Up 27.6%, Power and Renewables Deals Lean on Project Finance

Companies comparing renewable energy law firms are buying into a sector that is growing far faster than the deal market around it. Sartori & Partners data show 2,009 power and renewables deals in the 12 months to September 2026, against 1,575 a year earlier: the count rose 27.6%, while deals across all sectors rose 10.6%. Project and infrastructure finance makes up 24.8% of the sector's work, and that mix decides which firms show up on the deals, how deep their teams run and how much partner time a company can expect on its mandate.

Over the settled 12-month windows, power and renewables deals rose 27.6%, from 1,575 to 2,009. Deals across all sectors rose 10.6% over the same months, from 43,590 to 48,216, so the sector grew at 2.6 times the market's rate. No sector with more deals grew faster: pharma and biotech rose 14.5%, financial sponsors 8.9%, and banks and financial institutions 7.2%.

The energy sectors next door moved at a different speed. Oil and gas held flat (+5.3%), at 1,012 deals against 961. Utilities, water and waste rose 13.6%, to 978 deals. Infrastructure, a smaller sector, rose 49.1%, from 385 to 574. In the 12 months to October, power and renewables accounted for 4.1% of all dated deals, and its count of 1,989 was 1.9 times the oil and gas count.

By calendar year, the 2026 count through October, 1,663, already sits above the full-year 2025 figure of 1,660 in our records. For a company planning a financing or a sale in 2027, the practical point is congestion. The same projects partners are on more deals than a year ago, and their calendars fill earlier. Approach counsel when the term sheet is still being negotiated, not when signing is a few weeks away.

Each deal in the Sartori & Partners records carries a type. Project and infrastructure finance is 24.8% of power and renewables deals, near a quarter of the work, against 2.1% across all sectors. Seen from the other side, power and renewables deals made up 49.3% of every project and infrastructure finance deal recorded in the 12 months. Capital markets work sits close to its market share, at 25.2% against 25.7%, and M&A runs a little heavier, at 22.0% against 19.3%. Disputes and investigations are the gap: 5.3% of the sector's deals against 25.0% of the market.

This mix sets power apart from its energy neighbors. Project finance is 4.1% of oil and gas deals and 4.1% of utilities deals, where capital markets carry the weight at 40.2% and 60.9%. Only infrastructure comes close, at 19.8%. For a developer or an investor, the shortlist for a power mandate should start from project finance teams and then be checked for capital markets and M&A depth, not the other way round. A firm with a strong energy name earned on oil and gas offerings can field a thin project finance team.

Staffing follows the deal mix. Projects and infrastructure lawyers worked on 32.9% of power and renewables deals, against 2.4% of all deals, and banking and finance lawyers on 12.0% against 6.3%. The sector is the main client base of the projects practice: its 655 deals with projects lawyers on them are 57.1% of every deal that practice worked on. Litigation and disputes lawyers appear on 1.4% of power deals, against 3.7% across the market. One deal can involve several practices, so these shares overlap.

Deal flow and the lateral market moved apart. The count of lateral moves by lawyers with a power and renewables focus held flat (-5.5%), at 291 against 308, over the same windows in which deal flow rose 27.6%. The lateral market added no extra specialists to absorb the extra work. Ask who will run the deal day to day and what else that lawyer has closing in the same quarter.

The adviser ranking shows the deal mix at work. Latham & Watkins and White & Case advised on the most power and renewables deals in the 12 months to October 2026, both in the 101-150 band of deals advised. Next come Clifford Chance, then Watson Farley & Williams and Hunton Andrews Kurth at 4th and 5th, all in the 61-100 band, with CMS beside them. None of those three appears in the top 10 for all deals, while the first three in power all do, and Latham & Watkins ranks first on both lists. The power list matches the market at the very top and departs from it one band down. Hunton Andrews Kurth ranks first among advisers on utilities, water and waste deals as well.

The adviser list in oil and gas looks different. There Vinson & Elkins ranks 2nd and Baker Botts ranks 5th, and neither is in the power top 10. Disclosed values are smaller in power too: values are public on 27.7% of the sector's deals, with a median of $500 million, against $750 million in oil and gas and $802.5 million in utilities. Bands overlap from rank three down, so the order says less than the fit. Put a firm from the market's top 10 against one that ranks high only in power on the same project, and ask each how many project finance partners it would put on the deal and whether capital markets and M&A sit in the same team.

Where the work is done separates power from oil and gas. In Sartori & Partners data, 12.2% of power and renewables deals were handled with lawyers in Houston, against 48.2% for oil and gas and 22.1% for utilities. Lawyers in New York worked on 32.9% of power deals, lawyers in London on 19.0% and lawyers in Washington on 17.0%. Paris, at 9.0%, and Frankfurt, at 7.3%, make the power city list and are absent from the oil and gas one. One deal can count in several cities, so the shares overlap and add to more than the whole.

For a company with assets in Europe, a Houston office is no proxy for power experience: the power work runs through New York, London, Washington and the continental financial centers. A company whose power assets sit beside oil and gas operations in Texas is in a different position, since lawyers in Houston work on deals in both sectors and can carry one relationship across them.

First, build the shortlist around project finance. The work type runs at 11.8 times its market share in this sector, so ask each firm for the project finance partners who would staff your matter and the financings they closed in the last year, not for the firm's energy deal total. Second, plan for slower response than the firm's name suggests. Deal flow rose 27.6% against 10.6% in the wider market, so the firms doing this work carry more deals than a year ago. Engage early, agree staffing in the engagement letter and name the senior associate as well as the partner.

Third, look past the market's deal table. Watson Farley & Williams and Hunton Andrews Kurth, outside the market's top 10, sit in the same 61-100 band of deals advised as Clifford Chance, which is inside it, so volume alone will not separate them; team depth on your asset type and jurisdiction will. Fourth, match the office to the asset, not to the energy label. Power deals draw more on New York, London and Washington than on Houston, which carries far more weight in oil and gas.