Hybrid Projects Dominate Capacity Investment Scheme Tender 4

If you wanted proof that Australia’s transition now turns on dispatchability, Tender 4 of the Capacity Investment Scheme (CIS) delivered it. Of the 20 successful projects totalling 6.6 GW of new generation, a majority combined utility-scale solar with grid batteries—hybrids built to deliver electricity when the system needs it, not just when the sun is out.

The storage footprint is the other headline. Across the round, analysts tallied roughly 11.4 GWh of batteries awarded alongside the generation capacity. That’s big enough to shift the evening peak in multiple regions, and it pushes performance to the front page of procurement: cycling limits, availability, response time and FCAS participation are no longer technical footnotes; they’re central evaluation criteria.

Why hybrids—and why now? Revenue underwriting under CIS changes the financeability equation. By reducing merchant risk with floor-and-share mechanisms, the program lets developers design around reliability rather than chase daytime megawatt-hours alone. That reweights the bid room. It’s not just EPC price and schedule anymore; it’s EMS/SCADA architecture, grid-connection evidence that will stand up in AEMO/NSP reviews, and interfaces between EPCs, BESS integrators and operators that won’t buckle during commissioning.

Competition was fierce: the round was oversubscribed, which is why the winners read like teams with coherent delivery narratives—not just technology stacks. Expect more tenders and subcontracts to ask for proof of control strategy, commissioning plans tied to realistic milestones, and data to demonstrate evening performance rather than promises to “optimise later.”

Seen in context, this round is part of a deeper pivot. Battery investment had already accelerated through 2025; CIS simply pulled more of it forward with predictable steps from selection to financial close. For suppliers—transformers, inverters, BOP civils, protection and controls—the result is a pipeline that’s easier to map and a cadence of packages that looks less lumpy than the old merchant model.

Why this matters to government tendering

• Value for money now explicitly prices firming capability alongside energy output.
• Evidence thresholds are higher: buyers will test EMS designs, grid studies and commissioning readiness.
• Risk clarity is expected: warranties, augmentation plans and responsibilities for grid-services performance should be transparent and defensible.