De-risk every interconnection decision
Whether you're putting power onto the grid or pulling it off, grid access is the largest uncertainty most projects carry. The numbers you'll get for it, from the ISO or a data provider, are point estimates with no confidence attached. We give you the distribution: the range of costs you're exposed to, the drivers you can act on, and methods graded against published ISO results. Screen sites and defend budgets on probabilities instead of a single guess.
Who we work with
Three ways the same uncertainty shows up
Generation developers
Your cost exposure moves with a queue that won't hold still. Positions ahead of you withdraw, and their share of network upgrades lands on whoever stays in.
We solve powerflow across thousands of plausible queues and hand you a P10/P50/P90 band instead of a number that quickly goes stale.
Large load & data center developers
You're asking whether a delivery point can carry you, how soon, and at what cost.
We reproduce ISO large load studies, so you can screen sites and size a campus before the utility study comes back.
Five published SPP delivery point studies reproduced blind, 50–1,200 MW.
Investors, lenders & acquirers
Diligence on an interconnection position is often muddled, and the real risk is hard to gauge.
We give you the distribution instead: cost bands, build probabilities, infrastructure exposure, and cited evidence for everything. That lets you de-risk a project against the range of outcomes it is actually exposed to.
Grid access is the biggest line item, and the price isn't clear until it's too late.
Interconnection cost, capacity, and timing are usually delivered as point estimates: one scenario, one number, no error bar, and no way to see what would move it. Then the inputs change.
We measure it instead.
Thousands of scenarios solved in powerflow, not a sensitivity around a single case. Every result traceable to the projects, constraints, and assumptions driving it. And where an ISO publishes its own answers, we rebuild the study and show you exactly how close we landed.
Services
From siting through interconnection agreement
Five offerings across the interconnection lifecycle. Automation runs underneath all of them. Every process is scripted end to end, which is what makes running thousands of scenarios possible at all.
IX Atlas
Find the points of interconnection worth pursuing.
A database of interconnection capacity and upgrade costs, built on AC methodology rather than screening heuristics. Site against what the network can actually absorb, before you commit to a position.
Early-stage siting, land strategy, portfolio screening.
POI Cost Envelope
The cost range you're exposed to, not a single number.
We draw thousands of coherent versions of the queue, weight each position by its own build probability, and solve powerflow on every one. What comes back is the distribution (P10, P50, P90), plus the probability that your cost lands under whatever threshold you set.
A band is only worth the coverage behind it. We judge this product on how often realized cost actually falls inside the stated P10–P90, measured on back-tested cases.
Go/no-go on a queue entry, budgeting, investment committee.
Cluster Stress Test
Every viable cluster scenario, modeled.
Once you're in a cluster, your exposure moves with everyone around you. We model each viable scenario so you can see the full range of cost outcomes before you sign, and know which neighbors drive them.
IA decision, restudy exposure, withdrawal timing.
Queue Survival Index
Who's really in front of you, what their survival odds are, and why.
Every position is resolved to its project company and parent developer from public records, with cited evidence and a confidence grade. Each carries a build probability synthesized from public evidence on procurement status, offtake route, timing, and project readiness. Assigned network-upgrade cost is then folded in.
Backtested, not asserted. We rebuild historical queues as they stood, score each snapshot with no lookahead, and compare to what actually got built. Scores are probabilities, not verdicts.
Deliverability Risk Assessment
The path to resource adequacy revenue.
Deliverability determines cluster entry, Full or Partial Capacity Deliverability Status, and therefore your RA contracts. We model TPD exposure at a point of interconnection before the ISO publishes it.
RA revenue certainty, TPD allocation planning, NQC estimation, IDS risk.
Validation
We grade ourselves against published results
Most interconnection analysis asks you to trust the model. We think that's backwards. Where an ISO publishes its own study results, we rebuild the study, using only inputs available before publication, and measure how close we land.
Reproducing the CAISO deliverability modelling
Cluster 14 Phase II, PG&E region · July 2026
- 24 of 24 area constraints identified
- Every published loading reproduced within 10 percentage points
- Run blind on inputs available before CAISO published
The paper also documents our natively modeled RAS database. The armed contingency definitions CAISO credits are not in the public data, so we rebuilt them.
Reproducing SPP delivery point study results
Five published studies · August 2026
- 6 of 6 graded elements pass the ±5% criterion
- Maximum error 2.5%; median absolute error ~0.6%
- OG&E and Evergy territories, 138–345 kV, 50–1,200 MW
Each study was built from SPP's public ITP models and the published report, then graded afterward against the printed answer.
Markets
Where we work
Solar, storage, hybrid, wind, geothermal, and data-center energy campuses.
Team
Small, senior, and employee-owned
We're a small team that moves fast. Employee-owned means every person here is invested in whether your project gets built, not just whether we deliver a report.
Chris Cogan
Eric Bastoul
Marilyn Saulsbury
We've served 20+ companies and delivered hundreds of studies since 2017.
We'd love to hear what you're working on.
We'll tell you how we can help, or tell you honestly if the answer doesn't require our help.
Or write to chris@dendriteconsulting.com