Energy Transition Program → Renewable energy tracker

Facilitator Instructions

Classroom exercises for optimising use of the tracker

Use these exercises after the Walkthrough. Each exercise is designed to move participants from reading renewable-project statistics to interpreting delivery, system-integration and economic consequences for the Saudi energy transition.

1. Pipeline is not production

Purpose: Distinguish project announcements from operating renewable capacity.

Activity: Compare Installed, Under Development, Tendered and Announced projects. Then progressively include each status in the 2030 portfolio.

Debrief: Ask why tendered or announced MW cannot be treated as electricity already available to the system. Discuss financing, construction, grid connection, commissioning and operating-performance risks.

2. Reach 100 GW without creating a system problem

Purpose: Demonstrate that renewable capacity and system readiness must develop together.

Activity: Increase the renewable capacity target by adding solar and wind until the scenario approaches 100 GW. Keep Grid Readiness and Storage Deployment low. Observe the scenario outputs for Integration Pressure, System Stress and Indicative Renewable Curtailment.

Debrief: Capacity progress should improve while the three integration indicators deteriorate if grid, storage, flexibility and demand-side capability do not keep pace. Then use the Grid Integration interventions to bring the indicators back toward their desirable ranges. This demonstrates why renewable capacity alone is not a sufficient measure of a successful energy transition.

3. Demand growth changes the transition challenge

Purpose: Connect electricity-demand growth to the 50% renewable-electricity objective.

Activity: Hold renewable capacity constant and progressively increase Energy Demand Growth.

Debrief: Observe the change in projected electricity demand, renewable share and additional renewable capacity required. Discuss why a fixed GW target and a generation-share target are not interchangeable.

4. Lowest generation cost or lowest system cost?

Purpose: Challenge the assumption that the lowest auction tariff necessarily produces the lowest cost to the electricity system.

Activity: Start with a low-cost renewable scenario, then progressively increase WACC → project delay → transmission requirements → storage requirements → curtailment.

Debrief: Compare plant-level generation cost with system-adjusted cost. Identify which costs sit outside the headline tariff and who ultimately bears them.

5. Financing and delay sensitivity

Purpose: Show why financing structure and execution capability affect renewable economics.

Activity: Hold technology and capacity constant. Increase WACC, then test project delays of 6, 12, 24 and 36 months.

Debrief: Identify how financing and delay costs change the economics even though the physical project is unchanged. Discuss the value of bankable offtake, procurement discipline and timely approvals.

6. Geography, transmission and project selection

Purpose: Connect excellent renewable resources with the cost of delivering electricity to demand centres.

Activity: Use the Project Map to select projects in different locations. Compare capacity, technology and status, then increase the Transmission Requirement assumption for remote generation.

Debrief: Ask whether the best solar or wind resource automatically represents the best system project. Discuss network capacity, losses, congestion, connection timing and regional demand.

7. Storage versus curtailment

Purpose: Explore whether eliminating renewable curtailment is always economically optimal.

Activity: Create a high-renewable scenario. Compare a case with higher curtailment and limited storage against a case with substantial storage and lower curtailment.

Debrief: Compare avoided curtailment with storage CAPEX and duration. Discuss why some curtailment may be economically rational and when storage creates wider system value.

8. Solar versus wind portfolio balance

Purpose: Examine diversification rather than treating all renewable MW as equivalent.

Activity: Build one scenario dominated by solar and another with a greater wind contribution while keeping total added capacity broadly similar.

Debrief: Compare generation, capacity factors, variability, storage requirements and system stress. Discuss the value of complementary generation profiles.

9. From renewable project to Vision 2030 outcome

Purpose: Move from project delivery to national transition value.

Activity: Select a project and use Energy Transition View to trace Renewable Project → Generation → Grid Connection → System Flexibility → Demand Absorption → National Outcome.

Debrief: Ask participants to identify where value can be lost between construction and national outcome. Connect the discussion to energy security, localisation, investment, hydrogen, industrial development and sustainability.

Facilitator approach: Do not treat the exercises as demonstrations with a single correct answer. Ask teams to explain the assumptions behind their scenario, identify trade-offs, and defend why their proposed portfolio is appropriate for the Saudi energy transition.

Data baseline: KAPSARC Saudi Arabia Renewables Tracker — last reconciled 10 September 2026

Portfolio by status

Filtered project register

Progress toward 2030 range

100–130 GW ambition

Annual expected commissioning

Based on project register

Cumulative capacity trajectory

Installed + expected pipeline by year

Facilitator prompt: Ask participants whether a large announced or tendered pipeline is equivalent to operating renewable capacity. Explore the delivery, grid, financing and system-integration dependencies between project award and actual energy output.

Interactive Saudi project map

Approximate placement by named project location

Marker size = capacity Solar Wind Hybrid

Facilitator prompt: What regional patterns do participants see? Discuss how geography changes transmission requirements, curtailment risk, storage needs and the economics of connecting renewable generation to demand centres.

Renewable Project Register

Project	Technology	Status	Capacity MW	Expected / online	Location	Source

Capacity by technology

GW

Capacity by status

GW

Portfolio interpretation

Learning lens

Facilitator prompt: Compare the technology mix with the status mix. Which is the larger strategic challenge: developing enough projects, commissioning them, or integrating them successfully into the power system?

Progress toward 100–130 GW

Four portfolio lenses

What the gauge teaches

Policy ambition vs delivery

The tracker separates operating capacity from capacity that is under development, tendered or only announced. This prevents the common error of treating the full project pipeline as if it were already producing electricity. The difference between these layers is the project's delivery and integration risk.

2030 Renewable Scenario Simulator

Training model — participant-adjustable assumptions

Additional solar by 2030 20 GWNew solar capacity assumed to reach operation by 2030 before applying the commissioning-delay factor. Additional wind by 2030 10 GWNew wind capacity added to diversify the renewable portfolio and generation profile. Commissioning delay 10%Share of planned additions assumed not to be delivering by 2030 because of procurement, construction, connection or commissioning delay. Electricity demand growth to 2030 20%Growth in national electricity demand relative to the model's 2025 baseline; higher demand raises the renewable energy required for a 50% share. Solar capacity factor 25%Average solar output as a percentage of nameplate capacity over the year; higher values increase annual delivered energy. Wind capacity factor 40%Average wind output as a percentage of nameplate capacity; used to convert wind GW into annual TWh. Storage deployment 10 GWDispatchable battery or equivalent flexible capacity available to shift renewable energy and support balancing. Grid readiness 75%Composite training assumption for transmission, connection capacity, grid reinforcement and operational readiness to accept new renewable output. Curtailment 5%Renewable energy that could be generated but is not accepted because of congestion, oversupply or operational constraints.

Scenario interpretation

Capacity is not the same as delivered energy

Facilitator prompt: Ask teams to reach at least 100 GW while keeping integration pressure manageable. Then compare whether they solved the challenge by simply adding capacity or by balancing deployment, grid readiness, storage, curtailment and demand growth.

Grid & System Integration

Scenario-linked consequences

This view translates the participant's 2030 renewable scenario into power-system consequences. It is a training model: the purpose is to expose causal relationships between renewable penetration, grid readiness, storage, curtailment and demand rather than to replace an operational dispatch model.

Integration pathway

Where renewable capacity can be constrained

Grid optimisation levers

Improve the scenario rather than only diagnose it

Adjust the four system levers below. They do not add renewable MW; they improve how effectively the power system can connect, balance and absorb the renewable portfolio already selected in the 2030 Scenario Simulator.

Transmission & connection reinforcement 60%Network expansion, connection capacity and congestion relief. Demand response & flexible load 40%Ability to shift demand into periods of high renewable output, including industrial, desalination and other flexible loads. Forecasting & system operations 60%Forecasting, dispatch, reserves, digital visibility and operating procedures for variable renewable energy. Interconnection & flexible capacity 40%Regional interconnection, flexible generation and other balancing resources available when renewable output changes.

Priority interventions

Generated from the current scenario and optimisation choices

Facilitator prompt: Increase renewable additions aggressively without changing grid readiness or storage. Then ask the group why renewable capacity can rise while system-integration readiness deteriorates. Next improve grid, storage or demand flexibility and compare the outcome.

Project Economics & System Cost

Generation cost is not the same as system cost

This training model separates the cost of producing renewable electricity from the additional costs of financing, delay, transmission and storage needed to make that electricity useful to the power system. Project tariffs are shown only where a reliable public source is available.

Financing / WACC 6.0% Additional project delay 6 months Transmission requirement $120/kW Battery storage CAPEX $180/kWh Storage duration 4 hours Economic life 25 years

Controlled technology assumptions

2025 cost benchmark

Reliably sourced Saudi tariff / LCOE benchmarks

Not assumed for projects without a public value

Decision question

Lowest renewable generation cost or lowest system cost?

Facilitator prompt: First minimise generation cost. Then increase transmission distance/cost, storage requirements, WACC and project delay. Ask whether the option with the lowest tariff or plant-level LCOE still produces the lowest cost to the electricity system.

Energy Transition View

From project capacity to national outcome

Select a project to see how a renewable-energy investment creates value only when the surrounding energy system is able to absorb, balance and use its output.

Facilitator prompt: Challenge the class to identify the weakest link in the selected project's chain. A project can be technically complete while the wider transition benefit is constrained by grid connection, flexibility, demand or institutional coordination.

Model Administration

Data reconciliation control

KAPSARC Installed Projects: 17 | Plugin Installed Projects: 17 | Status: Reconciled

Controlled reconciliation register

Project ID	Project	Technology	MW	Status	COD / Expected	Source	Verification

Data quality exceptions

The project register is the controlled calculation source for dashboards, maps, charts and progress views. KAPSARC is the reconciliation baseline for the installed-project count as at 10 September 2026.

Scenario calculation assumptions

Assumption	Controlled value / rule	Source
Electricity-demand baseline	340 TWh for 2025; participant demand-growth slider projects this to 2030	S06
2030 renewable electricity objective	50% of projected electricity demand	S01 / S05
2024 national electricity consumption cross-check	340.43 TWh; 402.63 TWh sent to the network	S05
Capacity factors	Participant-adjustable solar and wind assumptions	Training assumption
Grid readiness	Proxy for the share of new renewable output that can be connected and delivered	Training assumption
Storage coverage	Storage GW compared with 15% of scenario renewable capacity; used only as a training proxy	Training assumption
Solar PV CAPEX / fixed O&M	$1,067.60/kW CAPEX; $21.30/kW-year fixed O&M (2025, 2022 USD)	S07
Onshore wind CAPEX / fixed O&M	$1,484.30/kW CAPEX; $28.80/kW-year fixed O&M (2025, 2022 USD)	S07
WACC, transmission and storage cost	Participant-adjustable training assumptions; not presented as Saudi project actuals	Training assumption

Control rule: If the installed-project count no longer equals 17, or an installed project lacks a commissioning year, source ID or usable capacity, Model Administration flags an exception rather than silently accepting the change.

Source Register

Transparency and update control

S01 — KAPSARC Saudi Arabia Renewables Tracker

Primary benchmark for the tracker concept, national renewable ambition and the KAPSARC status framework. KAPSARC describes a target range of 100–130 GW before 2030 and a goal of around 50% renewable electricity generation by 2030.

Open original KAPSARC tracker

S02 — KAPSARC, Renewable Energy Certificates in the Saudi Electricity System (2025)

Used to corroborate the scale and composition of the pipeline. KAPSARC reported 23 GW online or under construction and an additional 28.5 GW being tendered in its 2025 tracker reference.

KAPSARC

S03 — Renewable Vision Saudi Renewables Tracker, May 2026 snapshot

Used in V1 as the project-level working register where a row-level export from the public KAPSARC interface was not available to this build. The snapshot lists 58 projects and approximately 70.2 GW across installed, under-development, tendered and announced projects.

Open project snapshot

S04 — U.S. EIA Saudi Arabia country analysis

Historical cross-check for major operating and planned solar and wind projects, including Sakaka, Dumat Al-Jandal, Sudair and other NREP projects.

Open EIA source

S05 — GASTAT Electrical Energy Statistics 2024

National electricity cross-check. GASTAT reports approximately 402.63 TWh sent to the network and 340.43 TWh of electricity consumption in 2024.

GASTAT

S06 — KAPSARC, Evaluation and Role of Industrial Demand Response in Saudi Arabia (2026)

Used as the controlled scenario demand baseline. The paper's flexibility assessment uses 340 TWh annual electricity demand for 2025 and 415 TWh for 2030, alongside 2030 PV and wind assumptions.

KAPSARC

S07 — KAPSARC GCAM-KSA methodology / NREL ATB cost assumptions (2026)

Controlled 2025 technology-cost benchmark used by the economics training model: solar PV CAPEX $1,067.60/kW and fixed O&M $21.30/kW-year; onshore wind CAPEX $1,484.30/kW and fixed O&M $28.80/kW-year, in 2022 USD.

Open KAPSARC methodology

S08 — Vision 2030 renewable cost records

Public Saudi benchmarks used only where explicitly reported: Al Shuaibah solar as low as 1.04 US cents/kWh and Al Ghat wind as low as 1.57 US cents/kWh. Earlier Vision 2030 reporting gives Sakaka at SAR 0.0878/kWh and Dumat Al-Jandal at SAR 0.0746/kWh.

Vision 2030

S09 — KAPSARC / Ministry of Energy wind cost records

Al Ghat reported LCOE of 1.56558 US cents/kWh and Wa'ad Al Shamal 1.70187 US cents/kWh. These are reference benchmarks, not generic assumptions for all wind projects.

Open KAPSARC source

Data-control note: V1 is a training tracker, not an official project registry. Project status and commissioning dates can change. The source register is intentionally visible so future versions can update one controlled dataset rather than hard-coding figures throughout the interface.