projects must also manage increased cycling demands that can accelerate battery degradation.

The commercial model directly influences delivery strategy effectiveness. For example, merchant projects often require flexible systems, favouring split contracting or integrated teams, while contracted projects may benefit from turnkey delivery that prioritises predictable performance.

However, even well-designed commercial strategies face external constraints that delivery teams cannot control. Interconnection delays, permitting bottlenecks and regulatory frameworks that lag behind technology can limit revenue potential and disrupt project timelines. Flexibility in strategy allows projects to adapt to these constraints rather than be stalled by them.

As projects move beyond individual assets toward portfolios, external enablers become important. Policy alignment and community engagement determine whether promising individual projects can become replicable, scalable business models.

Policy alignment reduces development risk and provides the long-term visibility that institutional investors require. Clear market rules are important for defining how batteries can participate in multiple service markets. Mature frameworks, such as PJM’s regulation and capacity markets, can optimise revenues and improve project economics.

Streamlined permitting can also help reduce development timelines and costs. Jurisdictions with established clear approval pathways for energy storage, like California, can enable faster deployment and more predictable schedules.

As storage systems scale and become more visible within local energy networks, gaining community support becomes critical to project success. Engaging early and communicating transparently helps build trust, secure land access and avoid delays that can impact project economics.

Partnerships with Indigenous communities, for example, can deliver shared economic benefits. Rather than treating community consultation as a regulatory hurdle, this collaboration establishes long-term stewardship relationships that strengthen both project sustainability and community outcomes.

Stable policy frameworks support long-term planning and make integrated delivery and contracted commercial models more viable. In contrast, uncertain regulations often require more flexible strategies that can adjust quickly to change.

Technology choices represent the final piece of the strategic alignment puzzle. The right solution balances performance, safety and lifecycle economics while reinforcing delivery and commercial objectives.

• Lithium-ion systems remain dominant for short-duration applications. Their suitability depends on the use case defined by the commercial model.
• Alternative chemistries like sodium-ion and flow batteries offer cycling stability and end-of-life performance. These often suit contracted projects better than merchant ones.
• Hybrid configurations that combine storage with solar or wind generation are becoming standard. They improve economics by sharing infrastructure and creating more predictable output.
• Long-duration storage technologies (including compressed air and iron-air systems) address seasonal balancing needs. These emerging technologies typically require contracted revenue models and integrated delivery due to their complexity.

Across all categories, digital optimisation plays a role in how well systems perform. Advanced control platforms help operators monitor asset health, schedule maintenance before failures occur and respond to market signals in real time.

The overall principle is simple: technology should support strategy, not complicate it. Selecting based on technical specs alone can lead to operational challenges that undermine project goals.

These insights reveal why successful BESS projects require systematic strategic alignment rather than optimising individual elements in isolation. Confident delivery comes when every strategic choice reinforces the others:

• Start with assessing your organisation’s capability. Choose delivery models that match internal strengths. Plan and allocate resources for changing the delivery strategy as your organisation evolves.
• Align with market reality. Revenue models must reflect actual conditions, not theoretical potential. Design flexibility without compromising bankability.
• Build strategic relationships. Policy engagement and community partnerships are investments in scalability and risk reduction, not compliance costs.
• Select the appropriate technology to support strategy. Technical specifications should reinforce delivery and commercial objectives rather than drive them. Choose systems that support execution and performance.
• Plan for change. Markets, capabilities and technologies change continuously. Build adaptive capacity into every decision.

Confident BESS delivery depends on strategic coherence. Every decision should reinforce the project’s core objectives while maintaining flexibility for future opportunities. This approach builds scalable platforms for long-term growth in the energy storage market and strengthens organisations’ ability to deliver with confidence.

To explore how we can support your BESS strategy, from early-stage planning to multi-site delivery, connect with our energy specialists. You can also watch the full Accredited Technical Masterclass or browse our latest insights and case studies.