Expansion risk of battery storage thread failure?
The Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) has proposed a significant reform of network charge systematics called AgNes, which could have far-reaching implications for the energy industry. The proposed changes, if implemented, would require newly connected storage facilities to pay a capacity charge in addition to the consumption charge.
Currently, large storage facilities are exempt from network charges, only chargeable for the withdrawal and consumption of electricity. However, the BNetzA argues that grid usage "should basically be paid for, just like any other use of a valuable asset."
Several energy companies and industry associations, including regional grid operators and some consumer protection groups, oppose the planned changes. They argue that storage is not a consumer but shifts energy temporally and contributes to network relief, load shifting, and better integration of renewable energies. The storage association BVES, in particular, calls for a grid tariff system that rewards flexibility, reduces complexity, enables innovations, and reduces costs, not just distributes them.
Benedikt Deuchert, Head of Business and Regulatory Affairs at Kyon Energy, shares the concerns of the industry. Kyon Energy plans and operates network-coupled battery storage systems, currently storing 135 megawatts, with further projects under construction for a storage capacity of 700 megawatts. Deuchert argues that the Federal Network Agency's assumption that storage does not provide any remuneration for the grid is incorrect, as there is always a grid-supporting component due to the atypical behavior of storage in the grid system.
Deuchert suggests considering price signals such as local flexibility markets instead of a price zone split, as the claim of a fundamental contradiction between a market-driven and a grid-supporting approach of storage is false and goes past the core problem. He warns that if the ideas of the Federal Network Agency are implemented as intended, storage facilities would no longer contribute to market support, as they would be used by the network operator.
Thomas Antonioli, Co-Founder and CFO of the Berlin-based battery storage provider Terra One, also expressed concern that the end of network charge exemptions for large storage would have significant consequences for the storage location in Germany. Antonioli calls for planning certainty and a retention of privileged statuses in the new grid tariff system for those planning larger storage projects.
The Network Development Plan 2025-2037/2045 (NEP) has a legally prescribed expansion path B that foresees an installed large-scale storage capacity of 67,600 MW by the year 2037. With the annual increase from the year 2026 onwards being 6,000 MW, the proposed changes by the BNetzA could significantly impact the growth of the storage sector in Germany.
In addition, Antonioli wants a nationwide definition of grid benefit to ensure that grid operators work uniformly and avoid lengthy understanding processes. This call for a clearer definition of network support in the new fee structure is shared by several industry associations, including the industry association BDEW, which called for continuity in existing protection and the retention of privileged statuses in the new grid tariff system in its own discussion paper.
As the debate continues, it is clear that the proposed reform of network charge systematics by the Bundesnetzagentur has sparked controversy among energy industry stakeholders. The outcome of this debate could have significant implications for the future of the storage sector and the integration of renewable energies in Germany.
