Will Texas approve a major interconnection linking ERCOT to a national grid before 2029?
Peer-to-Peer Order Book
Live- A participant offers to buy or sell a contract at a price they choose.
- Another participant takes the opposite side.
- The exchange matches the orders and holds the collateral.
- Correct contracts settle at $1.00 · incorrect at $0.00.
- Fees are shown before any order is submitted.
What this market asks
In plain language: forecasters are estimating the probability that the outcome in the question actually happens by the deadline. The market currently prices 12% YES / 88% NO. Resolution is mechanical — it depends only on the criteria and sources below, not on opinions, headlines, or who "deserves" to win the argument.
- ▸ Two DC-tie proposals totaling 3 GW have entered formal FERC pre-filing.
- ▸ Post-storm reliability politics have softened historical opposition to interconnection.
- ▸ Export economics now favor Texas generators selling surplus wind and solar out of state.
- ▸ Jurisdictional independence from FERC is a core, bipartisan Texas political commitment.
- ▸ State leadership has publicly opposed any link that triggers federal oversight.
- ▸ Permitting and construction timelines make pre-2029 approval extremely tight even if favored.
Resolution criteria
Resolves YES if, before January 1, 2029, Texas regulators (PUCT) and FERC both approve a new synchronous or high-capacity DC interconnection (≥1.5 GW) between ERCOT and the Eastern or Western Interconnection.
- Any participant may flag a resolution within 72 hours with cited evidence.
- Trading pauses; positions freeze at last price while flags are reviewed.
- An independent resolution council (rotating, disclosed members) rules within 14 days using only the stated sources.
- Rulings are published with full written reasoning; credits settle after publication.
Discussion · 88 comments
LiveYES at 12% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 20%. Holding YES at 7 entry.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
Fading the crowd here. "Jurisdictional independence from FERC is a core, bipartisan Texas political commitment." That blocker has killed similar outcomes repeatedly — I have fair value near 3%.
YES at 12% is the value side. When the resolution source is this mechanical, momentum in the underlying process matters more than commentary.
The NO side is about timelines, not merits. Even if the outcome eventually happens, the deadline in the criteria is doing a lot of work.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
Committee calendar update: relevant action is now scheduled. In backtests of this market class, a scheduled action adds ~6 points to YES within a week.
This market pairs well with the related Pulse question — the gap between public sentiment and market probability is the interesting signal here.
Following this one closely. The resolution criteria are unusually clean, which is why participation is this high (3.2K forecasters).
The market is underpricing this. Base rates on comparable outcomes put fair value closer to 20%. Holding YES at 7 entry.