Targeting the Grid: Tactics and Vulnerabilities in Russia’s Campaign Against Ukrainian Energy Infrastructure

by Luke Bencie, Daniil Kryvets, and Ryan Utt

Introduction: Energy as a Strategic Target
Modern conflict is increasingly directed at the systems that sustain civilian life, not just those that fight wars. Russia’s sustained attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure show how power grids can be weaponized to apply strategic pressure, disrupt state functioning, and impose hardship on civilian populations without decisive battlefield engagement.

Rather than focusing solely on destroying generation capacity, these attacks exploit the structure of the grid itself. By targeting transmission substations, transformers, and urban thermal facilities, Russia has repeatedly fragmented electricity delivery, depriving millions of civilians of power, heat, and basic services — often during the coldest months of the year. Ukraine’s experience offers a rare real-time case study of how energy infrastructure can serve as both a strategic target and an instrument of coercion in modern conflict.

Why the Grid Matters in Modern Conflict
Electricity is a foundational enabler of modern society, supporting water and wastewater systems, healthcare, communications, transportation, industry, and military logistics. When power delivery is disrupted, these sectors fail simultaneously, producing cascading effects far beyond the point of attack. For an adversary, this makes energy infrastructure a highly efficient target.

Ukraine’s experience underscores a critical distinction between electricity generation and electricity delivery. Even when power plants remain operational, damage to transmission infrastructure — especially high-voltage substations and transformers — can fragment the grid, prevent voltage transformation, and isolate entire regions. Open-source assessments confirm that extensive damage to transmission and substation infrastructure constrained national power delivery despite continued operation of major generating plants.

The civilian impact has been significant and measurable. In 2024 alone, scheduled household outages totaled approximately 1,951 hours — nearly 22 percent of the year. These disruptions affected emergency services, economic activity, and daily civilian life, reflecting the cumulative impact of repeated strike waves rather than isolated incidents.

Ukraine’s Energy System: Structure, Function, and Wartime Vulnerability
Ukraine’s energy system is built around a nuclear base-load core, supported by thermal, hydroelectric, and renewable generation. Under peacetime conditions, this structure provides stability and efficiency. Under sustained attack, however, its vulnerabilities are concentrated not in production but in transmission and transformation.

Nuclear power plants supply the majority of Ukraine’s electricity and are designed for continuous, stable output. Many continued operating throughout the conflict. As a result, nuclear facilities are not tactically efficient targets for immediate disruption; their electricity becomes strategically irrelevant when it cannot be routed and delivered downstream.

The decisive vulnerability lies in high-voltage transmission infrastructure and substations, where electricity is transformed and distributed. Damage at this level fragments the grid, isolates regions, and prevents voltage transformation even when generation remains available. Sector assessments indicate that roughly half of Ukraine’s high-voltage substations have been damaged during repeated strike waves, severely constraining national delivery capacity.

When regions are cut off from the national grid, thermal and combined heat-and-power (CHP) plants become critical fallback assets. These facilities provide both electricity and district heating, particularly in urban areas. Their targeting produces compound effects, depriving civilians not only of power but also of heat and hot water during winter.

Kyiv illustrates this dynamic clearly. The capital relies on several large thermal and CHP plants capable of supporting local demand when isolated. All have sustained significant damage from repeated strikes, reducing the city’s resilience and increasing humanitarian pressure during periods of grid separation.

Russian Strike Tactics and the Use of Drones
As the conflict evolved into a prolonged war of attrition, Russia increasingly emphasized long-range strike capabilities, particularly one-way attack drones. The Shahed-series loitering munition became a central tool in this campaign.

These drones combine long range, relatively low cost, and simple construction. While they lack the destructive power of cruise or ballistic missiles, their effectiveness lies in persistence and volume. Russia has employed.

several tactics to maximize their impact:
Low-altitude flight to reduce radar detection
Large strike packages to saturate air defenses
Use of decoys to force costly interceptor use
Deceptive flight paths to complicate defensive engagement

Against energy infrastructure, even limited physical damage can interrupt operations and trigger complex, time-consuming repairs. Repeated waves degrade infrastructure over time, strain air defenses, and impose continuous pressure on civilian populations.


Luke Bencie is the Managing Director of Security Management International, LLC (SMI). He can be reached at www.smiconsultancy.com

Daniil Kryvets and Ryan Utt are Junior Research Associates at SMI.

 

---