Policymakers and energy providers are in a race against time: meet rising load growth spawned by the data centers powering AI, or risk further straining outdated grid infrastructure.

The industry has started looking to natural gas, coal power plants, nuclear power, and geothermal energy to meet the need, but these cannot scale as rapidly or as cost-effectively as solar and storage. To put this in perspective, constructing a PV plant alone takes around 18 months. Meanwhile, the current lead time for natural gas turbines is five years or more. The timeline is even longer for alternative technologies like geothermal and nuclear.

At the same time, solar and storage developers are navigating new political and financial pressure. Between the loss of the IRS’s incentive tax credits for solar, AD/CVD duties, and tariffs, these changes are forcing teams to rethink how projects can remain economically viable amid uncertainty.

These dual pressures, surging demand and shifting policy, are redefining how solar and storage projects are deployed. This new playbook for renewable deployment now favors in-depth supplier due diligence, tax credit preservation, and portfolio risk management, and developers need to adapt.

Supplier selection can no longer default to “the usual suspects”

As the industry responds to this new tempo, the first step is rethinking how suppliers are chosen. AI-driven demand is pressuring developers to move faster, but supplier familiarity isn’t the same as risk control. Even long-trusted Tier 1 manufacturers are now subject to added scrutiny under Section 232 tariffs and Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC) restrictions. Developers must now verify that their suppliers, and their suppliers’ suppliers, meet supply chain requirements before committing project capital.

For storage projects, even amid the potential of new AD/CVD cases and tariffs, FEOC transparency is currently the most important factor to consider. Storage has become the linchpin of reliable renewable delivery for data centers. Meeting the massive, around-the-clock power demands of AI infrastructure requires clear compliance.

With hyperscale data centers demanding massive, near-term power delivery, relying on a single manufacturer can expose developers to delays that ripple across entire corporate procurement timelines.

Developers should treat supplier choice as a data exercise: evaluating module class, production, BOS impacts, delivery timing, and pricing in real time instead of relying on static tier lists or legacy relationships. The same principle applies on the storage side, where supplier validation depends on transparent supply chain data and due diligence items like suppliers having the right fire test ratings, warranties, certifications, and UL listings.

This approach also surfaces competitive advantages; smaller or newer suppliers may have inventory that fits project specs and deadlines better than entrenched players.

Once developers have identified which partners can deliver with speed and compliance, cost-effectively, the next step is ensuring projects stay on track to capture financial incentives.

Prioritize commence construction

The commence construction deadline of July 4, 2026, is the date solar developers likely have circled in red. Miss that window, and a project loses today’s tax credit values and tougher eligibility requirements.

There are two ways to qualify, and recommendations based on project progress:

The Physical Work Test: A project qualifies if it begins “significant physical work of a significant nature” by the deadline. For solar developers, transformer procurement has become a common way to meet this threshold because the custom design and manufacturing of transformers typically qualify as physical work.

The Five-Percent Safe Harbor: A project qualifies if at least five percent of total costs are incurred by the deadline, usually through equipment purchases or binding contracts. While this provision no longer applies to solar projects larger than 1.5MW, battery developers can still use it to secure qualification. In practice, however, most energy storage projects also rely on the Physical Work Test, often through off-site transformer design and construction.

For data center-linked projects, these deadlines are even more critical because a delay in qualifying could jeopardize power purchase agreements with hyperscale or enterprise buyers racing to meet AI load growth.

With deadlines approaching and compliance hurdles intensifying, procurement itself becomes the central mechanism for managing both cost and execution risk.

Risk management through procurement

The ability to navigate these deadlines and compliance requirements depends on how developers structure procurement itself. The combination of AI-driven load growth, policy shifts, and supply volatility means a project’s success now hinges on how agile its procurement strategy is.

Procurement optionality is now the developer’s primary risk-management tool. For data center projects, the priorities are to mitigate risk by ensuring equipment reliability, supply chain availability for on-time deployment, and pricing visibility. Developers who combine live data with flexible contracting can balance all three.

Real-time data visibility enables portfolio-level decisions when purchasing solar modules and energy storage systems. As data centers push for 24/7 renewable power, developers need the agility to shift both generation and storage resources to meet dynamic load profiles and interconnection windows. Flexible contracting with adjustable delivery schedules or substitution clauses allows developers to meet “commence construction” deadlines even if a specific supplier or product slips.

The rise of AI and the data centers that power it has forced renewable developers to match the digital economy’s tempo with equally fast, flexible procurement. Data centers can’t meet their power demand without renewables, and renewables can’t meet that demand without smarter, faster procurement. Those who embrace this symbiosis will set the pace for the digital and decarbonized economy ahead.