Main
BTU researchers calculate that January–March accounted for 91.2% of Georgia’s recorded electricity imports in January–September 2026; excluding the separately identified Russian supply to Abkhazia still leaves a first-quarter share of 87.4%. Better procurement terms therefore matter especially for seasonal supply, while the eventual effect on customers’ bills depends on total costs and regulatory decisions.
Key Takeaways
- BTU researchers calculate that Georgia’s recorded gross electricity imports reached 1,082.131 million kWh in January–March 2026, or 91.2% of the January–September total of 1,186.497 million kWh; the figures include Russian supply to Abkhazia.
- After subtracting the Russian supply to Abkhazia separately identified by ESCO, BTU’s first-quarter share is 87.4% of Georgia’s remaining January–September 2026 imports, confirming strong seasonal concentration within the observed period.
- BTU researchers assess that the benefit of cheaper electricity imports for Georgian customers depends on purchased volumes, other generation, network costs and tariff treatment; a reduction in one procurement component does not establish an equivalent reduction in household bills.
Debates about electricity prices often focus on the purchase price of a single kilowatt-hour. For Georgia, another question is just as important: when does the country need imported electricity? A modest improvement in purchasing terms during a period of large purchases can matter more than a substantial discount when imports are small. The national electricity balance helps make that distinction visible.
The substantive question extends beyond the identity of the buyer. Where is Georgian electricity supply most exposed to seasonal needs, and how would an improvement in procurement reach customers? BTU’s analysis approaches that question by recalculating ESCO’s complete electricity balance for January–September 2026. [1]
What nine months reveal
ESCO records imports of 576.293 million kWh in January, 276.922 million in February and 228.916 million in March. The combined volume for April through September was 104.366 million kWh. Imports in the first three months therefore substantially exceeded those in the following six months together. A single low-import month cannot represent the country’s needs across the year.
A kilowatt-hour measures energy, rather than a power station’s installed capacity. Nor is an import volume a monetary cost. Calculating expenditure requires the prices paid for the corresponding purchases. BTU’s calculation identifies the distribution of imported energy across the observed months; it does not invent a financial saving.
| Period in 2026 | Recorded gross imports million kWh | Imports excluding identified Russian supply to Abkhazia million kWh |
|---|---|---|
| January–March | 1,082.131 | 659.202 |
| April–June | 82.445 | 72.956 |
| July–September | 21.921 | 21.921 |
| January–September | 1,186.497 | 754.079 |
| First-quarter share of nine-month total | 91.2% | 87.4% |
Source: ESCO monthly figures in the full electricity balance; quarterly aggregation, subtraction and percentage calculations by BTU. The last row shows percentages; all preceding rows show million kWh. Transit is recorded separately and is zero in this period. [1]
The second numerical column is essential. ESCO’s gross import total includes electricity supplied from Russia to Abkhazia. Summing the monthly entries gives 432.418 million kWh for that separately identified flow over nine months. Applying the same commercial purchase price or the same effect on Georgian retail bills to this volume would be unjustified. BTU therefore checked seasonal concentration after subtracting it as well.
The result supports the main finding: 87.4% of the remaining imports still fall in the first quarter. This adjusted figure is a precisely defined calculation, not an ESCO series called “retail-market imports.” It does not identify the supplier or customer that received every remaining kilowatt-hour. More detailed contracts and settlement information would be required for that allocation.
Why the season matters
Hydropower has a substantial place in Georgia’s electricity system. Generation from river water varies during the year and does not always match energy requirements in the same way. ESCO records hydropower output of 534.075 million kWh in January and 1,371.296 million in July. Those observations demonstrate a seasonal difference; the two figures alone cannot attribute every change to weather or to the operation of a particular power station. [1]
When hydropower output does not cover energy requirements, other sources must cover the gap. Those sources include imports and thermal generation. Technical availability, fuel, contracts and the network jointly determine supply options. Sufficient generation over an entire year would not, by itself, establish equally favorable supply conditions in every month.
September illustrates the difference. Imports were 7.143 million kWh and total resources were 1,139.870 million kWh. BTU calculates an import share of approximately 0.63% of those resources. In this comparison, total resources include generation and imports before network losses are deducted. The percentage is not the import-cost share of a customer’s bill.
A small monthly import volume also does not make cross-border connections redundant. A connection provides the ability to obtain energy when needed. Annual totals cannot fully measure supply reliability: energy must be available at the required hour, with the ability to transmit it. The table used here contains no hourly observations, so the analysis does not assign a numerical size to a particular peak-period shortage.
How a purchase price reaches customers
Improved terms from direct procurement can be valuable. Understanding that value requires distinguishing three levels. At the first level, the cost of a particular contract changes. At the second, imported electricity combines with other purchases and domestic generation to determine supply costs. At the third, customers pay for electricity alongside the relevant network and service costs.
| Level | What needs to be checked | What the import price alone cannot establish |
|---|---|---|
| Procurement | Price and volume of the particular contract | Annual savings for the entire system |
| Supply | Combined energy cost across different sources | An identical cost change for every supplier |
| Final tariff | GNERC decision and other recognized costs | The size and timing of a household bill reduction |
Analytical framework: BTU assessment. The regulator’s role and cost-assessment principles are established by Georgia’s Law on Energy and Water Supply. The table contains no price forecast. [4]
Put simply, a saving on one part of procurement cannot automatically be applied to the whole bill. If another source becomes more expensive at the same time, or necessary network costs rise, the overall outcome will differ. Improved procurement could also moderate an increase in costs without producing a lower final tariff. This describes a possible transmission mechanism, rather than a measured outcome already achieved.
Article 29 of Georgia’s Law on Energy and Water Supply gives GNERC responsibility for setting tariffs and their methodologies. Article 108 separately addresses tariff regulation for universal-service consumers and recognizes actual supply costs, imports and necessary investment in prices. Universal service under the law concerns households and small enterprises. An October procurement statement therefore cannot itself be treated as the announcement of a new retail tariff. [4]
The Azerbaijan component also has a defined scale. Summing ESCO’s monthly entries gives 171.435 million kWh imported from Azerbaijan in January–September, approximately 14.4% of recorded gross imports. Terms obtained for one origin cannot be extended to every imported kilowatt-hour. Equally, that historical nine-month share does not predetermine the origin of purchases during the coming winter. [1]
What businesses and households can use
For a household budget, the practical distinction is between the tariff currently in force and an anticipated change. Until GNERC publishes a corresponding decision, the existing tariff remains the basis for planning expenditure. A political statement may indicate the direction of a future cost change, but it does not establish the date or size of a bill reduction.
The business question is broader. Electricity supports the daily operation of a factory, refrigeration equipment, a hotel or a shop. Yet businesses do not all buy energy under identical arrangements. A small retail customer and a direct electricity consumer may face different contractual conditions. ESCO’s balance separately identifies universal service suppliers and direct consumers. An aggregate change in imports therefore does not establish an equal cost reduction for every business.
BTU researchers assess that the significant opportunity for Georgia is to improve the conditions of seasonal supply. Available energy, transparent procurement costs and reliable delivery together create economic value. Improving one of these conditions does not remove the importance of the others. Even a favorable purchase agreement is less useful if the contracted volume cannot arrive when it is needed.
The next useful information will therefore extend beyond an announcement of a new purchase price. It should establish the volume covered, the period of the agreement and how actual costs are treated in the regulator’s calculations. Without those details, assigning a saving to a particular household or firm would be premature.
The nine-month calculation already provides a clear answer to the central question: Georgia’s import requirements were strongly uneven across the observed months. That concentration explains why better procurement for winter supply is an important economic issue. For customers, its value must ultimately be assessed through improved supply conditions and the change in fully substantiated costs.
Questions and answers
Q: Does 91.2% mean Georgia imports 91.2% of its electricity?
A: No. It is the January–March share of recorded gross imports in January–September. It is not an import share of electricity consumption.
Q: Why isolate Russian supply to Abkhazia?
A: ESCO identifies that flow separately. Subtracting it checks whether seasonal concentration persists; the first-quarter share remains 87.4% of the adjusted nine-month total.
Q: When would cheaper procurement appear on a bill?
A: Establishing the timing and amount requires the relevant cost information and a regulatory decision. The electricity balance does not forecast that outcome.
Q: Why is there no annual savings estimate?
A: The sources reviewed do not provide all relevant contract prices, volumes and effective periods. Multiplying all historical imports by one claimed price difference would not establish actual savings.