Abstract: The article presents a comparative analysis of the resource potential for two strategies of initiating energy-saving equipment production: establishing a new enterprise (greenfield) and reorienting an existing one (brownfield). The research methodology is based on a systemic analysis of human, material, technological, infrastructural, and financial resources, with particular attention to industry-specific factors such as the need for high-tech equipment, qualified engineering specialists, access to certification centers, and dependence on imported components. A resource matrix, GAP analysis, and SWOT analysis were applied to identify risks, deficiencies, and strategic advantages of each scenario.The results of the case study of thermal substation production demonstrate that the greenfield strategy provides greater technological flexibility, innovation capacity, and long-term competitiveness, but requires significant financial investments and faces critical gaps in human resources and infrastructure. In contrast, the brownfield approach enables faster market entry with lower costs and benefits from existing infrastructure and workforce, yet it is constrained by technological inertia, limited scalability, and the need for modernization.The practical significance of the study lies in offering recommendations for investors and entrepreneurs regarding the choice of an optimal development strategy in the field of energy-saving technologies. The findings suggest that a combined approach is most effective: in the short term, the brownfield strategy allows rapid entry into the market and generation of cash flow, while in the long term, the greenfield strategy ensures technological advancement and integration into global supply chains. This dual-phase model balances efficiency with innovation, providing a pathway for sustainable growth in the energy efficiency sector.