Delivery models for large-scale renewable projects
At a glance
The energy transition is accelerating, bringing new level of complexity to how renewable energy infrastructure is planned, delivered and scaled. Across utility-scale wind, battery energy storage, transmission and hybrid energy systems, asset owners and developers are no longer managing individual projects in isolation. They are increasingly delivering interconnected portfolios of infrastructure, often across multiple regions, stakeholders and supply chains while balancing commercial pressure, technical complexity and ambitious delivery timeframes.
In this environment, project success no longer depends on any single element in isolation. Technology selection, commercial strategy, stakeholder alignment, supply chain resilience, organisational capability and delivery execution all play an equally critical role. The challenge and the opportunity lie in bringing these elements together through a delivery strategy that creates alignment across the entire program.
At GHD, we see delivery models as strategic enablers that create the structure, governance and partnerships needed to integrate the many moving parts of large-scale renewable infrastructure.
Keeping pace with the market
At the same time, the renewable energy sector is entering a new phase of maturity, and delivery expectations continue to evolve just as rapidly. Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) across wind turbine generation and battery energy storage are showing a reduced appetite for taking on full engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) wrap responsibilities, shifting more interface management and delivery accountability back to owners and delivery partners. Meanwhile, owners’ teams are managing increasingly complex portfolios, often with internal systems, governance frameworks and resourcing models built for a different scale of capital delivery.
In parallel, EPC partners are investing significantly in technical capability, digital systems and project delivery capacity to support market growth. Those investments increasingly rely on long-term strategic relationships that allow teams, processes and lessons learned to mature over multiple projects, rather than resetting with every new contract.
These market dynamics are reshaping how organisations approach delivery. In addition to the traditional question of “who will deliver this project?”, a more strategic consideration is emerging: “What delivery model best aligns capability, partners, governance and long-term investment objectives?”
Moving from projects to programs
As renewable investment pipelines grow, project-by-project delivery models are becoming increasingly difficult to sustain. Repeated mobilisation of teams, systems and contractors can drive unnecessary cost, introduce interface risk and limit an organisation’s ability to capture and embed lessons learned. Valuable knowledge often remains fragmented across projects, while internal teams spend significant time re-establishing governance, onboarding delivery partners and rebuilding ways of working.
A program-based approach offers a different path. When organisations structure delivery models around a broader portfolio, they can standardise engineering solutions, build repeatable procurement strategies and create delivery frameworks that strengthen over time. Teams can design once and reapply those solutions many times. Construction teams can refine methodologies based on real-world outcomes. Leadership teams can strengthen safety performance through consistency, shared expectations and recurring project teams. Project controls, reporting frameworks and governance structures can become more efficient, scalable and predictable.
Over time, these improvements become cumulative, lowering delivery costs, reducing execution risk, strengthening schedule certainty and minimising repeated training and mobilisation. Most importantly, they create an environment where continuous improvement becomes a built-in feature of the delivery model itself.
Aligning delivery models with strategic priorities
No universal delivery model exists for renewable infrastructure because no two organisations enter the market with the same objectives, capabilities or risk profile.
Some organisations want to retain direct strategic control while expanding internal capability. Others want to accelerate delivery across a growing pipeline without proportionally increasing headcount. Some prioritise speed to market, while others focus on technical assurance or building long-term delivery maturity.
The strongest delivery models reflect these strategic drivers from the outset. In practice, this typically results in four dominant approaches, each with distinct risk allocation, governance structure and capability requirements.
Engineering, procurement and construction (EPC)
Traditionally, an EPC “wrap” model involves a developer engaging a single contractor to deliver the full project scope, supported by an owner’s engineer to provide performance oversight. Under this model, the EPC contractor generally assumes responsibility for a significant proportion of project delivery risk, including construction execution and site safety, acting as principal contractor. This approach is often selected where developers seek to reduce direct exposure to delivery risk and achieve a higher degree of cost certainty, although this is typically reflected through contingency within the EPC pricing structure.
Engineering, procurement and construction management (EPCM)
Under an EPCM model, design, procurement and key elements of project management, including construction coordination, are undertaken by the EPCM entity on behalf of the client. Detailed engineering is typically advanced to a significant level prior to construction package award to reducing pricing uncertainty and improving schedule confidence. Delivery is then generally structured across multiple procurement and construction packages. The EPCM entity often fulfils the role of principal contractor and may hold responsibility for overall facility performance, depending on contractual arrangements. This model is often well suited to projects delivered in proximity to existing operations, where interface management and continuity of operations are important considerations.
Integrated project management team (IPMT)
The IPMT model is increasingly being applied to large-scale programs where a fast start is required and the client organisation has limited delivery experience and is seeking to progressively build internal capability. Design input is typically provided either by the IPMT or another delivery partner in the early stages, with execution commonly delivered through multiple procurement and construction packages to support cost and delivery optimisation. The model is characterised by a “salt and pepper” structure, bringing together client and service provider personnel within a single integrated project organisation. It is often well suited to program-based delivery environments where standardisation, repeatability and capability development are important considerations.
Multi EPC with construction management services
This model is typically adopted for multi-package EPC delivery strategies where both an owner’s engineer function and construction management services are required to support technical assurance, on-site coordination and interface management across multiple EPC packages. Under this arrangement, the client generally retains responsibility for overall interface management while maintaining flexibility to optimise contractor selection across work scopes to support cost competitiveness and alignment of capability with project requirements. This approach is commonly used where the client organisation has limited internal capacity to directly manage multiple contractors and complex delivery interfaces.
From delivery model to strategic enabler
Selecting a delivery model is not only a commercial or contractual choice. It is a strategic decision shaped by what an organisation needs to achieve across cost, risk, speed, capability and long-term program outcomes. These drivers determine how delivery is structured, how risk is shared and how effectively a program performs at scale.
When organisations clearly define and align these priorities, the delivery model becomes more than a project framework. It becomes an enabler of consistent execution, stronger alignment across partners and sustained performance across the full lifecycle of renewable infrastructure development.