⚡ POWERGRIDIQ
Institutional Market Brief
🇦🇹 Austria · PGIQ Tier 3 Workable
As of June 2026 · powergridiq.com/rating/austria
PGIQ Rating v2 (reliability-adjusted) · as of June 2026
3

🇦🇹 Austria

Viable, with conditions, holding steady
Tier 3 Workable · Composite 58/100, #22 of 79 markets · Outlook Stable · Med confidence · how we score

Clean (hydro-led) and stable, but mid-scale and mid-cost; workable rather than a magnet.

See live grid data →
One market,
four reads
BuildTier 3Siting ratingSellGrade BOfftakePlanLightLoad pressureMonitorNot coveredSiting screen only
The same market, four decisions. Open any lens to see this market ranked against the rest.

Grid conditions now

Structural baseline, June 2026Open the live map for Austria →
Demand
6,500 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wholesale price
62/MWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Carbon intensity
85 g/kWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Low-carbon share
87%
Structural baseline, June 2026
The same market, read four ways

Austria is a moderate market to sell power into

Grade B (Moderate)
Offtake score 60/100
Demand 33, build feasibility 58, combined into the score. For a seller: where buyers already pay, how tight supply is, and how feasible new build is here.
See it on the Offtake Grade →

Austria: some room at system level, light demand pressure

Some room 68/100
System-level room, not local capacity
Local capacity: not assessed. We have found no operator publication of area or substation capacity for this market, so whether the bus serving a candidate site can take the load is an open question. Absence of a finding here is not evidence that capacity exists.
Two reads for a grid planner: how much room the system as a whole looks to have (Some room), and how hard demand is already pushing (Light). The first is a market-level estimate from connection ease, forward adequacy and reliability margin. It is not local deliverability. Capacity at a specific substation is not assessed for this market, and a market can look roomy while the bus you want has nothing available. Confirm local capacity with the utility before relying on it.
Demand growth
Slow load growth in our read, the pull on your system.
Load Pipeline Reality → Where demand is hungry → Connection friction →

Austria is not yet covered for a held exposure

SITING SCREEN ONLY
Austria is not yet monitored. Full monitoring needs reviewed reliability, connection-queue data and a compiled cost band; this market has only a subset, so we show it as a siting screen. We deepen coverage market by market.
See the markets we cover →

The five pillars behind the tier

A
A
C
M
C
The pillar signature: Access, Availability, Cost, Momentum, Carbon, taller is stronger. The same shape repeats across every market so peers compare at a glance.
Access30%58

Workable access.

Availability25%58

Moderate availability (hydro-led).

Cost25%64

Mid-range cost.

Momentum15%35

Limited momentum.

Carbon5%88

Clean (~90 g), hydro.

Default weights, which lean toward cost and access rather than carbon: Access 30 · Availability 25 · Cost 25 · Momentum 15 · Carbon 5. Momentum reflects the data-center build already underway, not just stated intentions.
Seller view: Read these the other way: momentum is your customer pipeline, cost is your revenue ceiling, and access is how hard it is to build and sell here, not only to connect.

Reliability overlay

Reliability reviewed: no material concerns were found, so the rating is unchanged. Reliability is reported as five separate layers, never as one combined label, because they answer different questions and a strong answer on one does not cover a gap in another: what has actually failed on the bulk system, what a forward assessment expects of firm supply, how the local network performs, what your contract actually promises, and what your site is designed to ride through. Any one of them can cap the tier.

Historical bulk-system performance: No reliability flags found

Modelled read: hydro-rich, well interconnected and reliable.

modelled

Historical utility-territory delivery performance: No reliability flags found

Average customer interruption (SAIDI) of 37.72 minutes per year in 2022, excluding major event days as filed.

measured · E-Control (via CEER)

A blend, not your supplier. This figure covers several distribution operators, so it describes an average customer rather than the operator that would serve your site. It is good for comparing markets and watching them move, it tops out at Comparable (M2), and it cannot carry a Project Case. E-Control national average across Austrian DSOs. It is a territory-wide history and is silent on: performance at a specific substation or feeder; transmission-level service, which is a different product from distribution service; the industrial or large-load customer class specifically; N-1 or other redundancy architecture at the supplying substation; contractual curtailment (being told to cut output or consumption) rights the utility may hold over the load; power quality and momentary interruptions, which this metric excludes by construction; on-site UPS, storage or generation; forward adequacy: it is a record of what happened, not a forecast.

Forward resource adequacy (assessed): No adequacy flags

Contractual service terms: not assessed

We have not compiled what firm service actually promises here: whether it is firm, non-firm or interruptible, the conditions under which you can be curtailed, the redundancy required of you, and the transfer time behind any N-1 commitment. Treat this as an open diligence item, not as an indication that service is firm.

Ask the utility for the tariff or service agreement terms before relying on firm supply.

Designed site resilience: not applicable at market level

Utility feeds, UPS, storage, on-site generation, islanding, black start and the residual energy you still expect to lose are properties of a specific site design, not of a market. This layer only exists once there is a site, and we never assert it for you.

Confidence: Low. Each input is labelled as measured, modelled, or drawn from a specific event, and is framed as a risk to a prospective large new load, not as a verdict on any utility or grid operator. Forward adequacy is an assessment of what is expected, not a measurement of what has happened; it is a forecast and is labelled as one.
Seller view: Tight forward capacity (firm supply promised for future years) is scarcity that firm generation and storage get paid for; an adequacy flag is a demand signal for new supply, not only a risk to a load.

Supply relief outlook

Will the power crunch ease before your load energizes? This nets the demand racing for capacity against the new supply likely to arrive and the old supply leaving. A cross-side read, using the same data a seller sees the other way.
Balanced
Demand pressure
Slow load growth competing for the same capacity.

What this means: Supply and demand look broadly balanced; the outcome hinges on the drivers below.

Reliability metrics

Delivery reliability (measured)

The average customer loses about 37.72 minutes of power per year (2022). This is the standard regulator outage measure (SAIDI); lower means a more reliable grid.

Averaged across several territories. No single customer experiences this figure. The per-territory table in the reliability overlay above gives each operator’s own filed record, which is what a site-specific read needs.

Source: E-Control (via CEER)

Hard, cited measures behind the reliability overlay above: the regulator outage series (SAIDI, measured, published with a lag) and the forward resource-adequacy assessment (a measured forecast). Framed as risk to a prospective large new load, not a verdict on any utility.

Data provenance and freshness

What we hold for this market, field by field. Each tier below is assigned from the evidence actually held for that field, with provenance. A low tier means we looked and it is thin; it is not a verdict on the market.
cost: not_assessedconnection: not_assessedreliability: M2carbon: M2regulatory: not_assessedlocal capacity: not_assessed
Against a Standardized Project Case, these fields are not answered here at all: cost, connection. Absence of a finding is not evidence of low risk, and it is a different statement from a low tier.
Read against other uses: Discovery and monitoring: insufficient · Market comparison: insufficient · Project Case with a carbon requirement: insufficient · Conditional site diligence: insufficient.
Depth is not a rating strength, a confidence score or a feasibility conclusion. An aggregate is only ever shown for a named use case, and equals the lowest tier across that use case's required fields. Definitions v1.0. See the full coverage matrix.
How solid the data behind this rating is, on two separate axes plus recency. Source reliability is how measured the numbers are, as opposed to triangulated or modelled. Coverage is how many of the decision-relevant data dimensions (reliability, connection, and cost) are compiled for this market. The two are kept apart because they answer different questions: a market can have strong sources on the little that is covered, or broad coverage that still leans on models. Neither grades the rating itself. The rating is a cited opinion, graded separately and falsifiably by the public track record and baseline measurement plan.

Source reliability

High

1 of 1 data layers measured

Coverage

Partial

1 of 3 dimensions: reliability, connection, cost

Last reviewed

June 2026

per-layer vintages below

LayerMethodVintageFreshnessSource
PGIQ Rating opinionopinionJune 2026CurrentPGIQ methodology
Reliabilitymeasured2022AgingE-Control (via CEER)

Freshness reflects each layer's refresh cadence: reliability annual to three-yearly, capacity-auction and queue yearly, tariffs every year or two. The full cross-market freshness dashboard is at /data-quality.

What this market can and cannot answer yet

No market-level read closes a project case on its own, and saying only that would waste the evidence we do hold. Below is what is established, what is open, and what to do next.

What is established

  • Historical utility-territory delivery performance 37.72 minutes per year (2022)
  • Historical bulk-system performance (modelled)

What is open

  • Forward resource adequacy (assessed)
  • Contractual service terms (would change the answer)
  • Designed site resilience
  • cost evidence (would change the answer)
  • connection evidence (would change the answer)
  • regulatory evidence
  • local_capacity evidence

How service and connection are organized

Not compiled for this market. Identify the serving operator before relying on any figure here, because a market-level read is an average over territories.
How the connection process is organised: the applicable service and connection entities depend on the candidate location and the power pathway. We have not compiled the structure for this market; that is a gap in our wayfinding, not a fact about the market.

Credible ranges today

  • No cost or schedule range is compiled for this market.

What could disqualify this market

  • Scale and ecosystem.
  • Cost.

Outlook drivers

↑ Upgrade triggers

  • Hydro-backed clean supply attracts firm tenants.
  • Regional interconnection helps.

↓ Downgrade triggers

  • Mid cost and scale.
  • Limited ecosystem.

Key risks

Peer comparison

Trades like
Switzerland (clean, small, mid-cost)
Ahead
on carbon
Behind
on scale
🔔 Get alerts for Austria
Be notified the moment this market's PGIQ Rating, outlook, or a material development changes. Free while we validate demand.

Rating history

June 2026
New ratingNew rating: Tier 3 Workable assigned.
🔒 The full time series behind Austria, how its score, recurring cost, and interconnection queue (the line to connect to the grid) have moved month by month, is part of the Analyst Desk. The rating actions above are always free.
Every rating action is dated and explained, and the log is only ever added to, never edited. Reviews happen on a regular schedule and whenever a significant event occurs. "Affirmed" means we reviewed a development and the tier held; "Under review" means a significant item is being assessed and the rating could change.

Score history

How Austria's reliability-adjusted score and tier have moved, month by month. Part of your Analyst Desk.

Immutable monthly snapshots of the reliability-adjusted score, tier, outlook and recurring cost, oldest first. Dated when taken and never back-filled, so the series only compounds forward. Part of the Analyst Desk →

Grid conditions now

Structural baseline, June 2026Open the live map for Austria →
Demand
6,500 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
System demand across the market.
Wholesale price
62/MWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Energy only, and always modelled: no live price feed exists in any market. This is not the delivered cost.
Carbon intensity
85 g/kWh
Structural baseline, June 2026
Derived from the fuel mix. Never directly measured.
Low-carbon share
87%
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, biofuel and nuclear. The emissions-free share of generation, which is the read for a carbon target.
Renewable share
87%
Structural baseline, June 2026
Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and biofuel. Excludes nuclear, which is low-carbon but not renewable, so this is the read for an RE100-style renewable procurement mandate.
Installed capacity
15,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Firm capacity
not held
Structural baseline, June 2026
De-rated, system-level.
System firm margin
not held
Structural baseline, June 2026
Market-wide estimate of de-rated firm capacity less peak demand. This is a directional screen, not local connectable capacity at any point of delivery.
Imports
3,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Modelled. No live interchange feed exists.
Exports
2,000 MW
Structural baseline, June 2026
Modelled. No live interchange feed exists.

Every field above carries its own source and freshness. Price, imports and exports are modelled in every market because no feed supplies them. Carbon intensity is derived from the fuel mix.

What next for Austria?

Add to shortlistTrack it alongside your other candidates.Compare with peersRank markets against each other on your own weights.Open the Analyst DeskEvery market side by side, with history and alerts.Retrieve it through the APIThe same read as JSON, with provenance on every field.

Done with Austria? Browse every market or see conditions across every region.

How does Austria compare to every other market?

This page is our full read on Austria alone, and it is free. To decide where a large load should actually go, you need every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the history and alerts when your shortlist moves. That is the Analyst Desk.

With your Analyst Desk, compare Austria against every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the full history and shortlist alerts.

+ Add to your shortlist Recurring cost, ranked Connection friction, ranked Get the Analyst Desk →
Cite as: PowerGridIQ Rating, "Austria" (Tier 3 Workable), as of June 2026. A proprietary, directional screen for siting a large electricity load; not a connection guarantee, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice. Sources and methodology at powergridiq.com/methodology. © PowerGridIQ.