Energy Intelligence · Cluster 1Wedge A — funnel: counted vs 90-day targetcountedtarget
Commercial wedge
The first objective is not a platform. It is one paid customer. Three candidate wedges; only A is proposed for building, and it stops at RECOMMEND.
Only money, a signed pilot or a committed design partnership counts. Compliments are not counted.
Wedge A · Dispatch decision support for BESS / energy communities proposed
- Customer
- Stadtwerke, Mieterstrom / gemeinschaftliche Gebäudeversorgung operators, small BESS operators
- Problem
- Batteries and community assets run on rule-based schedules that leave money on the table against day-ahead / intraday prices and §42b allocation rules.
- What it costs them today
- Unknown until asked — the first ten conversations quantify it. Hypothesis: 5–15 % of achievable storage revenue.
- Build
- optimize_dispatch on the existing MILP · validate_constraints (SoC, power, grid connection) · generate_explanation in German · weekly PDF/CSV recommendation, € gap vs their schedule
- Do not build
- any write path to inverters or BMS · a portal · multi-tenant UI · new forecasting models before a baseline
- ROI metric
- € per month vs the customer's own schedule, measured on their data, reported with the assumptions listed.
- Entry
- Energie Teilen paid intake (Stripe) → data-sharing agreement → four-week recommendation trial.
- Decision
D-009
Wedge B · Time-to-power / behind-the-meter siting analysis proposed
- Customer
- Data-centre and industrial developers (US first via EIA data)
- Problem
- Grid connection lead times decide project viability; developers pay for defensible BTM scenarios.
- What it costs them today
- Cost of delay per MW-month — the calculator exists; the price the buyer pays for the answer does not yet.
- Build
- nothing new until wedge A has a customer or B has an inbound paying user
- Do not build
- EU data integration before a paying US user
- ROI metric
- Subscription revenue; months of delay avoided as reported by the buyer.
- Entry
- timetopower.ai subscription (exists).
- Decision
—
Wedge C · Constraint prediction / hosting capacity for DSOs proposed
- Customer
- DSOs, Stadtwerke network arms
- Problem
- Connection requests are refused or delayed for lack of feeder-level constraint forecasts.
- What it costs them today
- Long sales cycle, procurement, NIS2 scope. Not the first wedge.
- Build
- nothing before A is sold
- Do not build
- DSO integrations on speculation
- ROI metric
- Connections approved per feeder per year; engineering hours per request.
- Entry
- Warm DSO contact only after A produces a reference.
- Decision
—
Priority customers
C&I energy operatorsBESS operatorsrenewable developersmicrogrid operatorsaggregatorsenergy communitiesStadtwerkeselected DSO / utility partners
What we ask
- What costs you money today?
- How much?
- Who owns the budget?
- How do you solve it now?
- What would success be worth?
Never asked: “Would you use this?”