Compute ordered is not compute installed.
How an engagement runs: framing call, NDA, fixed-fee proposal →
Capital is committed on day one. Revenue starts when the site is energised. Everything in between is physical: a grid connection to secure, high-voltage equipment to procure, permits to clear, and a local community that can challenge the project. That gap is where AI data center financings now go wrong, and it is rarely where a standard technical adviser looks hardest.
GridReadiness gives lenders, infrastructure funds, private credit and acquirers an independent view of the three physical risks between signing and energisation, for assets in France and across Europe.
Where the delivery gap opens
Indicative ranges from GridReadiness market tracking, 2026. Each gate must clear before capacity earns revenue.
WHY THIS MATTERS NOW
The warning signs are already in the market. Loans on Oracle's New Mexico campus were reported trading around 90 cents while the project waits on a single gas pipeline permit. In France, RTE has reserved close to 18 GW of grid capacity for around 80 data center projects, part of which will never be built. Major transformer manufacturers quote 48 to 60 months or more. And several French projects are facing legal challenges or local campaigns. None of these risks appears on a GPU purchase order.
The banks now say the same. In September 2026, Morgan Stanley estimated a US power shortfall of 33 GW through 2028 even after onsite generation, and Goldman Sachs expects only around half of scheduled US capacity to be delivered on time over two years. In August, Morgan Stanley's strategists argued that community opposition must now be "underwritten like land, power, or labor".
Academic research points the same way. A paper presented at the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity conference in September 2026 finds that AI data center projects are increasingly financed off balance sheet, with project debt reaching around 90% of asset value in the largest deals, and names execution (power access, permits, local opposition, equipment supply) as one of the main vulnerabilities for creditors. See what it means for lenders.
WHAT WE CHECK
| Risk | What we review | Red flags we look for |
|---|---|---|
| Grid connection | RTE or Enedis offer, queue position, works schedule, cost, contractual milestones | Unsigned offer, conditional capacity, works dependent on third-party reinforcements |
| Connection transferability | Which company holds the PTF, applicable version of RTE's general conditions, annual queue review, reduction mechanism for unused capacity | PTF held outside the acquired perimeter, planned transfer to a third party, site fill-up slower than contracted capacity steps |
| HV equipment | Transformer and switchgear procurement status, supplier, delivery slot, alternatives | No confirmed slot, single supplier, delivery after the grid date |
| Permits and community | Completeness of the regulatory sequence, challenge windows, pending proceedings, local opposition | Open authorisations, irregular permit posting, organised opposition, election exposure |
New in 2026: the EU A–G rating. Since the Commission adopted a common rating for data centres in September 2026, we also review the energy (PUE) and water (WUE) classes a project is designed for, and its exposure to the minimum performance standards expected from 2027. See what the EU rating means for lenders.
Further reading, the series "The data center through an investor's eyes": avoiding a stranded asset, Article 9 and EU taxonomy, PUE and value, retrofitting existing sites.
DELIVERABLES
Red-flag review. A short, decision-oriented report on the three risks, with a clear view on schedule realism. Suited to screening before an investment committee.
Full technical due diligence report. Detailed analysis of the connection offer, equipment plan and permitting file, with a probability-weighted energisation date and recommended conditions precedent.
Construction-phase monitoring. Milestone tracking for drawdown decisions: grid works progress, equipment delivery, permit status.
WHO WE WORK FOR
Senior lenders and debt funds, infrastructure and real estate funds, private credit, family offices, and buyers of data center platforms or development portfolios. We work alongside legal counsel and the lenders' technical adviser, not in place of them.
WHY INDEPENDENT
We sell no equipment, earn no commissions and have no stake in the projects we review. Our work combines market intelligence on grid and equipment lead times with senior high-voltage engineers from our network for field and document review. And if one of our experts is on assignment with a developer or an EPC contractor, we do not carry out the due diligence of that same project for a lender, nor support the host community on it.
Further reading: What lenders miss in AI data center due diligence and Compute ordered is not compute installed.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
What does data center technical due diligence cover for lenders?
For GridReadiness, it covers the three physical risks between financial close and energisation: the grid connection, the high-voltage equipment supply chain and the permitting and community risk.
When should a lender commission this review?
Before credit approval or investment committee, and ideally before signing. It can also support drawdown decisions during construction.
Do you replace the lenders' technical adviser?
No. We focus on grid, equipment and permitting risk, which are often covered only briefly in a standard technical review, and work alongside the adviser and legal counsel.
Which countries do you cover?
France in depth, and projects across Europe through our network of senior high-voltage engineers.