![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.mate-solar.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/Cutting-Arizona-Commercial-Demand-Charges-by-50-Percent-with-Battery-Energy-Storage-1024x555.webp\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nArizona has moved from being a promising solar state to becoming the single most explosive energy storage market in the United States. In the second quarter of 2026, Arizona installed 6.2 GWh of new storage capacity, the largest quarterly deployment ever recorded by any U.S. state. That single-quarter figure exceeded Texas\u2019s 3.8 GWh and California\u2019s 3.6 GWh, two markets that have historically dominated grid-scale and behind-the-meter storage. Nationwide, total storage deployment reached 20.2 GWh in Q2 2026, and 74% of that capacity was deployed in states that voted for Donald Trump in 2024. Arizona, Texas, and Utah are now leading the next phase of U.S. energy infrastructure investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For commercial and industrial customers, the moment is even more specific. U.S. C&I storage additions reached 1.8 GWh in Q2 2026, with a large share tied directly to data center loads. Arizona is not simply adding batteries as an afterthought to solar. Utilities, developers, and large end users now treat storage as core infrastructure: a fast, schedulable, revenue-stacking asset that can be placed behind existing interconnection points when new thermal generation is slow, expensive, or impossible to build quickly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This article is designed as a practical market blueprint and technical guide for developers, EPCs, energy managers, data center operators, manufacturers, and commercial real estate owners evaluating behind-the-meter or front-of-meter storage in Arizona in late 2026. It covers the actual market data, the policy and regulatory environment, recent project benchmarks, the eight most pressing customer problems, technology selection criteria, project economics, procurement best practices, and a detailed FAQ section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Importantly, this is not a generic overview. It is written for professionals who need to act on the Arizona market now: people who are comparing liquid-cooled outdoor cabinets against air-cooled containers, modeling demand-charge savings under SRP and APS tariffs, assessing the impact of HB 2918, or trying to understand how to serve data center loads under HB 2467\u2019s renewable-plus-storage mandate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
1. Arizona Energy Storage Market Status: September 2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.1 The Q2 2026 Record<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s 6.2 GWh of new storage in Q2 2026 is the largest single-quarter state deployment in U.S. history. To put that in context, the entire United States deployed 20.2 GWh in the same quarter. Arizona alone accounted for roughly 31% of all U.S. storage capacity installed during the period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Texas deployed 3.8 GWh in Q2 2026, while California deployed 3.6 GWh. Both are mature storage markets with large interconnection queues, sophisticated utility procurement, and established C&I incentive structures. Arizona\u2019s ability to outpace both states in a single quarter signals a structural shift, not a one-off project anomaly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The drivers are not primarily renewable portfolio standards or climate policy. Arizona\u2019s storage boom is driven by three practical conditions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Peak demand is rising faster than new supply can be built.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Phoenix is one of the fastest-growing metropolitan areas in the United States. Population growth, industrial expansion, and especially data center development are pushing summer peak loads higher every year. Traditional thermal generation is difficult to permit, finance, and interconnect quickly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Interconnection queues make new thermal plants slow.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n A new gas plant can take years to move through siting, permitting, interconnection, and construction. A battery energy storage system can often be deployed at an existing substation or behind an existing meter in 12 to 24 months, depending on scope.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Batteries are the fastest schedulable asset developers can place behind existing interconnection points.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Storage does not need fuel supply contracts, water access, or emissions permits. It can provide capacity, frequency response, ramping, and load shifting almost immediately after energization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1.2 C&I Storage Specifics in Q2 2026<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n U.S. C&I storage additions reached 1.8 GWh in Q2 2026. The largest single source of new C&I load is data centers. Arizona is now the clearest state in the country for combined solar-plus-storage deployment, largely because utilities and regulators have begun treating storage as core infrastructure rather than a marginal clean-energy technology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Community, commercial, and industrial storage also showed momentum in Q1 2026, with 97.7 MW installed, a 27% quarter-over-quarter increase. Arizona, California, Texas, and Hawaii recorded the largest sequential gains in Q1 2026. The CCI segment is expected to grow by 26% through 2031.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For Arizona C&I customers, the relevant numbers are not only gigawatt-hours. The value of storage is measured in avoided demand charges, time-of-use arbitrage, resilience, and the ability to meet renewable-plus-storage obligations for high-load facilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Why Arizona Is the New Center of Gravity for U.S. Storage<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s storage growth is not being driven by aggressive climate mandates. It is being driven by load growth, grid constraints, and the hard economics of peak power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Phoenix and the broader Salt River Valley are experiencing some of the fastest electricity demand growth in the United States. Data centers, semiconductor fabs, electric vehicle manufacturing, logistics hubs, and population-driven commercial development are all competing for capacity. At the same time, utilities face public and regulatory pressure to keep rates stable and avoid rolling blackouts during extreme heat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Storage solves this problem in a way that thermal plants cannot. A battery system can be sited at a substation, behind a commercial meter, or co-located with a data center. It can charge during off-peak hours and discharge during the late afternoon and evening peak. It can provide grid services while also reducing the host customer\u2019s demand charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s utilities have recognized this. SRP, APS, and TEP have all launched storage incentive programs or procurement targets. SRP has signed multiple large storage contracts, including the Pediment BESS and the Flatland Energy Storage project. APS is reforming its interconnection queue, albeit slowly. TEP has a storage incentive program that pays battery owners for average annual kW output.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The result is a market where storage is no longer a niche sustainability play. It is the default capacity resource for a grid that needs fast, flexible, and financeable infrastructure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Policy and Regulatory Environment<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.1 Federal Investment Tax Credit: The Core C&I Driver<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The federal Investment Tax Credit remains the single most important financial incentive for commercial and industrial storage in Arizona.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For-profit businesses can use a 30% investment tax credit under the current federal framework. When combined with the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System, or MACRS, the effective first-year cost reduction can be substantial. MACRS allows storage assets to be depreciated over a five-year schedule, which accelerates tax benefits and improves net present value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Section 48E of the Internal Revenue Code covers clean electricity investment credits for commercial battery storage placed in service after December 31, 2024. This means that projects commissioned in 2025 and 2026 are squarely within the 48E framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Energy community bonus credits can add another 10 percentage points to the ITC for projects located in designated energy communities. Arizona has areas that may qualify based on historical fossil fuel employment or brownfield status. Developers should carefully evaluate whether a project site falls within an eligible energy community, because the additional 10% can materially change project returns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The interaction between ITC and MACRS is powerful. A commercial storage system that qualifies for the 30% ITC and five-year MACRS can reduce the effective upfront cost by 35% to 45% depending on the customer\u2019s tax appetite. For a $1 million system, that can mean $350,000 to $450,000 in combined federal tax benefits over the first several years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.2 State Tax Policy: Uncertainty and Opportunity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s state tax environment for storage is in motion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2918<\/strong> is advancing through the legislature in 2026. The bill would terminate special property tax treatment for large renewable energy projects, including wind, solar, and associated battery storage. It would require these projects to pay significantly higher local property taxes. The bill changes how renewable energy and storage equipment are valued for property tax purposes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2918 is primarily aimed at utility-scale projects, but its policy direction matters for C&I customers as well. If large-scale solar and storage assets face higher property taxes, the industry may see upward pressure on power purchase agreement prices, changes in project siting, or a shift toward behind-the-meter configurations that are valued differently. C&I customers should model sensitivity to property tax changes when evaluating long-term storage economics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2467<\/strong> creates new requirements for computer data centers. Data centers must use electricity from renewable energy paired with battery storage, and the bill also limits cooling water use. This is a direct response to the explosive data center growth in the Phoenix metropolitan area and the state\u2019s long-term water constraints. HB 2467 takes effect for new obligations starting December 31, 2026, making it an immediate planning factor for any data center operator in Arizona.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Representative Cavero\u2019s proposed bill<\/strong> is more positive for storage. The bill would expand sales tax and use tax exemptions for energy storage equipment, covering residential, commercial, and industrial facilities. It also proposes a 10% income tax credit for commercial solar equipment from 2031 to 2038, with caps and a five-year carryforward. If passed, this would further reduce the installed cost of commercial solar-plus-storage systems in Arizona.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.3 Utility Incentive Programs<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona utilities have developed several C&I-facing storage programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These programs are not identical. They differ in dispatch requirements, incentive calculation, contract length, and eligibility. C&I customers should evaluate them in the context of their own load profile and risk tolerance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3.4 Interconnection Reform: The Bottleneck<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Interconnection is the largest single challenge facing Arizona storage development. Arizona currently receives a \u201cB\u201d grade for storage interconnection procedures. That is better than many states, but it is not an \u201cA\u201d for a reason.<\/p>\n\n\n\n APS\u2019s interconnection queue reform has taken longer than expected. The CO Bar Complex, a 1.2 GW solar plus 4 GWh storage project, was originally scheduled to come online in the second half of 2026 but has been delayed because of APS queue reform. This is not an isolated case. Across the U.S., interconnection queues now routinely take more than five years. In some regions, waits stretch to seven years. Roughly 80% of projects that enter interconnection queues ultimately withdraw.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For C&I customers, the interconnection problem is slightly different. Behind-the-meter projects can often move faster than front-of-meter projects because they do not require the same transmission-level study process. However, any export-capable system or large project that requires utility interconnection review can still face delays.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. Recent Project Landscape in Arizona<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.1 Large-Scale Storage Projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The following table summarizes major Arizona storage projects recently completed, under construction, or announced as of September 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These projects show the scale of Arizona\u2019s storage pipeline. But they also highlight a critical point: large front-of-meter projects are increasingly complex, capital-intensive, and subject to interconnection risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4.2 Commercial and Industrial Storage Projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n C&I projects in Arizona are smaller but often higher-value on a per-kilowatt-hour basis because they directly reduce retail electricity costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nucor\u2019s Kingman facility is especially instructive. A 50 MW \/ 200 MWh behind-the-meter storage system is enormous by C&I standards. It demonstrates that large industrial customers in Arizona view storage as a core cost-management tool, not a sustainability gesture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Strata Clean Energy\u2019s Arizona pipeline includes nearly 2 GW of data center development. That is a strong signal that data center renewable-plus-storage mandates are translating into real procurement activity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 5. Eight Core Customer Problems and How Storage Addresses Them<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The following eight problems define the Arizona C&I storage opportunity in 2026. Any developer, EPC, or equipment supplier that wants to win business in this market must be able to speak to these issues with specificity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 1: Data Center Load Explosion and the Renewable-Plus-Storage Mandate<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s data center boom is the single largest new source of electricity demand in the state. Phoenix is now one of the top data center markets in the U.S., driven by cloud computing, AI training and inference, and enterprise colocation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2467 requires data centers to use electricity from renewable energy paired with battery storage starting December 31, 2026. The bill also limits cooling water use, which creates a second compliance layer in a state where water is scarce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For data center operators, this is not a voluntary sustainability goal. It is a legal requirement with compliance deadlines. Storage is the enabling technology because solar alone cannot match a data center\u2019s 24\/7 load profile. A properly sized solar-plus-storage system can shift daytime solar generation into evening and nighttime hours, firm renewable output, and reduce dependence on grid power during peak periods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Strata Clean Energy\u2019s nearly 2 GW data center development pipeline in Arizona shows that developers are already responding to this mandate. For equipment suppliers, the opportunity is to provide scalable, repeatable storage blocks that can be deployed quickly and integrated with new solar generation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 2: Summer Peak Demand Charges at 30\u201350% of the Bill<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona commercial customers face some of the highest summer peak demand charges in the country. Demand charges can represent 30% to 50% of a commercial electric bill. The summer peak window from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. is particularly punitive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n SRP customers can see battery value of $150 to $180 per kWh per year under certain rate structures. A properly controlled battery can reduce peak kW demand by 45% to 55%, avoiding summer peak charges as high as $25.50 per kW. APS commercial plans impose a summer peak demand charge of $6.994 per kW, but the total bill impact can be much larger when combined with energy charges and ratchets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The key phrase here is \u201cproperly controlled.\u201d Demand charge reduction requires accurate load forecasting, fast discharge response, and utility tariff modeling. A battery that is not dispatched correctly may miss the peak window or export at the wrong time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 3: Interconnection Queues of 5\u20137 Years<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Across the U.S., interconnection queues take more than five years, and in some regions five to seven years. Arizona is better than average but still faces significant challenges. APS\u2019s queue reform has taken longer than expected, causing delays for large projects like CO Bar Complex.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For C&I customers, the most practical response is to focus on behind-the-meter systems that avoid the transmission queue entirely. A behind-the-meter battery that does not export to the grid can often be deployed without a lengthy interconnection study, though utility review is still required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second response is to use modular, pre-engineered storage products that can be deployed quickly once interconnection approval is received. Containerized and outdoor cabinet systems can be installed in weeks, not years, if the site and interconnection are ready.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 4: HB 2918 Property Tax Reform and Investment Returns<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2918 would end special property tax treatment for large renewable and storage projects. While the bill is primarily aimed at utility-scale assets, its direction creates uncertainty for all storage investments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n C&I customers should model property tax sensitivity explicitly. A change in assessed value can reduce long-term savings by several percentage points. The best mitigation is to work with tax advisors who understand Arizona\u2019s evolving treatment of energy storage and to structure projects so that tax benefits are realized early.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 5: Extreme Heat and Outdoor Equipment Performance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Phoenix routinely sees summer temperatures above 115\u00b0F, or 46\u00b0C. This is not a theoretical concern for battery systems. High ambient temperatures reduce charge\/discharge efficiency, accelerate degradation, and increase thermal management loads.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Outdoor storage products must use high-temperature-rated components, active thermal management, and robust enclosures. Liquid-cooled systems generally perform better in extreme heat than air-cooled systems because they maintain tighter cell temperature control. However, liquid cooling also adds complexity and maintenance requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For Arizona C&I projects, the right product choice is critical. A system that works well in a mild coastal climate may fail prematurely or underperform in Phoenix.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 6: Project Financing for C&I Storage<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Large Arizona storage projects have raised substantial financing. Pediment BESS secured $398 million. Aypa Power obtained a $1.5 billion construction warehouse credit facility. Avantus Kitt raised over $300 million. But these are utility-scale projects with long-term contracts and investment-grade off-takers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Small and mid-sized C&I customers do not have the same access to capital. They need equipment suppliers and developers who can offer flexible procurement options, such as leases, power purchase agreements, or staged purchases. They also need systems that can be financed under standard commercial lending terms without requiring a utility-scale PPA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 7: Water Constraints and Data Center Cooling<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n HB 2467 limits cooling water use for data centers. In Arizona, water is already a critical resource. Traditional water-cooled data centers face increasing regulatory and reputational pressure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Storage is not a direct replacement for cooling, but it is an enabling part of the renewable-plus-storage solution that data centers must adopt. Solar-plus-storage can also power air-cooled or liquid-cooled IT systems more cleanly. For data center developers, the water constraint reinforces the need to integrate storage at the design stage, not as a retrofit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Problem 8: CCI Market Growth of 26% Through 2031<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The U.S. community, commercial, and industrial storage market is projected to grow by 26% through 2031. Q1 2026 CCI installations reached 97.7 MW, up 27% quarter-over-quarter. Arizona, California, Texas, and Hawaii posted the largest sequential gains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite this growth, C&I storage remains much smaller than grid-scale storage. That means the market is less crowded, but it also means customers need more education and a clearer value proposition. The winners in this segment will be companies that can provide simple, bankable, repeatable solutions, not bespoke engineering projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6. Technology Selection for Arizona C&I Projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.1 Liquid Cooling vs. Air Cooling<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona\u2019s extreme heat makes thermal management a top-tier selection criterion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Liquid-cooled systems offer several advantages:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Air-cooled systems are often simpler and less expensive upfront, but they may derate in extreme heat and require more clearance for airflow. In Phoenix, an air-cooled container may need additional HVAC capacity to maintain acceptable internal temperatures, which reduces round-trip efficiency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For behind-the-meter C&I applications where space is limited and summer performance is critical, liquid-cooled outdoor cabinets are increasingly preferred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.2 Outdoor Cabinets vs. Containers<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Outdoor cabinet systems are modular, easier to permit, and faster to deploy. They can be placed on concrete pads or compacted gravel, and they do not require the same site preparation as full container systems. For a 100 kW to 250 kW commercial load, a liquid-cooled outdoor cabinet can be a practical building block.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For larger loads or longer duration, containerized systems offer higher energy density. A 20-foot liquid-cooled container can provide 3 MWh to 5 MWh of capacity, while a 40-foot air-cooled container can provide 1 MWh to 2 MWh.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The right choice depends on the customer\u2019s load profile, available space, interconnection limit, and thermal environment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6.3 Hybrid Solar-Plus-Storage Systems<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Arizona has some of the best solar resource in the United States. Combining solar with storage allows customers to generate low-cost daytime electricity and shift it to the peak demand window. A hybrid system can also provide resilience during grid outages if configured for islanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For large commercial and industrial sites, a 500 kW hybrid solar system paired with storage can offset a significant share of annual energy consumption and reduce peak demand. This type of system is especially relevant for data centers, manufacturers, and logistics facilities that operate during the day and need firm power in the evening.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When evaluating hybrid systems, C&I customers should look for products that integrate PV inverters, battery inverters, and controls in a single architecture. This reduces integration risk and improves dispatch accuracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 7. Product Considerations for the Arizona Market<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n While this article is not a product catalog, several equipment categories are especially relevant to Arizona C&I projects in late 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For high-efficiency large and medium C&I demand, a hybrid solar system such as the \u041a\u043e\u043c\u0435\u0440\u0446\u0456\u0439\u043d\u0430 \u0433\u0456\u0431\u0440\u0438\u0434\u043d\u0430 \u0441\u043e\u043d\u044f\u0447\u043d\u0430 \u0441\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0435\u043c\u0430 \u043f\u043e\u0442\u0443\u0436\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u044e 500 \u043a\u0412\u0442<\/strong> can combine PV generation and storage dispatch in one architecture. This type of system is well suited for manufacturing plants, large retail centers, data center ancillary loads, and agricultural processing facilities that need to reduce both energy and demand charges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\u041f\u0440\u043e\u0454\u043a\u0442<\/strong><\/td> \u0420\u043e\u0437\u043c\u0456\u0440<\/strong><\/td> Key Characteristics<\/strong><\/td><\/tr> Pediment BESS<\/td> 250 \u041c\u0412\u0442 \/ 1 000 \u041c\u0412\u0442\u00b7\u0433\u043e\u0434<\/td> Developed by Aypa Power for SRP; commissioned June 2026; located in Mesa\u2019s Elliot Road Technology Corridor<\/td><\/tr> Flatland Energy Storage<\/td> 200 MW \/ 800 MWh<\/td> Developed by EDP for SRP; commissioned June 2026; EDP\u2019s largest BESS globally<\/td><\/tr> Project Sterling<\/td> 360 MW \/ 1.4 GWh<\/td> Tesla and ContourGlobal; construction starts 2026; expected online 2028<\/td><\/tr> Pioneer Clean Energy Center<\/td> 300 MW solar + 300 MW \/ 1,200 MWh BESS<\/td> Fluence providing storage technology; expected online April 2027<\/td><\/tr> CO Bar Complex<\/td> 1.2 GW solar + 4 GWh storage<\/td> Enlight; Arizona\u2019s largest solar-plus-storage complex; delayed by APS interconnection queue reform<\/td><\/tr> Maricopa Energy Center<\/td> 2,200 MWh storage<\/td> Copia Power; Arizona\u2019s largest solar-plus-storage project; phased completion 2026\u20132027<\/td><\/tr> Avantus Kitt Project<\/td> 100 MW solar + 400 MWh storage<\/td> Over $300 million financing; expected online late 2026<\/td><\/tr> Longroad Sun Pond<\/td> 111 MWdc solar + 340 MWh storage<\/td> Commissioned May 2026<\/td><\/tr> Aypa Power Second Phase<\/td> 250 MW \/ 2,000 MWh<\/td> SRP contract; expected online December 2028<\/td><\/tr> Energy Dome \u00d7 SRP<\/td> 19 MW \/ 190 MWh<\/td> CO\u2082-based long-duration storage; Google partnership<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n \u041f\u0440\u043e\u0454\u043a\u0442<\/strong><\/td> \u0420\u043e\u0437\u043c\u0456\u0440<\/strong><\/td> Key Characteristics<\/strong><\/td><\/tr> Nucor Kingman Steel Mill<\/td> 50 MW \/ 200 MWh<\/td> Arizona\u2019s largest behind-the-meter C&I storage system; Tesla Megapack<\/td><\/tr> Nucor Phase 2<\/td> 25 MW solar<\/td> Follow-on project in 2026 to further reduce daytime energy costs<\/td><\/tr> Qcells Solar + Storage Project<\/td> 372 MW<\/td> Announced July 2026<\/td><\/tr> Strata Clean Energy<\/td> 2 GWh+ in operation or construction<\/td> 5 GW development pipeline in Arizona<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n