For modular compute and powered-site developers

Data-center power capacity assessment for a proposed load.

Headroom checks a proposed additional data-center load against supplied power, battery, fuel and cooling records over a defined period. Get a written finding on what the evidence supports, which evaluated constraint binds and which records remain unresolved before the next diligence decision.

Where Headroom fits in power due diligence.

Headroom evaluates a supplied proposal and stated period using authorized records. It reports the applicable power, resource and cooling findings, limits, margins and evidence gaps.

Utility feasibility and interconnection studies address supply availability, network upgrades and connection arrangements. Headroom does not replace those studies, certify available capacity or provide external engineering approval. Your site engineer confirms the applicable records, boundaries and assumptions.

Start with a no-charge fit discussion using high-level information. The assessment itself is paid, scoped and quoted in writing before work begins; fees are for the assessment, never a favorable finding.

Identify the constraint before committing more diligence time.

A connection rating or spare-power figure is a starting point. Existing demand, protected reserves, battery duration, generator fuel and cooling determine whether the proposed load fits within the applicable method.

Headroom identifies the evaluated constraints and unresolved records so your team can decide what to investigate before the next diligence step.

Screen the pipeline.

Run the same supported question across your candidate sites. For each one, Headroom reports:

  • The result on the records supplied: Supported, Not supported, Unknown or Not evaluated
  • The constraints and their timing: power, battery energy, fuel or cooling
  • The records that are missing, stale or in conflict
  • The next record or engineering confirmation that would change the answer

Where the documented method supports it, compatible cases can have explained diligence priorities: proceed with review, obtain evidence, or hold or revise the supplied proposal. Ties and reviewer judgment remain visible; incompatible cases are not forced into one ranking. The displayed portfolio example is an unranked summary, with no combined MW total.

Start with one site and one decision.

Pick a site and the load you want to add, over a defined period. With written permission to use the records, an analyst maps your exports and your engineer confirms meter boundaries, timing, limits and assumptions. You receive:

  • A written finding: Supported, Not supported, Unknown or Not evaluated, and why
  • The basis: limits, margins, source references and assumptions
  • Next actions: what to verify, reconcile or revise before you commit

The First Site Evaluation requires suitable records and an agreed scope. Standard assessments: Written finding within five business days after scope is agreed and the required records are confirmed. Broader assessments, including coupled power-and-cooling work, follow the schedule agreed in the written quote.

When records are stale or conflict, Headroom doesn't fill the gap.

Missing or conflicting records leave the affected checks unresolved. A known constraint still produces a Not supported finding. The report identifies what evidence is needed before reassessment. Unknown does not mean zero physical capacity.

See a missing-evidence example

Two power methods, plus cooling.

  • Grid, battery and diesel: one grid connection, one battery and one already-running diesel generator, checked for power, stored energy and fuel over the period. Excludes refueling, startup, islanding, multiple batteries or generators, and dispatch optimization.
  • Grid and natural gas: one grid connection and one already-running gas engine or turbine, checked against documented operating points and gas supply. Excludes gas plus battery, multiple units, startup and islanding.
  • Cooling: air, single-phase liquid or mixed cooling, reported as a separate finding alongside a compatible power evaluation. A cooling result alone does not support a proposal.
Method boundaries

The finding concerns a proposed additional load over a defined period. It is not a firm capacity commitment, certification or revenue guarantee.

Read-only from the first conversation.

  • No equipment access or control credentials
  • Start with the question, not the records; nothing sensitive is needed to begin
  • Records are shared only after scope, permitted use, recipients and handling are agreed in writing
  • Exported files only; no portal, no live connection to your systems
Records checklist

How pricing works

Pipeline Screens are priced per portfolio. A First Site Evaluation is priced per site, based on scope, complexity and the proposed load. Quarterly reporting is available under an annual agreement, priced per site according to the agreed scope. Pricing and terms are subject to written approval before work begins. Fees are for the assessment, never for a favorable result.

Bring one site question.

Tell us the site, the load you want to add and the period that matters. We will confirm fit and scope before any records change hands.

Request a First Site Evaluation

Read-only, export-based and analyst-assisted. Findings apply to a supplied proposal, defined period and supported method; they are not operating approval or guaranteed capacity. Public capacity examples are synthetic. Customer-site validation and qualified external engineering review remain outstanding. Method boundaries and verification