METHODOLOGY · V3.0

How the ECM Conflict Score is built

The score is an analytical model, not an official company or utility rating.

ECM CONFLICT SCORE

0–100

A 0–100 analytical index that separates infrastructure pressure into five auditable dimensions.

ECM = 0.30(Grid) + 0.20(Water) + 0.20(Energy) + 0.15(Permitting) + 0.15(Pipeline)
30%Grid constraint

Interconnection queues, transmission timing, substation and utility-node constraints.

20%Water stress

Watershed stress, cooling architecture and competition for treated or raw water.

20%Energy supply risk

Firm supply, hourly low-carbon availability, fuel exposure and local generation adequacy.

15%Permitting / social conflict

Permitting friction, local opposition, moratoria and policy uncertainty.

15%Pipeline pressure

Concentration of announced capacity relative to regional delivery capability.

Data classes

REPORTED Direct statement in a primary or official source.

DERIVED Calculation derived from a reported input with the formula disclosed.

MODELED Scenario estimate; never presented as an audited company total.

Confidence A / B / C

A — location or headline project fact directly reported.

B — project reported, but location or capacity remains aggregated / allocated.

C — analytical reference point with material uncertainty; treat as directional only.

Non-negotiable rules

1. A marker must state its location precision. 2. A modeled value must never be styled as a live measurement. 3. Material revisions go into the public changelog. 4. Third-party source rights remain with their owners. 5. The score describes ECM analytical pressure, not project quality or company conduct.