Natural resources companies are at the center of one of the most profound transitions in industrial history: the global shift to electrification.
Electrification isn’t just a technology shift, it’s a value chain transformation that stretches from project design, to build and operation stages of electrified projects, delivering opportunities to improve efficiency, reduce emissions, and unlock new economic potential. Explore our interactive electrification value chain tool to pinpoint risk exposures and actionable solutions. The future is electric. We'll help you power through it.
Let's go
The future is electric.
We'll help you power through it.
Project bankability
Power up project financing Capital chases confidence and clarity. Only the best risk-managed electrification projects rise to the top of the investment stack. Click the + icons to find out how you can tackle key project bankability risks.
Availability & cost of finance
Stakeholder management
Lender requirements
Inflation
A full external assessment of investment structures highlights what’s needed to secure full equity and debt support. Assessing scenarios such as offtaker creditworthiness can help to derisk the project, and supplementary solutions such as performance guarantees and parametric insurance can support project performance and debt servicing, making projects more bankable.
Availability and cost of finance
Against a backdrop of climate volatility, geopolitical headwinds, technology challenges and supply chain failures, lenders’ commercial, technical and credit committees are increasingly scrutinizing the quality of their investments. Projects and companies with robust risk management and well-considered insurance strategies will be at the top of the pile.
Solution
Challenge
Lenders will impose requirements as part of the loan agreement. As part of Common Terms Agreement (CTA) negotiations, brokers should proactively engage with lenders to make sure the terms are aligned to both project owners' and lenders' expectations. In the event of refinancing, this exercise will need to be repeated. Consider:
Lenders require clear project economics, evidence of proven technology or financial backstops against non-performance, secure offtake or revenue agreements, grid‑connection certainty, strong permitting status, reliable supply‑chain plans, and credible risk mitigation measures. They also expect data-driven risk information, transparent governance, and alignment with sustainability standards to ensure bankability across natural resources electrification projects.
Effective stakeholder engagement can be the difference between projects that secure financing and those that stall. Many contracts require reviews and alignment throughout the project lifecycle to ensure commitments are realistic and achievable. The value of an objective eye with experience across multiple projects, will be a major differentiator. Consider:
Bankability depends on reducing uncertainty, but electrification projects often involve multiple stakeholders whose priorities do not perfectly align. Stakeholders have different incentives, mandates and timelines. Misalignment, such as unclear policy direction, competing local interests, or conflicting commercial expectations, creates uncertainty that reduces investor confidence.
Valuations are an important consideration for asset owners to ensure that when in an inflationary environment, declared insurance values and limits are appropriate and sufficient. This prevents underinsurance and protects balance sheets. For lenders, ensuring accurate insurable values protects collateral value and reinstatement costs of their investment, reducing credit exposure. Consider:
Inflation is squeezing margins, forcing companies to weave cost cutting into long-term electrification investments and these two forces can pull in opposite directions. Rising operating, equipment, construction and material costs, alongside supply chain bottlenecks, make grid upgrades and new electrified infrastructure more expensive, slowing deployment timelines. This could mean that contracts are breached, bringing penalties that can extend beyond immediate financial burdens.
Back
Sector specialist advisory and broking
Credit insurance
Parametric solutions
Performance guarantees
Surety solutions
Calculating realistic loss scenarios
Assessing realistic replacement costs
Construction insurance
Supply and demand
Beat the bottlenecks Exploding demand and volatile supply chains threaten timelines and budgets for electrification projects. Click the + icons to find out how to take action.
M&A
Critical and long lead time equipment
Acquiring new tech
Disruption to supply chain
Contractor solvency
Dependencies in critical minerals
Logistics and port delays
Warranty and indemnity (W&I) / representations and warranties (R&W) insurance, tax insurance, environmental impairment liability, and title/land-use insurance all help to reduce deal risk, protect against legacy environmental issues, and unlock investment capital. Insurers can then help companies accelerate electrified, low‑carbon operating models and modernize infrastructure. Consider:
M&A can disrupt electrification by creating project delays, misaligned strategies and integration challenges. Acquirers may not have a compatible technology interface, causing strained capital allocation, complicated technology standardization, expanded risk exposure surface, and ultimately, delays in execution. For technologies seeking investment through M&A, transactions can introduce regulatory or stakeholder uncertainties, slowing progress on decarbonization.
Where new technologies are being used, data-driven risk engineering is key to articulating accurate risk information to insurers, helping them make informed decisions. In addition, performance insurance can provide a financial backstop if technology doesn't perform as planned, helping project owners service debt obligations and protect lenders' balance sheets. Consider:
With the demand for power ever increasing, innovative solutions including new and prototypical technologies are being acquired. But this comes with risk. All project stakeholders, including lenders and insurers, tend to rely on a technology's track record. When this isn't available, their risk exposures become more uncertain.
Forensic accounting helps to quantify daily business interruption losses from supply chain disruptions using financial metrics and interdependency analysis. These values feed into actuarial risk optimization studies, producing full risk distributions that inform insurance decisions, including limit adequacy and efficient pricing. Consider:
Supply chain disruptions can inflate costs and delay project timelines, slowing electrification progress. From scarcity of critical minerals, to transport bottlenecks, to war and geopolitical headwinds, to weather-related perils and to cyber attacks, supply chains are exposed to an ever-increasing network of risks. Heavy reliance on concentrated suppliers and fractured international supply can stall equipment availability and undermine deployment.
As the demand for power grows exponentially, so does the demand on contractors to build electrified projects. The financial demands, combined with the competitive environment in which contractors are transacting business, are leaving contractors with economics that don't stack up. Projects' reliance on contractors presents a key risk in the event that they are unable to complete the works as a result of insolvency.
Insurers will examine a contractor's track record. Credit coverage can be a valuable complementary solution to cover the contractual performance or credit risk of the contractor and equipment supplier. A risk intermediary is the link companies need to fully integrate insurers' requirements and owners’ expectations, particularly across different contractors. Consider:
Dependence on critical minerals creates supply‑chain volatility, price swings, geopolitical risk, long permitting timelines, and environmental/social scrutiny. These factors can delay projects, raise capital costs, and limit scalability of electrification technologies such as batteries, electric fleets, and renewable infrastructure.
By combining forensic accounting, actuarial optimization, and bespoke scenario modelling, sophisticated analytical tools help to identify risks and create a robust strategy. Insights are translated into likelihood- and severity-based loss forecasts, helping decision-makers ensure these critical mineral dependencies are fully reflected in loss estimates and optimal risk decisions are made. Consider:
Transport delays slow delivery of critical equipment, inflate project costs, disrupt construction sequencing, and extend outage or downtime windows. They also delay grid connection components, increase storage needs, and heighten supply chain risk, ultimately pushing back commissioning schedules and undermining electrification targets across natural resources companies’ operations.
Marine and cargo insurance solutions can help to protect high‑value equipment in transit, covering delays or damage to batteries and electrical components. Consider:
Long lead times delay project schedules, inflate costs, and increase exposure to market volatility. They constrain grid connection timelines, disrupt sequencing of site upgrades, and create procurement risk. Extended waits for transformers, switchgear, and HV equipment also limit flexibility, forcing operators to redesign scopes or rely on interim diesel solutions.
By identifying critical components early, assessing supply chain vulnerabilities, and guiding contingency plan decision-making, risk engineering supports scenario planning, supplier diversification, and proactive maintenance strategies. With data-driven insights, natural resources companies can better avoid bottlenecks and keep electrification projects on schedule while improving reliability and resilience. Consider:
M&A insurance
Calculating potential loss scenarios
Pinpointing supply chain exposures
Credit solutions
Marine cargo solutions
Liability
Power to the people Working in harmony with communities and ecosystems is at the core of making electrification projects a long-term success. Click the + icons to explore the key liability risks that need to be addressed.
Proximity to people and property
Third-party agreements
Third‑party liability influences almost every stage of clean energy and electrification projects—from design and permitting to financing and long‑term operations. It affects cost, timelines, risk allocation, stakeholder engagement, and regulatory compliance. Projects with crossings of third-party land, particularly pipelines or cables, will have contractual agreements requiring liability insurance to cover damage to third-party property.
Strong contractual frameworks, robust insurance, technical standards, and proactive community engagement are essential to minimize third-party liability risks. Careful review of the third-party agreements, as well as risk mitigation will be required. This policy will be an extension of the main third-party liability insurance policy. Consider:
Project owners are exposed to pollution claims as a result of construction and operational activities, as well as legacy pollution for brownfield sites. Construction- and operational-related pollution liabilities can result in regulatory fines, restoration requirements and third-party claims.
Polution
Environmental liability insurance can cover both the project owner and the contractor across incidents that happen both during construction and operations, and pre-existing pollution. Consider:
Decommissioning commitments
Decommissioning insurance policies and surety bonds offer a financial guarantee to the landowner or local authority, providing a capital-efficient solution for project owners. Consider:
Landowners or local governing bodies may require a decommisioning fund to allow for decommissioning at the end of life for a project. For SPVs, putting aside this capital on day one is not always capital efficient, so many project companies look to alternative means of funding.
Covering project owners for their legal liability to claims made by third parties against the project, liability cover is likely to be a contractual requirement and a requirement of lenders. A review can assess and quantify the appropriate limit, depending on location, technology, and proximity to third parties. Consider:
Project owners are exposed to potential claims caused by damage or injury to third parties or their property as a result of the project works and operations. In particular, communities and businesses neighboring project sites are at an increased risk.
Modelling potential costs
Project completion
Perform on day one From bottlenecks to breakdowns, delays can create major financial challenges. Click the + icons to find out which risks to make sure your electrified assets power up when they should.
Delay in start up
There are a multitude of reasons for a project's delay in start-up date, these can range from delays with shipping, supply chain disruptions, an incident on site and an issue with contractors. Major factors affecting potential disruption to a project's start date include the replacement lead times on major equipment such as transformers.
Diagnostic tools help to identify risks across the supply chain, and insurance solutions such as delay in start-up insurance covers the potential lost revenue to the project if the project's start date is delayed by an insurable event. Consider:
Change of contractor
Changing a contractor mid-way through a construction project can have profound implications on the project risk. Loss of technical continuity, schedule delays, cost escalation, quality control risks and contractual exposures are all areas of increased focus for insurers and lenders.
Proactive communication with key stakeholders and transparent information sharing with insurers is critical to ensure continuity of insurance protection and reducing risk of loss on site. Consider:
Strict/unachievable warranties
Contractual warranty requirements may not be met by the OEM/contractor provided warranties, leading to potential gaps in coverage if something goes wrong on site
Performance warranty insurance products offer additional cover to project owners, providing protection in relation to long-term warranty exposures. This ranges from technology failure to underperformance. These exposures can be identified at an early stage during the contract review. Consider:
Physical damage
Actuarial loss models quantify physical damage from natural catastrophe perils and man-made risks such as fire or explosion. Businesses' historical claims data, supplemented with industry-wide benchmarks, enable specialists to build tailored frequency and severity models. Combined, these produce bespoke property damage loss forecasts that support insurance decisions. Consider:
Electrified assets are typically high value, and physical damage caused by weather-related or natural catastrophe perils, terrorism and physical violence, ground movement, human factors such as accidental damage from machinery and other environmental degradation all have the potential to cause significant financial impacts. The cost is not only contained to physical damage, but the associated business interruption.
Cyber
Defend the digital heart of electrification Digital systems connect an electrified world. But they also attract attackers. Click the + icon to find out how cyber resilience keeps energy flowing.
Actuarial loss models quantify potential exposure from cyber related perils such as cyber-attacks, network outages and supply chain issues. Businesses' historical claims data, supplemented with industry wide benchmarks, enable specialists to build tailored frequency and severity models. Combined, these produce bespoke cyber loss quantification that can support data driven insurance decisions. Consider:
Vulnerabilities in connected grids, digital infrastructure, and IoT devices can enable system disruption, data breaches, or operational shutdowns. Supply‑chain weaknesses and legacy system integration raise exposure, while ransomware and remote‑access attacks can halt energy delivery. These threats increase project delays, regulatory non‑compliance, financial losses, and reputational damage.
Assessing your current cyber systems, modelling your realistic exposure to a cyber incident and cyber insurance
Geopolitical risk
Sail the regulatory headwinds Policy swings, political shocks, and shifting regulations can derail momentum. Click the + icons to find out how smart planning keeps your electrification ambitions moving, wherever you operate.
Government intervention in project
Government intervention can slow electrification by adding regulatory complexity, shifting policy priorities, creating permitting delays, and introducing inconsistent incentives. It can also raise project costs, extend timelines, and increase uncertainty for investors, affecting long‑term planning and deployment across the natural resources sector.
Assessing the likelihood of political instability in a planned project location is a fundamental first step, enabling specialists to advise which mitigating factors might be required. In the event a project or asset is seized by the local government, political risk insurance is a valuable solution. Consider:
Currency instability and FX
The 'on the ground' costs can change dramatically if the local currency is instable and this has a knock-on effect in the project's overall viability. If the PPA is in a different currency to the loan agreement, it can cause issues in the event that the local currency fluctuates and prevents the project from meeting it's fixed costs in international currencies.
Instability in currency and fluctuations in rate of exchange
Specialist risk advisors can assess the likelihood of political instability in a project location to prioritize risk management actions. Cover is available for currency fluctuation, catering for inability to either convert and/or transfer local currency profits or dividends, or service hard currency debt as a result of foreign government action. Consider:
Political violence and terroristm
There have been a number of events in recent years where the local population's attitude towards a project has changed, resulting in politically-led protests and malicious damage carried out on site. Even where a project hasn't been the area of attention, political instability in country has had an effect where public disruption has prevented access to certain sites.
Political violence and terrorism causes damage to the site and prevents access
Threat assessments calculate the likelihood of political instability in a project location and the likely impact via risk engineering. This provides data-driven insights on physical damage to a site caused by political violence, terrorism or sabotage, which can then be covered under a political risk or terrorism policy. Consider:
Critical national infrastructure
The concentration of power on fewer assets will increase their criticality for the production of electricity which could pose an attractive target for terrorist organization, criminals and protest groups.
Three key steps: quantify risk exposures through risk and analytics; assess and mitigate the risk through threat assessment and vulnerability surveys combined with recommendations to reduce the security risks; and transfer the financial risks to insurance markets. Consider:
Changes to travel profile
Adjustments in the supply chain to include electrified projects can change the profile and destinations of your travelling staff and expat footprint. This changing geographical footprint will create additional obligations to the workforce, with companies extending their duty of care considerations beyond typical or historic areas of support.
Ensure specialist support to expat and travelling staff. Support available before, during and after business travel or part of a country entry assessment for expat staff and their dependents. Consider:
Changes in regulations, tariffs and incentives
Solutions such as Tariff Guard act as a policy endorsement that designed to protect from uninsured or underinsured property losses caused by tariff-driven cost increases. This endorsement provides additional financial protection for insured property that is affected by new or heightened tariffs on essential materials that are often critical for electrification projects. Consider:
Shifting incentives and regulations, such as tariffs, subsidy changes, or stricter permitting, can raise project costs, disrupt supply chains, slow technology deployment, and create investment uncertainty. These factors can delay electrification timelines, challenge long‑term planning, and reduce the financial viability of electrification projects.
Termination of a PPA
Termination of a PPA can stall financing, disrupt project timelines, undermine energy‑supply certainty, and increase exposure to volatile power markets. It may force projects to redesign energy strategies, renegotiate contracts, or secure costly interim supply, ultimately delaying or jeopardizing electrification goals across natural‑resource operations.
Credit solutions are designed to respond in a case where of an offtaker is not able to uphold the PPA agreement. In addition, political risk cover is also available in the event a PPA is terminated by a government body. Consider:
Crisis management
Geopolitical risk solutions
Modelling potential scenarios
Identifying perils
Weather
Weather the storms Extreme weather is becoming the new normal. Click the + icons to find out how risk strategies can keep your electrification projects steady when conditions aren’t.
Natural catastrophe
Natural catastrophes caused more than $100 billion in insured losses in 2025, the sixth consecutive year above that threshold. Climate change and extreme weather disrupt electrification projects by damaging infrastructure, delaying construction, increasing maintenance needs, complicating remote-site logistics, reducing equipment reliability and raising operational risks. These factors drive up costs, extend timelines, and require more resilient designs.
Using tools to quantify losses from extreme weather captures direct damage, business interruption and indirect impacts. Incorporating detailed risk engineering reports—covering occupation type, construction, and building characteristics—enhances vulnerability analysis. This quantification clarifies the protection needed while identifying cost-efficient alternatives that reinforce long-term stability. Consider:
Futureproofing assets for climate change
Future‑proofing for climate change adds uncertainty to electrification projects: harsher weather demands more resilient infrastructure; shifting climate models complicate design assumptions; and long project lifecycles risk assets becoming obsolete. These factors raise capital costs, extend timelines, and require flexible, adaptive technologies across the natural resources sector.
Analyzing projects’ long-term exposure to climate change is critical to make informed decisions on appropriate risk strategies. Backed by data, companies can explore insurance solutions available in the market, and articulate accurate risk information to insurers. Parametric cover is a key solution, catering for extreme changes in weather patterns. Consider:
Modelling natural catastrophe scenarios
