Guets Column

Houston expert asks: Is the Texas grid ready for the future?

Data centers, EVs, and storms put the Texas grid to the test. Photo courtesy UH.

Texas has spent the past five years racing to strengthen its electric grid after Winter Storm Uri exposed just how vulnerable it was. Billions have gone into new transmission lines, grid hardening, and a surge of renewables and batteries. Those moves have made a difference, we haven’t seen another systemwide blackout like Uri, but the question now isn’t what’s been done, it’s whether Texas can keep up with what’s coming.

Massive data centers, electric vehicles, and industrial projects are driving electricity demand to unprecedented levels. NERC recently boosted its 10-year load forecast for Texas by more than 60%. McKinsey projects that U.S. electricity demand will rise roughly 40% by 2030 and double by 2050, with data centers alone accounting for as much as 11-12% of total U.S. electricity demand by 2030, up from about 4% today. Texas, already the top destination for new data centers, will feel that surge at a greater scale.

While the challenges ahead are massive and there will undoubtedly be bumps in the road (some probably big), we have an engaged Texas legislature, capable regulatory bodies, active non-profits, pragmatic industry groups, and the best energy minds in the world working together to make a market-based system work. I am optimistic Texas will find a way.

Why Texas Faces a Unique Grid Challenge

About 90% of Texas is served by a single, independent grid operated by ERCOT, rather than being connected to the two large interstate grids that cover the rest of the country. This structure allows ERCOT to avoid federal oversight of its market design, although it still must comply with FERC reliability standards. The trade-off is limited access to power from neighboring states during emergencies, leaving Texas to rely almost entirely on in-state generation and reserves when extreme weather hits.

ERCOT’s market design is also different. It’s an “energy-only” market, meaning generators are paid for electricity sold, not for keeping capacity available. While that lowers prices in normal times, it also makes it harder to finance backup, dispatchable generation like natural gas and batteries needed when the wind isn’t blowing or the sun isn’t shining.

The Risks Mounting

In Texas, solar and wind power supply a significant percentage of electricity to the grid. As Julie Cohn, a nonresident scholar at the Baker Institute, explains, these inverter‑based resources “connect through power electronics, which means they don’t provide the same physical signals to the grid that traditional generators do.” The Odessa incidents, where solar farms tripped offline during minor grid disturbances, showed how fragile parts of this evolving grid can be. “Fortunately, it didn’t result in customer outages, and it was a clear signal that Texas has the opportunity to lead in solving this challenge.”

Extreme weather adds more pressure while the grid is trying to adapt to a surge in use. CES research manager Miaomiao Rimmer notes: “Hurricane frequencies haven't increased, but infrastructure and population in their paths have expanded dramatically. The same hurricane that hit 70 years ago would cause far more damage today because there’s simply more in harm’s way.”

Medlock: “Texas has made significant strides in the last 5 years, but there’s more work to be done.”

Ken Medlock, Senior Director of the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University’s Baker Institute, argues that Texas’s problem isn’t a lack of solutions; it’s how quickly those solutions are implemented. He stresses that during the January 2024 cold snap, natural gas kept the grid stable, proving that “any system configuration with sufficient, dispatchable generation capacity would have kept the lights on.” Yet ERCOT load has exceeded dispatchable capacity with growing frequency since 2018, raising the stakes for future reliability.

Ken notes: “ERCOT has a substantial portfolio of options, including investment in dispatchable generation, storage near industrial users, transmission expansion, and siting generation closer to load centers. But allowing structural risks to reliability that can be avoided at a reasonable cost is unacceptable. Appropriate market design and sufficient regulatory oversight are critical.” He emphasizes that reliability must be explicitly priced into ERCOT’s market so backup resources can be built and maintained profitably. These resources, whether natural gas, nuclear, or batteries, cannot remain afterthoughts if Texas wants a stable grid.

Building a More Reliable Grid

For Texas to keep pace with rising demand and withstand severe weather, it must act decisively on multiple fronts, strengthening its grid while building for long-term growth.

  • Coordinated Planning: Align regulators, utilities, and market players to plan decades ahead, not just for next summer.
  • Balancing Clean and Reliable Power: Match renewable growth with flexible, dispatchable generation that can deliver power on demand.
  • Fixing Local Weak Spots: Harden distribution networks, where most outages occur, rather than focusing only on large-scale generation.
  • Market Reform and Technology Investment: Price reliability fairly and support R&D to make renewables strengthen, not destabilize, the grid.

In Conclusion

While Texas has undeniably improved its grid since Winter Storm Uri, surging electricity demand and intensifying weather mean the work is far from over. Unlike other states, ERCOT can’t rely on its neighbors for backup power, and its market structure makes new dispatchable resources harder to build. Decisive leadership, investment, and reforms will be needed to ensure Texas can keep the lights on.

It probably won’t be a smooth journey, but my sense is that Texas will solve these problems and do something spectacular. It will deliver more power with fewer emissions, faster than skeptics believe, and surprise us all.

-----------

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn.

Trending News

A View From HETI

The process permanently stores some CO2 underground, reducing carbon emissions and carbon intensity. Photo courtesy UH

A new report from the University of Houston estimates that a method known as carbon dioxide-enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) could recover roughly 137 billion barrels of U.S. oil—with Texas and the Gulf Coast poised to play a major role.

A UH Energy-produced white paper, titled “Revitalization of Mature Oil Fields: Opportunities and Challenges of CO2-EOR,” looks at how CO2-EOR could increase U.S. energy supply, reduce carbon emissions and lower the carbon intensity of oil production.

CO2-EOR injects pressurized carbon dioxide into mature oil wells to loosen and push oil trapped underground toward the production wells, allowing operators to extract oil typically left behind. The process permanently stores some CO2 underground, reducing carbon emissions and carbon intensity.

“Injected CO2 works to revitalize mature oil fields by reducing oil viscosity, improving sweep efficiency and restoring reservoir pressure, resulting in incremental oil production beyond primary and secondary recovery,” the report reads. “CO2-EOR also supports permanent carbon storage and by virtue of this will produce uniquely low-carbon intensity oil for global markets.”

Authored by Charles McConnell, executive director of UH's Center for Carbon Management in Energy, and Zhiyuan Li, a UH petroleum engineering doctoral candidate, the paper says that much of the opportunity lies right under the feet of Texas oil companies.

Texas and the Gulf Coast, including its offshore resources, have half of the nation's oil resources considered favorable for the CO2-EOR technology, the report says. According to UH, conventional U.S. oil reservoirs contain 624 billion barrels, with 434 billion barrels still underground, including about 20 billion barrels of proven reserves.

Still, the paper argues that the economics behind CO2-EOR need to be considered. The process’ success depends on a number of factors, including costs of carbon capture, field redevelopment, operations, monitoring, transportation and available tax incentives, according to UH.

Logistically, developing CO2-EOR operations out of older wells and infrastructure presents pros and cons. While using older wells can be more economical, aging infrastructure may require more frequent monitoring, inspection, repair or re-plugging, according to UH.

Ultimately, the report recommends focusing CO2-EOR development on mature oil fields with existing infrastructure, well-understood geology and reliable CO2 supplies. This approach, UH says, could help extend the productive life of existing oil fields while supporting “lower carbon intensity oil for global markets and a significant contribution to energy security.”

Read the full report here.

Trending News