Orsted has teamed up with Mission Clean Energy to develop 1 GW of standalone battery storage in the US Midwest. It is Orsted's first standalone battery partnership anywhere in the world. Yet Orsted is not buying the projects, and it is not leading their development. Its money is going into something more specific, and much earlier in a project's life.
Key takeaways
- Orsted announced on 8 August 2024 a partnership with Mission Clean Energy to develop a 1 GW battery energy storage portfolio in the US, with no deal value disclosed.
- The Orsted and Mission Clean Energy partnership covers four standalone battery storage projects across the Midwest, with interconnection applications totalling 1 GW submitted in MISO Central and North.
- Under the partnership, Orsted will use its capital to secure and maintain interconnection queue positions for the projects, which are owned by Mission Clean Energy, while Mission continues to lead development.
- Orsted holds an option to acquire an ownership stake in the Mission Clean Energy battery projects as they mature.
- The Mission Clean Energy deal is Orsted's first standalone battery storage partnership in the US and globally, building on its existing portfolio of co-located solar and storage projects.
What is Orsted actually paying for?
A place in line. Before a power project can connect to the grid, it must enter the grid operator's interconnection queue, the list of projects waiting for studies and approval to connect. In MISO, the grid operator covering much of the US Midwest, holding a place in that queue costs money long before a project earns any.
That is where Orsted comes in. Leap logs the agreement as a joint venture with no buyer named; no stake has changed hands. The partnership terms are specific: Orsted's capital secures and maintains queue positions for projects Mission owns, and Mission keeps leading the development work. Orsted is funding the most capital-hungry, least certain part of early development without taking over the projects themselves.
For Mission, a developer, this solves a familiar problem. Queue positions for four batteries averaging 250 MW each tie up cash for years. A partner with a large balance sheet keeps those positions alive while the developer does the permitting, land and design work that turns an application into a buildable project.
Why take an option instead of a stake?
Because the projects are a long way from being worth owning. Leap classifies the portfolio as early-stage, and the only concrete milestone in the record is that interconnection applications have been filed. Many projects that enter a queue never reach construction. Buying equity at that point would mean paying for a pipeline whose survival rate nobody yet knows.
An option reverses that risk. Orsted can acquire an ownership stake as the projects mature, which means it can wait until studies clarify grid costs and timelines before deciding how much it wants. If a project stalls, Orsted has funded queue costs rather than bought an asset that may never be built.
The structure also fits the moment Orsted was in. In March 2024 it agreed to sell 80 percent of a 956 MW operating US wind portfolio to Stonepeak for $300 million, a deal in which tax equity shrank the headline price. A company recycling capital out of operating assets has reason to prefer small, staged commitments in new technologies over large upfront purchases.
Why standalone batteries, and why MISO?
Standalone storage lets Orsted offer utilities something its existing US portfolio does not. Until this deal its storage sat alongside solar. Co-located storage is designed around a solar plant's output; a standalone battery is designed around the grid's needs, charging and discharging wherever prices or reliability services pay best.
Leap records the stated rationale plainly: the partnership complements Orsted's existing development efforts and broadens the range of technologies it can offer utilities and other customers. Orsted's solar business in the US is built on large contracted plants such as Mockingbird in Texas, whose output is split among several corporate buyers. Standalone batteries in the Midwest give it a product for a different set of customers in a different market.
Enerdatics records 21 US battery storage M&A transactions announced in 2024. Seventeen were asset deals, two were corporate deals and only two were joint ventures or partnerships: the Orsted and Mission agreement and a CleanCapital and Available Power partnership for distributed storage in New York. Only two of the 21 carry a MISO tag: this partnership and Pedal Steel Solar's purchase in March 2024 of two standalone storage projects of 800 MWh each from Valor Infrastructure Partners. Only two of the 17 asset deals disclose a value. On those numbers, a 1 GW MISO battery partnership was unusual on three counts at once.
What does the deal signal for US battery storage?
It signals that large developers are willing to pay to get into storage early, but not to commit fully before the grid has had its say. Funding queue positions with an option to buy later is a way to buy exposure to a pipeline at the cost of keeping it alive, not at the cost of owning it.
It also signals where the pressure in US storage development sits. The binding constraint for a battery developer is often not technology or customers but grid access, and the expense of holding a queue position until studies conclude. A partner that takes on that expense is effectively buying optionality on the grid connection itself.
And it points to MISO as a market that, at least in 2024, saw little storage deal flow in Leap relative to its size. If Orsted exercises its option on some or all of the four projects, that would mark a step from paying for queue positions to owning standalone batteries in a market where few buyers had yet committed.
Frequently asked questions
What did Orsted agree with Mission Clean Energy? Orsted announced on 8 August 2024 a partnership with Mission Clean Energy to develop four standalone battery storage projects totalling 1 GW in the US Midwest, with interconnection applications filed in MISO Central and North.
Does Orsted own the Mission Clean Energy battery projects? No. The projects are owned by Mission Clean Energy, which leads their development. Orsted funds their interconnection queue positions and has an option to acquire an ownership stake as the projects mature.
Is this Orsted's first battery storage deal? It is Orsted's first standalone battery storage partnership in the US and globally. Its earlier storage projects are co-located with solar.
Ready to get deal-ready answers in seconds? Try Enerdatics Leap AI and access verified intelligence across M&A, financings, PPAs, projects, and energy market developments through natural language.
