Part 3: Global Expansion, Partnerships, and Developments.

The UK

Cap and Floor

This is without question the biggest potential catalyst in the company's history so listen sharp.

In October 2024, the UK government announced the implementation of the LDES Cap and Floor Scheme, to be delivered by the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem).^(58) The program, born out of the curtailment crisis in the country, will reward selected projects with revenue floors and ceilings (caps): If the project's revenue falls below the floor, it will be topped-up by the consumers, and if it rises above the cap, the difference will be returned to the consumers. The scheme thus offers incredibly lucrative, guaranteed revenue stability to developers. Ofgem disclosed it intends to reward up to 7.7 GW of projects through to 2035,^(59) which is about 22% of the current total power demand of the UK grid.^(60)

The application process officialy opened on 8 April 2025 and has two steps: Eligibility Assessment and Project Assessment. The Eligibility Assessment meant to confirm that applicants met the minimal conditions: Projects had be capable of at least 8h discharge duration at full power, and had to have either TRL 9 with a minimum of 100 MW power capacity (so called stream 1) or TRL 8 with a minimum 50 MW power capacity (stream 2).^(61) Projects were further devided into tracks, with track 1 projects deliverable by 2030 and track 2 projects by 2033. They were also asked to show basic deliverability evidence as pertains to stuff like grid connection, planning consent, etc.

The Eligibility Assessment outcome was published on September 23.^(62) Out of 171 projects that applied, 77 passed this stage, 21 of whom utilize VRFBs. Of those 21, 5 are entirely VRFBs, while 16 are hybrid projects of VRFBs and ZBBs. All 21 projects named Invinity as their VRFB supplier. The 16 hybrid projects all belong to Frontier Power Limited and name Eos as their ZBB supplier. Only 1 project of the 21 belongs in Track 2. The total VRFB energy capacity of the 21 projects is 16.7 GWh. The largest of them is Hagshaw LDES, a pure VRFB project with 500 GW power output and 6 GWh energy capacity. Of the remaining 56 projects, 48 use LIBs.

Needless to say, this is massive. The smallest of these projects has a larger VRFB energy capacity (~>=260 MWh) than all of Invinity's currently deployed fleet combined, and the largest (Hagshaw) would likely mean over a billion dollars in revenue on its own.

We are now in the middle of the project assessment window, with an initial decision list to be published this spring, and the final list in the summer. The full assessment criteria are too involved to be discussed here in detail (you can read about them in references 63-66), but we can examine the parts that are more technology/supplier-specific in nature to get an idea of Invinity's prospects, particularly compared to the LIB projects. Ofgem asesses the projects across three pillars: Financial Assessment, Ecnonomic Assessment, and Strategic Assessment.

Financial Assessment broadly measures the direct bankability of the project. Its key metric is R=Project revenue as a % of the project floor level, meant to gauge whether a project will be a burden on consumers by spending too often below the floor. The floor level is determined by Ofgem's assessment of the project's total costs over a default 25 years regime, where a project with higher costs requires a higher floor to cover them and is henced punished with a lower R value.

The key point is that, unlike commercial LCOS estimates with their 8-12% discount rates, Ofgem determines the floor so as to have a rate of return of only 4.47% CPIH-real (it's common for government schemes to use lower discount rates than commercial initiatives). This enormously rewards longer lived assets. An LFP battery that reaches EOL after 6,000 deep cycles and needs to be replaced after only 15 years will be hit with a 50% present replacement cost. Moreover, projects are granted the ability to increase their regime length beyond 25 years, which will reduce the floor level by spreading it over a longer time, as well as include EOL value in the assessment, which Ofgem assumes to be 0 by default. Both of these further buff VRFBs with their 30+ year ratings and high EOL value.

The Economic Assessment measures the project's broader impact on the UK grid and socio-economic consumer welfare, and is a mixture of quantitative and qualitative scoring. Most of it is project-specific metrics like effect on wholesale market costs, supply security, avoided curtailment, local community impact, etc. But one metric to take note of is "skills and supply chain – qualitative impact".

Ofgem doesn't use a mechanistic "number of jobs created/supported" metric since they aknowledge the possiblity that, for example, a project will create some jobs by displacing others. However, in their own words:

"We recognise that some Projects may have a positive impact on local labour markets and supply chains, through investment in specialised skills, or their commitment to source workers and materials from local markets and domestic supply chains, or by supporting the stimulation and export potential of UK-developed technology. Where this is the case, we will consider any evidence put forward by Projects and consider it as part of the qualitative assessment of wider economic and social benefits."

This is relevant to us because Invinity is the only stationary battery manufacturer in the UK. The acceptance of VRFB projects and the resulting ramp-ups of Bathgate and Motherwell will directly create dozens of skilled jobs, at no expense to others.^(67) Moreover, Invinity's unique status places pressure on the UK government to signal that they encourage and reward domestic production, which is clearly an image they want to broadcast.^(68-70) Ofgem even directly refers to references 69,70 in their assessment documentation.

Lastly, the strategic assessment is a smorgasbord of everything that doesn't fit in the other two. It includes deliverability, risk of cost overruns, project interdependency, etc. The metric of most interest to us is the first one they list: technology diversity. Quoting them again:

"We expect it could be in the long-term interest of consumers that we limit overreliance on a narrow set of LDES technologies. There may also be societal benefit from insight derived from the relative performance of different LDES technologies. As part of the Strategic Assessment, we will consider the overall portfolio of assets that perform strongly within the Economic and Financial Assessments and its measure its technological diversity."

They do add a caviat that they will not uphold technology diversity at all costs, and that the economic and financial factors are still the higher priority, but this is still encouraging.

All of these taken together, along with the fact that the government awarding these schemes literally has a 19% stake in Invinity (I know, the agencies are supposed to be independent, but behind closed doors...) lead me to believe that the scenario where VRFBs will be left in the lurch is highly unlikely. While not all 21 projects will be accepted, all it would take is a fraction to launch Invinity into the stratosphere, and for at least that much I am very optimistic.

Killellan

Another development to keep an eye on is the Killellan AI Growth Zone, a proposed hyperscale hub in Argyll, Scotland combining data center capacity with on-site renewables.^(71) The project is led by Argyll Infrastructure Holdings Limited, with partners listed in its application including Schneider Electric, Lenovo, CorPower Ocean, Invinity Energy Systems, and Suir Engineering.

Of relevance to us is the renewable aspect. The project's planned power capacity is 500 MW by 2030, and 2 GW by 2035. Earlier stages describe a micro-grid configuration, with grid integration planned at the advanced stages. If we assume a resonable minimum duration of 8h, that's at least 16 GWh of storage capacity, comparable to the entire Cap and Floor lineup. Invinity has been named as the supplier of this capacity.^(72)

The project is proposed as a bid for the UK Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology (DSIT)'s AI Growth Zone programme.^(73) Launched in early 2025, this is the UK's main initiative to encourage a domestic AI industry. It rewards selected projects with priority access to grid power, lower operating electricity costs, streamlined planning and permitting, and possible financing support.

Applications are made on a rolling basis, with no time limit. Unlike Cap and Floor, DSIT don't list a detailed assessment criteria for projects, only the minimum criteria: projects are required to demonstrate access to >=500 MW by 2030, water and land availability, suitable planning and delivery feasibility, assessments of local impact, and disclose the requested level of government support.^(74)

Considering that Killellan will live or die based on its acceptance into the programme, it's harder to get an estimate on its prospects compared to Cap and Floor. But there were some encouraging developments recently. On 10 Jan 2026, the Swiss firm D M Investments AG has taken control of Argyll Infrastructure Holdings Limited with >75% ownership of shares and voting rights.^(75) Before this, the funding efforts have so far raised only an initial £15m and unlocked negotiations for another £100m out of the total £15bn required for the project.^(76) The new institutional management materially improves their chances to raise the required capital.

That being said, even within arguably the biggest infrastructure investment frenzy since the Railway Mania, £15bn is a lot of money. It's therefore best to regard Killellan more as a (very large) possible bonus, rather than a major part of the thesis.

China

Unsurprisingly, China currently leads the global charge when i