Interconnection, curtailment, capacity revenue and permitting authority all change at the market boundary. An orientation to the US markets that shape development decisions.
TransGlobe Power
Markets
Why the market matters more than the map
Two identical projects in different markets are not the same project. Interconnection procedure, curtailment exposure, capacity revenue, permitting authority and offtake structure all change at the market boundary. A development plan that ignores which market it is in is a plan that has not started.
Interconnection process and queue behaviour differ by operator
Curtailment risk varies with congestion and transmission build-out
Capacity and ancillary revenue exist in some markets and not others
Permitting authority may sit with state, county or municipality
Offtake structures reflect the market’s resource mix and load growth
ERCOT — Texas
An energy-only market with no centralised capacity payment, and a connection process that has historically moved faster than most. That combination attracts development volume and produces congestion, so nodal basis risk and curtailment deserve as much modelling attention as the resource itself.
Energy-only — revenue concentrates in scarcity pricing
Historically faster interconnection than other US markets
Nodal basis and congestion are primary commercial risks
Largely intrastate, with a distinct regulatory posture
PJM — Mid-Atlantic and Midwest
A capacity market alongside energy, spanning many states and therefore many permitting regimes. Queue reform has reshaped how projects enter and progress, so a position taken under an older process should be re-read against current rules.
Capacity market provides a revenue stream absent in energy-only markets
Multi-state footprint means permitting varies inside one market
Queue process has undergone material reform
Transmission constraints differ sharply by zone
CAISO — California
High renewable penetration, which makes the shape of generation as important as its volume. Storage economics are stronger where evening ramp is steep, and curtailment during high-output periods is a modelling requirement rather than an edge case.
Steep evening ramp supports storage and hybrid configurations
Midday curtailment is a base-case assumption, not a tail risk
State-level policy is a significant driver of project structure
Permitting can involve multiple overlapping authorities
MISO and SPP — Central
Large footprints with substantial wind resource and long transmission distances. Interconnection cost allocation and network upgrade exposure are frequently the deciding factor rather than the resource, which is generally strong.
Strong wind and increasingly strong solar resource
Network upgrade allocation can dominate project cost
Long distances between generation and load
Queue reform has changed study sequencing
WECC — West outside California
A varied region rather than a single market, with bilateral contracting more common than centralised markets. Resource quality is often excellent and the constraint is usually transmission access and finding a counterparty.
Bilateral offtake more common than organised market revenue
Excellent solar and wind resource in much of the region
Transmission access is frequently the binding constraint
Multiple balancing authorities rather than one operator
Southeast and vertically integrated utilities
Where utilities remain vertically integrated, projects typically advance through utility procurement rather than an open market. That changes the commercial path entirely: the counterparty is the utility, and its resource plan sets the timetable.
Development often follows utility procurement cycles
Integrated resource plans signal timing and technology preference
Fewer merchant opportunities than in organised markets
Interconnection handled by the utility rather than an independent operator
How we use this
Market characteristics are an input to screening, not a substitute for it. A strong market does not rescue a poor site, and a difficult market does not disqualify a good one — but the market determines which questions get asked first.
Market context applied at screening, before spend commits
Revenue structure modelled against how the market actually pays
Interconnection strategy built from the specific operator’s process
Capacities and delivered rates are as recorded against each project in TransGlobe Power’s project overview.
FAQ
Common questions
Detail
Questions this raises.
Does TransGlobe Power operate in all these markets?+
These pages describe market characteristics that shape development decisions. Where TGP is engaged on a project is determined by the specific opportunity and the parties involved, not by a claimed presence in every region.
Which market is best for development?+
There is no general answer. The right market depends on the technology, the offtake structure, the developer’s risk appetite and where a viable site exists. The useful comparison is always between specific sites, not between markets in the abstract.
How current is this information?+
Market rules change, particularly interconnection procedures, which have undergone significant reform. Treat this as orientation and verify current procedure with the relevant operator before relying on it.
Do you work outside the United States?+
International work is assessed case by case. The market considerations described here are US-specific; other jurisdictions have their own structures and would be assessed on their own terms.
