India’s renewable transition caught between stranded power and institutional Inertia

India’s renewable energy sector is in the midst of an extraordinary build-out. Capacity targets are being met, investments are flowing in, and the country has positioned itself as a global clean-energy leader. But beneath these headline achievements lies a troubling operational reality. Take the example of Rajasthan, where more than 4,000 MW of fully commissioned renewable capacity is unable to evacuate power during peak hours, due to grid congestion.

India’s renewable energy sector is in the midst of an extraordinary build-out. Capacity targets are being met, investments are flowing in, and the country has positioned itself as a global clean-energy leader. But beneath these headline achievements lies a troubling operational reality. Take the example of Rajasthan, where more than 4,000 MW of fully commissioned renewable capacity is unable to evacuate power during peak hours, due to grid congestion.

This issue was highlighted as a priority risk for India’s energy transition at the Bharat Climate Forum (BCF) 2026, where policymakers, system planners, developers, and financiers converged on the view that transmission congestion and operational conservatism, rather than generation shortfalls, are now among the most binding constraints to scale.

Rajasthan has approximately 23 GW of commissioned renewable capacity, but the available evacuation margin stands at about 18.9 GW. If curtailment was distributed proportionately, peak-hour losses would be about 15% – operationally inconvenient, but financially manageable. Instead, the burden falls entirely on projects with Temporary General Network Access (T-GNA), which face 100% shutdowns during peak solar hours, while projects with Permanent GNA continue uninterrupted. This binary approach concentrates financial distress on generators who commissioned projects in good faith, met their timelines, and secured all necessary clearances.

More troubling is the persistent under-utilisation of transmission infrastructure itself. High-capacity 765 kV double-circuit corridors, each designed to evacuate around 6,000 MW and costing ₹4,000–₹5,000 crore, are often operated at 600–1,000 MW. Utilisation levels below 20% are becoming routine. Therefore, several commissioned projects remain connected but unable to inject power due to gaps in associated transmission readiness.

This brings us to an important question about institutional responsibility. Should the national grid operator’s mandate be limited solely to maintaining stability, or does it extend to maximising the utilisation of publicly-funded assets within safe operating parameters?

These transmission investments, now exceeding ₹1 lakh crore nationally, are recovered through consumer tariffs. When high-capacity corridors operate far below their design capacity, customers pay for infrastructure that delivers only a fraction of its intended value. At the same time, renewable generation remains stranded, compounding inefficiencies across the power system.