INDICATIVE PROTOTYPE · figures pending NUMBERS v2.2 sign-off · internal — not for external release
enleashed
market model evidence go-to-market all
Workstream 1Value
at stake
Scoping question

How big is the coordination pool, how does it move across 2026 → 2030, and how much of it is realistic to capture under different worlds?

Research inputs

NESO balancing & constraint costs · ESO whole-system flex benefit · CP30 target · DFS performance data · DESNZ Clean Flexibility Roadmap.

Method

Five sourced pools sized at three horizons (2026 / 2027 / 2030); five scenario stress tests; portfolio-coverage overlay shows the realistic enleashed slice.

Value map · v4

Five pools. Three horizons. One realistic slice.

Most value maps quote one big number for one year and stop. This one shows five distinct value pools moving across three horizons (2026 → 2027 → 2030), stress-tested under five scenarios (base, slow flex, fast flex, low gas, high stress), with a portfolio-coverage overlay that shows the slice Enleashed can realistically address at each tier.

Macro pool sizes are sourced (NESO/ESO/DESNZ — see ledger below). The scenario multipliers and portfolio-coverage curve are Enleashed's analysis, pending NUMBERS v2.2 sign-off. F1: no GB curtailment magnitudes are quoted; the curtailment row tracks relative change only. Falsifier (F-VM-1): the realistic-coverage curve assumes ≥40% addressable; below that, the entire £-deliverable thesis must be re-scoped.
Pools at horizon · click a pool to highlight it on the plot
Annual coordination value at stake — five pools, by year
2026

Stress test the year & scenario

Horizon year2026
ScenarioBase
Source ledger · every figure with its provenance

Macro pools · sourced; multipliers & coverage curve · Enleashed analysis

measured · published · indicative · synthetic
QuantityValueSource & method
+ expand methodology & assumptions