From capital to delivery report

Newton | From capital to delivery

This leads to a deeper structural issue. Infrastructure delivery is still largely organized around sequential phases with separate accountabilities: • development • permitting now matter 6

Why delivery models

Financing institutions are also becoming part of the delivery ecosystem, particularly where affordability, risk sharing and execution readiness are linked directly to funding availability. Execution readiness itself is becoming a financing criterion.

• engineering • procurement • construction • commissioning

Come to us with projects that are ready to go...” Gregory Beard Director of the DOE Office of Energy Dominance Financing

Each phase often has different owners, incentives, timelines, governance structures and performance measures. But the outcome often depends on the broader industrial complex working together across financing, permitting, transmission, supply chain and delivery systems. This creates a structural gap. Even where individual functions perform well, the broader delivery system can still fail to move at the pace required. This is not simply a capacity problem. It is a question of how delivery systems are:

Utilities are constantly balancing multiple strategic objectives simultaneously: • growth • reliability • affordability

• structured • integrated • orchestrated • managed end-to-end

• regulatory confidence • stakeholder legitimacy • execution readiness

These priorities need to be optimized together rather than independently. Affordability has become an execution outcome, not simply a regulatory outcome. Delivery predictability affects not only customer outcomes, but also:

• regulatory confidence • financing assumptions • investor credibility • long-term industrial competitiveness

15

Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs