NEM digital twin simulation

A stress-test of what happens if the ESEM slips while data-centre demand arrives on schedule and build rates fail to fully compensate.

ESEM delay (months)12
DC demand growth (% pa)25
RE build rate (GW/yr)5
Wholesale price trajectory ($/MWh - distributional range)
Simulation timeline - what breaks, when
Distributional outcomes at peak stress (2028-29)
Decision memo
How To Read This
The key result
A 12-month ESEM delay does not create a 12-month problem. It creates a 2-3 year stress window because investment timing, construction lead times, and demand growth do not move at the same speed.
Why the damage persists
If projects are not contracted in 2027, they do not simply reappear a year later. Most replacement capacity has 2-4 year build times, so delayed contracting pushes missing capacity into the early 2030s.
Why data centres matter
Demand growth arrives on schedule whether the ESEM does or not. If replacement capacity is missing, new large loads draw against an already stressed system, pushing prices up while older coal remains unreliable.
The leverage point
The model shows that build rate is the hedge against institutional delay. Higher renewable and firming build rates can partially offset policy slippage even when the formal transition pathway is disrupted.
What this page adds
This is the fifth instrument in the suite. The CLD explains why the system oscillates, the sequence shows what binds, the stock-flow view shows how fast it moves, the futures cone shows where paths lead, and this simulation shows what happens if the plan slips.

Original prompt context: Gabriel Wong’s LinkedIn post on the EN26 keynote.