Grid Investment Planning | Use Cases
Grid investment planning, simulated year by year — for the next 5 to 30 years
Substation renewals, line replacements, transformer programmes, smart-meter rollouts, DER integration, EV-load reinforcement. The same model handles them all — and shows the trade-offs between them.
Networks
Power · Water · Gas
Horizon
5–30 years
year-by-year
Constraints
Budget · Risk · Carbon
Why grid investment planning is harder than it used to be ?
A 2026 grid investment plan has to absorb forces that didn’t exist when the last plan was built. DER penetration. EV load. Generation retirement. Climate-driven outage frequency. Regulatory revenue caps. Net-zero commitments. Workforce attrition. Each force reshapes the plan; combined, they make spreadsheet planning impossible.
DER & EV reshape demand
Distributed solar, batteries, EV charging fundamentally change load shape. Plans built on historical demand forecasts are already obsolete.
Generation retirement
Coal, gas, nuclear units coming offline. Replacement capacity, transmission reinforcement, and storage all on the same critical path.
Climate volatility
Storms, heat domes, drought, wildfire. Reliability investment has to be modelled forward, not against historical baselines.
Regulatory revenue caps
The total CAPEX envelope is fixed by regulator. Trade-offs between substation renewal, line hardening, and DER integration are zero-sum.
Net-zero commitments
Voluntary or mandated decarbonization pathways have to coexist with reliability and affordability.
Workforce attrition
Senior planning engineers retiring with the network model in their heads. Decision logic has to live in the platform.
How Simeo solves it ?
One model. Six futures. Year-by-year evidence.
Multi-decade scenario simulation
Compare 5, 10, 30-year scenarios under budget / risk / carbon constraints. See exactly which assets get funded in each future.
DER & EV load modelling
Distributed solar, battery storage, EV charging modelled as scenario inputs. See which substations need upgrade timing changes.
Reinforcement vs replacement
Refurbish, replace, or run-to-failure — modelled with full-life cost, risk reduction, and carbon impact for every option.
Climate-aware risk weighting
Forward weather exposure layered onto asset condition. Investments prioritized where climate consequence is highest.
Carbon as a first-class constraint
Generation mix, line losses, electrification of heat and transport. Net-zero pathway sits inside CAPEX, not next to it.
Audit-ready evidence trail
Every recommendation links to the asset, the condition data, the model, the action. Defensible to regulator, board, and public.
What the workflow looks like ?
From asset register to 30-year reinforcement plan.
1 · Unify the asset register
Substations, lines, transformers, switchgear, mains, plants — bulk import from CMMS, GIS, ERP.
2 · Project forward
10,000+ predictive models. Failure probability + consequence + climate exposure.
3 · Define scenarios
Budget caps, reliability targets, decarbonization pathway, DER penetration assumptions.
4 · Compare & defend
Side-by-side scenarios. Asset-level slips. Sensitivity in seconds. Board-ready output.
Outcomes
What grid planners measure.
25–30%
TCO reduction
10%+
Reliability improvement
6–12 wks
First plan
Hours
Scenario re-run
FAQs
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. Year-by-year simulation across the full asset life cycle. Predictive models project degradation, risk, cost, and carbon over the planning horizon you set.
Both. Transmission, distribution, generation, and storage assets all handled with vertical-specific predictive models.
DER penetration is a scenario input that reshapes load shape, line capacity, voltage management, and substation upgrade timing. Run aggressive vs conservative DER scenarios; see asset-level impact.
Yes. Load forecasts (internal models, vendor tools) integrate via REST/GraphQL APIs as scenario inputs.
Yes. The same engine handles linear and point assets across power, water, and gas — with asset-family-specific predictive models for each.