Grid-Enhancing Technologies: Why GETs Are Everywhere Now
Grid-enhancing technologies are suddenly everywhere in energy conversations because you can squeeze more reliable transfer capability out of lines you already own and already pay to maintain. From where we sit at the Alliance for Competitive Power (ACP), that is a big deal for you as a regulator, market participant, consumer advocate, or large-load customer: GETs can relieve grid pressure quickly without defaulting to the slowest and most expensive answer every time.
You still need new transmission. No serious stakeholder argues otherwise. But you also need practical, near-term ways to cut congestion, reduce curtailment, and keep competitive markets functioning while the long-lead projects work their way through planning, siting, and cost allocation. That is the lane where GETs have started showing up in docket after docket.
Why the Grid Feels Tighter Than It Used to
If you are watching interconnection requests stack up, you are seeing the bottleneck in real time. A lot of the bulk power system was designed around yesterday’s power flows, not today’s mix of wind, solar, storage, and fast-changing demand. The result is familiar: Constrained interfaces, pockets of high prices, and projects stuck waiting for deliverability upgrades.
States and grid operators are paying attention because the queue is not a rounding error. The Pew Charitable Trusts highlights how states are turning to GETs as one way to ease transmission gridlock as generation and storage requests surge. When projects cannot connect, customers lose access to new supply options, and the market gets less competitive right when you need it to stay sharp.
New lines will remain the backbone solution, but they often move on a timeline that does not match load growth, electrification, and data center development. GETs are popular right now because they offer you something rare in this sector: Speed.
Defining GETs in Practice
You will hear a lot of definitions. Here is the working version we use: GETs are hardware and software tools that help the existing grid carry more power safely by improving visibility, control, and real-time decision-making. The WATT Coalition lays out this idea clearly, emphasizing faster deployment and least-cost benefits on existing infrastructure.
In the real world, most policy and planning conversations circle three tool families again and again:
Dynamic Line Ratings (DLR) to update how much power a line can safely carry based on actual conditions.
Advanced Power Flow Control (APFC) to redirect power away from bottlenecks and toward available paths.
Topology optimization to reconfigure the network using switching and software logic so the grid runs “cleaner” under changing conditions.
Think of them as ways to get more value out of what is already in the ground while you build what needs to come next.
Tool Family #1: Dynamic Line Ratings (DLR)
If you have ever wondered why a transmission line is “rated” as if every hour is the hottest, stillest day of the year, you are not alone. Many ratings are intentionally conservative because nobody wants a sagging line or damaged equipment. But conditions change constantly. Wind cools conductors, temperatures swing, and actual clearance can vary.
DLR uses sensors, weather data, and analytics to estimate safe capacity in real time. That can mean more headroom on the same corridor when conditions allow, and tighter margins when they do not.
For you, the practical value shows up in a few places: Fewer constrained dispatches, less curtailment of low-cost generation, and more breathing room during tight operating hours. A study discussed through PubMed Central describes how DLR-enabled operations supported significantly more wind delivery and produced major consumer savings. The U.S. grid is not a copy-paste match, but the takeaway holds: When you stop guessing and start measuring, you often find usable capacity you were leaving on the table.
Tool Family #2: Advanced Power Flow Control (APFC)
Here is the part that trips people up: Power does not politely stay on the path you wish it would take. It follows physics, splitting across parallel lines based on impedance. That is why you can have one set of lines running hot while another set nearby looks underused.
APFC devices give operators more control over those flows by changing electrical characteristics on targeted paths. In plain language, you get a better set of knobs to steer megawatts away from a clogged interface and onto capacity that is sitting idle.
The World Resources Institute explains how advanced transmission technologies can improve how the grid moves power, which matters more as variability increases and constraints shift around the map. For competitive markets, this can reduce “price island” behavior where congestion effectively shrinks the market footprint. When power can move more freely, local market power gets harder to exercise, and customers are less exposed to avoidable price spikes.
Tool Family #3: Topology Optimization and Smart Switching
Topology optimization is the quiet workhorse of the GETs family. Much of it is software: It evaluates grid conditions and recommends switching actions that change how power routes through the network. Sometimes it is decision support for the control room. Sometimes it is automated under strict operating rules.
When you do it well, you can relieve congestion without installing hardware at every pinch point. The tradeoff is discipline. You need clear operating procedures, strong model validation, and comfort that reliability standards are respected on every action, every time.
Still, from a “how fast can you see benefits” standpoint, topology tools can move quickly because you are improving operations more than you are pouring concrete.
Drivers behind the Modern Integration Push
GETs are not brand new. The difference is that the system is under a new kind of stress, and the old playbook is not keeping up.
Congestion is expensive and visible: When the grid becomes the limiting factor, you see it in uplift, redispatch, curtailment, and volatile price separations.
Interconnection queues are forcing hard choices: If you care about bringing new supply online, you cannot ignore deliverability constraints.
Public and federal support is rising: This focus reached a peak with FERC's historic June 18, 2026, Section 206 "Show Cause" mandates, which explicitly order grid operators to evaluate alternative technologies like GETs to lower connection barriers and speed up timelines for large AI loads. The U.S. Department of Energy has highlighted parallel efforts to accelerate deployment of smart transmission tools, prioritizing immediate consumer affordability.
In short: You are hearing about GETs because stakeholders are looking for upgrades that can be validated, scaled, and delivered on a timeline that matches today’s needs.
Where Each Tool Family Shines
Dynamic Line Ratings (DLR)
What it changes: Line ratings update with real-world conditions.
Where it helps most: Unlocking extra transfer on existing corridors.
Typical consumer upside: Lower congestion, less curtailment, improved operating margins.
Advanced Power Flow Control (APFC)
What it changes: Actively steers flows away from bottlenecks.
Where it helps most: Reducing overloads and using parallel paths better.
Typical consumer upside: Fewer price islands, more efficient dispatch, lower congestion costs.
Topology Optimization
What it changes: Switching and configuration decisions improve routing.
Where it helps most: Fast operational gains without major construction.
Typical consumer upside: Reduced constraints during stressed periods, better day-to-day efficiency.
Driving Market Discipline and Consumer Gains
At ACP, you will always hear us come back to the same point: Markets work best when transmission constraints are managed transparently and competitively, not used as a permanent choke collar on supply.
When interfaces stay tight, local resources can gain leverage. You see it in persistent congestion, frequent out-of-market actions, and price outcomes that do not reflect broader regional competition. GETs help by expanding the “effective market” during more hours of the year. That can mean:
Less congestion rent baked into customer costs.
Fewer must-run and reliability commits that distort price signals.
More deliverability for new entrants trying to reach load.
They also fit a common-sense sequencing: Use the grid better now, then build the new infrastructure you still need, with clearer data about where the true long-term constraints are.
Navigating Structural and Operational Barriers
If GETs are so useful, why are they not everywhere already? A few practical reasons keep coming up in proceedings and stakeholder meetings:
Incentives still lean toward capital spend: In many jurisdictions, utilities earn more predictably on large projects than on operational efficiency. Without performance expectations, GETs can remain “nice to have.”
Operations and standards matter: Real-time tools require data quality, forecasting discipline, cybersecurity attention, and control-room training. Nobody wants a tool that looks great in a pilot and becomes a headache at 2 a.m. during a storm.
GETs are not a universal substitute: Some constraints are physical and persistent. You will still need new lines, reconductoring, substations, and long-term planning to meet growth and resilience needs.
The takeaway for you is not “GETs always.” The takeaway is “GETs first when they are cost-effective, then build what is truly necessary.”
Balancing Tech Adoption with Open Retail Choice
We care about speed, but not at the expense of customers or competition. You can support GET adoption in a way that is both practical and market-aligned by insisting on a few basics:
Make GETs a real option in planning: Do not let them be an afterthought once the preferred portfolio is already chosen.
Ask for measurable performance: Tie cost recovery to observed congestion reduction, transfer gains, or reliability improvements where feasible.
Keep the data and assumptions visible: Stakeholders need enough transparency to verify benefits and avoid “trust us” planning.
Reward efficiency, not just expansion: Encourage regulatory structures that value operating outcomes and customer value.
Protect open market access: Do not let “grid modernization” become a pretext to re-monopolize competitive functions or restrict customer choice.
If you want our broader perspective on why competitive structures matter when you evaluate upgrades and cost recovery, start with ACP’s work at the Alliance for Competitive Power. You can also dig into how open markets translate into customer value in our post Energy Competition Success: How Open Markets Deliver Savings.
Five Actionable Planning Directives
Require a GET screen in transmission and congestion planning: Ask planners to show where DLR, APFC, or topology optimization could defer or reduce larger upgrades.
Standardize benefit tracking: Push for consistent metrics like reduced congestion costs, fewer constraint hours, and changes in available transfer capability.
Run pilots with a path to scale: A pilot that cannot graduate is just a report. Insist on decision points and go-forward criteria.
Coordinate with market monitors and operators: Make sure operational changes are reflected in market rules and reliability practices.
Keep procurement and participation competitive: Where appropriate, use competitive solicitations and clear evaluation rules so customers get the best deal.
FAQ: Deploying Grid-Enhancing Technologies
Are grid-enhancing technologies a replacement for building new transmission lines?
No. You should treat GETs as a fast way to unlock capacity and reduce congestion on the existing grid, not a full substitute for new transmission needed for long-term growth, resilience, and new resource delivery.
How quickly can you deploy GETs compared with new lines?
Many GET projects can be deployed in months to a couple of years depending on procurement, telecom integration, and operator procedures. New high-voltage lines can take close to a decade when siting and permitting are complex.
Do GETs primarily add capacity, or do they help reliability too?
They can do both. DLR improves situational awareness and rating accuracy, APFC can reduce overload risk by steering flows, and topology optimization can reduce constraint-driven stress by routing power more efficiently.
Who benefits most when GETs work as intended?
You see benefits across the system: Customers through lower congestion costs and fewer out-of-market actions, developers through improved deliverability, and operators through better tools for managing variability and contingency conditions.
What should you watch for in filings and proposals?
Watch for weak verification plans, vague claims of benefits, and incentive structures that reward spending without rewarding performance. Also watch for any attempt to use modernization as a reason to restrict competitive entry or customer choice.
Conclusion: Scale Efficiency with Performance Metrics
Grid-enhancing technologies are everywhere now because you need options that move faster than a major new line, and you need them without sacrificing reliability or handing customers a blank check. When you deploy GETs with clear metrics, strong operational standards, and transparent planning, you can reduce congestion, improve reliability margins, and widen access to competitive supply.
If you are shaping policy, reviewing a transmission plan, or participating in a stakeholder process, now is the moment to make sure GETs are evaluated seriously and implemented in ways that protect consumers. ACP will keep pushing for grid upgrades that modernize the system while keeping markets open. If you want to compare notes on what you are seeing in your region, connect with us through the ACP contact page.
