The case started from a technical conflict in which a renewable developer saw their access and connection requests denied to a node on the transmission grid due to alleged exhausted capacity. The differentiating element was that the project incorporated an advanced solution, synchronous condensers, precisely to improve stability and increase the effective evacuation capacity of the node, allowing the energy produced to be discharged without physically modifying the existing infrastructure.

The key problem was not only technical, but also one of operational coherence: the system operator considered that the “additional” capacity attributable to these condensers was insufficient and, in practice, prioritized the evacuation of facilities that already had access granted, leaving the developer who provided the solution unable to benefit from it. The core of the debate focused on who would really benefit from the technical investment in synchronous compensation and whether the applied criterion made sense when the installation of these devices depended on the project being accepted.

martinsdelima approached the assignment with a clear purpose: to explain the operation of synchronous condensers independently and rigorously, to analyze their effect on the access capacity of the node and to evaluate the beneficiaries of the capacity increase derived from their incorporation. In order for the report to be useful in a contentious-technical environment, it was built on a proven documentary basis: information provided in the file, own research and public sources, with a strictly technical and objectifiable approach.

Our methodology translates the report from a complex topic to a comprehensible framework without losing precision: difference between types of generation modules (synchronous/asynchronous), concepts of active and reactive energy, and criteria with which the access capacity of a node is determined (including the short-circuit/WSCR criterion when compensators are incorporated). From there, it details what a synchronous condenser is and how it works, highlighting its role in compensating reactive energy and stabilizing voltage, with the practical effect of optimizing the use of the grid and allowing more “useful” active energy to be transported in the same infrastructure.

With that base, martinsdelima carried out the critical analysis of the criterion applied in the denial: the report states that it is not logical to compute as “capacity available to third parties” an improvement that only exists if the project that contributes it is executed, and that the capacity increase can only be added when the request that makes the installation of the compensators viable is accepted. In addition, a technical approximation aligned with the operator’s approach is incorporated (including the reference to its formulation to estimate additional capacity), but applied with technical consistency to support defensible conclusions.

The final result was a report especially “marketable” as an experience for three reasons:

(1) provides technical pedagogy with expert level,

(2) connects electrical engineering with the real criterion of access to the grid, and

(3) converts a confusing debate into clear conclusions on impact, viability and beneficiaries, reinforcing the position of the project from a solid technical argument and understandable for third parties