Q&A: Schneider Electric on modern energy threats, digitalisation and grid resilience
Shubbhronil Roy, VP of strategy and transformation at Schneider Electric, speaks to Power Technology about filling the gaps in the digital transformation for better grid resilience. From stronger information technology (IT) and operational technology (OT) alignment to incremental implementation strategies, Roy outlines a pragmatic yet hopeful vision for a more resilient, digital future.
Shubbhronil Roy (SR): The first is the energy transition and push for decarbonisation. There is significant acceleration in renewable energy adoption across the world. In Europe, for instance, over 40% of electricity generation is expected to be renewable by 2030.
However, current grids cannot handle this new renewable load. Around 1,700GW of renewables in Europe and 3,000GW globally are ready but cannot be connected to the grid because the infrastructure isn't ready, leading to congestion and potential blackouts. So, while renewables increase, the grid must be upgraded accordingly.
The second is ageing – both infrastructure and workforce. Most grids in the US and Europe were built in the mid-1900s. Over 50% of transformers and substations will reach end-of-life by 2030. Similarly, more than 50% of the current workforce is expected to retire by then.
The third is cybersecurity. Cyber threats have more than doubled in the last two years, especially with escalating geopolitical conflicts like the situation in Ukraine, and grids are being targeted. Disrupting the grid can plunge entire cities into darkness, making this a critical issue.
The fourth involves major weather events – tornadoes, wildfires, storms and so on – that are becoming more common as the climate crisis progresses. Notably, up to 83% of recent blackouts were attributed to such events, causing not only human loss but significant financial damage.
Lastly, we see massive future power demand, driven by AI and data centres, population growth, industrialisation and electrification. Overall, we expect 30% more demand in the next 20 years than what we've experienced over the past 50.
These outlined challenges define the grid's current and future landscape.
SR: I don't believe there will be one clear winner among the 'three Ds.' It's about finding the right formula for the right region and people.
Globally, we observe variations in renewable adoption, cybersecurity, regulation and utility structures. For instance, the US has vertically integrated utilities – one entity handles generation, transmission and distribution (T&D) and retail. In Europe, it's unbundled – different entities manage each part. Energy is a localized business in this sense. So, decentralisation and decarbonisation mean different things in different contexts.
Since grids are regulated, not purely profit-driven, politics and public service are also central [to what is prioritised] in the region. In the US, for example, decarbonisation is a politically sensitive term, but resiliency and affordability are universal priorities, hence becoming the drivers behind the three Ds.
SR: If I had to name one major blind spot in digitalising the grid, it would be data integration. Data is often called the new energy currency. But within utilities, we see massive silos – between departments, and even within IT and OT teams. Each system uses different data models, so there is no single source of truth.
During proof-of-concepts, we've found that operators often question the data itself instead of discussing what actions to take. There's frequent disagreement: 'this data isn't correct' or 'that wasn't logged properly'. This undermines the ability to prescribe solutions based on data.
Even mature utilities struggle to build network models. It can take months because the silo problem runs deep. Utilities are starting to realise the importance of a unified data model, but the road ahead involves connecting systems, breaking down silos and ensuring consistent data across the enterprise.
SR: Historically, IT and OT have operated in silos. For example, IT might manage the customer department and billing, while the GIS (geographic information systems) mapping substations and household connectivity may sit in OT or another IT team. These are different systems, built at different times, and they rarely speak the same language.
Despite billions spent on integration over the last decade, it's still often a patchwork. Integration isn't holistic – it connects system A to system B but doesn't achieve full alignment. Instead, we get duplication, mismatched data and sometimes poor outcomes.
As new systems are added – like demand response (DR) systems – questions arise again: should we build a new database or integrate with existing ones?
Utilities are massive, with sprawling infrastructure – generation, transmission, medium and low voltage distribution, industrial and customer service. Within each alone, there are multiple layers. Aligning everything is a monumental task.
Also, regulations differ across departments. OT within a utility may operate under entirely different rules to IT. It's a legacy of how the industry evolved – regulated, conservative and fragmented.
SR: For the energy transition and grid digitalisation to progress, IT and OT must converge. We're already seeing this shift, some by OT and others by IT, but these lines are blurring. Collaboration is key.
Now, OT benefits immensely from AI, enabled by IT capabilities. For AI to work effectively, IT and OT need a shared foundation. Utilities must establish frameworks where these departments collaborate fully. Again, it's not about one side winning – it's about joint effort, adapted to each utility's maturity.
The cloud also helps. Given the critical nature of the grid and cybersecurity risks, a hybrid cloud model makes the most sense. Less critical applications can run in the cloud; mission-critical ones can stay on-premises. This combines agility and security. Our 'One Digital Grid' platform embodies this principle – open, modular, secure and incremental.
SR: Substations are crucial. They move electricity through T&D networks into our homes. High voltage is reduced through substations to lower voltage suitable for residential use.
Digitisation of substations is increasing rapidly. We're now pushing intelligence to the edge, where the data originates. Previously, decisions were centralised, but now, with localised intelligence, actions can be taken more quickly, right at the substation, without relying on the control centre.
Think of it like the human body: if your limbs could react independently without waiting for signals from the brain, response times would be faster. Substation reaction delays can range from milliseconds to minutes when not everything is digitised and some data is still collected manually. Edge intelligence reduces that lag.
Another emerging concept is the virtual substation, where hardware functions are increasingly replaced by software. With AI and modern technology, intelligence itself will become a commodity.
SR: Definitely. One major lesson came from COVID, during which companies with robust digital infrastructure and strong business continuity plans thrived, while others struggled. That period highlighted how essential digitalisation is for resilience.
Post-COVID, we saw a significant uptick in digital transformation, not just in energy but across industries. Companies across all sectors realised they needed to be prepared for disruptions.
Another lesson from sectors such as food and beverage, FMCG and pharmaceuticals is the shift away from large 'Big Bang' digitalisation projects. Instead, it should be about stepwise implementation and use case-driven development.
Our company has even banned the word 'pilot' internally. It's now about real testing, with real customer data, for real outcomes. This approach has allowed us to help our partners; for example, we helped Nestlé digitise hundreds of plants with impressive efficiency and continuity gains.
SR: Resilience is no longer optional. Take the Iberian Peninsula incident, for example: it took 13 hours to restore the system, despite good infrastructure and protocols. This showed current systems aren't adequate for future demands. Grids were originally built for one-way energy flow. Now, with EVs, distributed renewables and bi-directional flow, the pressure is much greater.
Digitalisation can increase resiliency by allowing us to anticipate and act before issues occur. The need for grid visibility and predictability is only increasing – without these upgrades, the energy transition simply can't happen.
But technology alone isn't enough. People, partnerships and regulation are equally important. The future of grid digitalisation depends on all these aspects coming together, so this would be the next frontier.
The grid is essential to sustainability, electrification, industrialisation and climate action. We must ensure that the grid becomes an enabler, not an obstacle, of the transition.
Thankfully, awareness is growing, and I believe the next 10 years will be transformative for grid innovation. Whether it will be enough to meet net-zero goals – I can't say. But we're moving in the right direction.
"Q&A: Schneider Electric on modern energy threats, digitalisation and grid resilience " was originally created and published by Power Technology, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Citigroup (NYSE:C) Enhances Global Payment Solutions And Redeems €2 Billion Notes
Citigroup recently announced a partnership with Papaya Global to enhance workforce payment solutions and the redemption of €1.75 billion in notes as part of its capital management strategy. During the last quarter, the company's stock price increased by 20%, aligning with market trends. This rise coincided with its inclusion in several Russell indices, highlighting investor confidence. Further bolstered by strong Q1 earnings and significant leadership changes, these developments likely complemented general market gains amidst ongoing U.S. economic and policy-related updates, reflecting the company's commitment to financial efficiency and global operational expansion. Buy, Hold or Sell Citigroup? View our complete analysis and fair value estimate and you decide. Uncover the next big thing with financially sound penny stocks that balance risk and reward. The recent developments announced by Citigroup, particularly the partnership with Papaya Global and the redemption of €1.75 billion in notes, have the potential to significantly influence the company's narrative. These initiatives align with its focus on enhancing operational efficiency and global expansion. By integrating advanced payment solutions, Citigroup's bid to boost client experience may also support noninterest revenue growth, a key element in its strategic wealth management focus. This could provide a temporary boost to revenue and earnings forecasts as the company leverages technological advancements and efficient capital management to improve profitability. Over a longer-term period of three years, Citigroup's total shareholder return reached 108.25%, indicating a very large appreciation when including both share price increases and dividends. This growth is noteworthy compared to its recent one-year performance, where Citigroup outperformed the US Banks industry, which returned 27.4% over the past year. This context highlights Citigroup's enduring strength and potential in navigating volatile market conditions. The stock's recent price movement, which included a 20% increase during the last quarter, positions it close to the consensus analyst price target of US$87.38, with only a minor discount remaining. This indicates that the market may be pricing in some expectations of revenue and earnings improvements but could still offer upside if the company achieves its ambitious AI and wealth management goals. However, the macroeconomic and regulatory uncertainties remain potential challenges to sustaining such growth trajectories. Gain insights into Citigroup's future direction by reviewing our growth report. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include NYSE:C. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
OpenAI says it has not partnered with Robinhood for stock tokens
(Reuters) -OpenAI said on Wednesday it has not partnered with Robinhood for the stock tokens the trading platform unveiled earlier this week. Robinhood said on Monday it had launched tokens that would allow its customers in the European Union to get exposure to OpenAI and SpaceX. "We did not partner with Robinhood, were not involved in this, and do not endorse it," OpenAI said. The issue highlights a key challenge with tokens linked to private company stock. Privately held startups often have a so-called "right of first refusal", which gives them the first opportunity to buy back their shares before the owner can sell them to an outside party. Robinhood and SpaceX did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
ECB president Christine Lagarde says stablecoins will lead to the ‘privatization of money,' undermining central bankers ‘public good'
European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde spoke out against stablecoins at a recent conference in Portugal, saying they risk 'weakening the sovereignty' of countries that leave them unchecked. The rise of stablecoins risks eroding the role of central banks in governing their nation's monetary policy, European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde said. Stablecoins, which are digital assets usually pegged to fiat currencies, have grown in popularity. Their rise as relatively stable assets in the world of cryptocurrency have made them appealing both to investors and issuers. As a result, central banks across the world have been forced to contend with how to regulate stablecoins. On Tuesday during a gathering of central bankers in Sintra, Portugal, Lagarde said stablecoins shouldn't be treated as money. 'I think that we are falling prey to some confusion between money, means of payment, and payment infrastructure, and that is accelerated or emphasized as a result of the technology that is being used, and some technologies in particular,' Lagarde said during a panel with four other central bankers. One of the questions regulators and central banks contend with when it comes to stablecoins is that they are often issued by private companies, not the public sector. Among the most well-known stablecoin issuers are companies like Circle and Tether, which have tokens linked to the U.S. dollar, the euro, and the Chinese yuan. 'I regard money as a public good, and ourselves as the public servants in charge of securing and protecting that public good,' Lagarde said. 'My fear is that that blurring of the lines I mentioned earlier is likely to lead to a privatization of money. I don't think that this is the purpose for which we've been appointed to do the job that we have, nor is it good for this public good that is money.' One of the major risks central banks see in stablecoins is that if enough investors use them it will reduce the amount of money in traditional banks, therefore limiting the effectiveness of monetary policy on the economy. 'I think it risks undermining our capacity to conduct monetary policy,' Lagarde said. 'I think it risks weakening the sovereignty of those countries, which inadvertently become subject to the use of that means of payment, payment infrastructure, slash alleged money.' Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey said stablecoins 'purport to be money' which makes them different from other digital assets like Bitcoin. It also means they should be subject to more stringent regulations, he said. 'They purport to have the medium of exchange function of money, and therefore they do have to meet the test of money…which is really all about them being assured to hold their nominal value,' Bailey said. To contend with stablecoins central banks have been working with lawmakers to draft new legislation for the assets. In the U.S. the Senate passed the GENIUS Act last month, which provided the first regulatory framework for stablecoins. The law was considered a watershed moment for the crypto industry, as it essentially paved the way for government-sanctioned, privately issued digital currencies pegged to the U.S. dollar. In South Korea investors had flocked to dollar-backed stablecoins to such a degree that the Bank of Korea had to loosen regulations on foreign exchange markets to attract investors to the country as capital fled elsewhere. Meanwhile Lagarde has pushed the European Parliament to move faster on introducing laws overseeing a digital euro, which would help counter the influence of stablecoins. Other central bankers on the panel with Lagarde welcomed the push to regulate stablecoins. Bank of Korea governor Rhee Chang-yong said without proper oversight stablecoins could undermine South Korea's regulations governing capital flows. Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell said regulations were needed since stablecoins were becoming a fixture in the financial world. 'If we're going to have stablecoins—and apparently we are—we need to have a federal and state level regulatory framework, which I think we're making progress towards having,' he said. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data