The Great Flexibility Debate: German Energy Innovators Sound Alarm Over Fossil Bias in New ‘FlexBG’ Legislation

BERLIN – As Germany races to complete its ambitious Energiewende (energy transition), the legislative framework intended to provide the necessary "flexibility" to the power grid has come under fire. On June 23, 2026, the Association of Energy Market Innovators (bne – Bundesverband Neue Energiewirtschaft) issued a comprehensive and scathing critique of the draft “Act to Accelerate Planning and Approval Procedures for More Flexibility in the Electricity System and to Ensure Security of Supply,” commonly referred to as the Flexibility Acceleration Act (FlexBG).

While the German government presents the FlexBG as a vital tool for integrating renewable energy and ensuring grid stability, the bne argues that the draft law is fundamentally flawed. In its official statement, the association warns that the legislation, despite its name, is heavily biased toward fossil-fuel infrastructure—specifically gas-fired power plants—while systematically discriminating against the very storage technologies and decentralized solutions that the transition requires.

Main Facts: A Law of Contradictions

The FlexBG was introduced with the promise of slashing the bureaucratic red tape that currently delays the construction of energy infrastructure. As Germany moves toward a system dominated by intermittent wind and solar power, "flexibility"—the ability to balance supply and demand rapidly—is the new currency of the energy market.

However, the bne’s analysis reveals a stark disconnect between the law’s stated goals and its actual provisions. The association’s primary grievances can be summarized in three core points:

1. Selective Acceleration: While Section 1 of the FlexBG nominally includes both power plants and energy storage, the subsequent "acceleration measures" (Sections 4 through 9) apply almost exclusively to traditional power plants. This creates a two-tier system where gas plants receive fast-track approvals while battery storage remains bogged down in standard regulatory hurdles.
2. Fossil-Fuel "Lock-in": By granting a "special status" to fossil-fuel plants funded under the Power Plant Security Act (StromVKG), the law risks creating new path dependencies. The bne argues that this prioritizes carbon-heavy infrastructure over cleaner, more cost-effective alternatives.
3. Property Rights Overreach: The draft proposes changes to the Energy Industry Act (EnWG) that would allow private developers of gas infrastructure to seize or enter private land more easily. The bne describes this as a "disproportionate interference" with private property rights for the benefit of fossil fuel interests.

Chronology: From the Power Plant Strategy to FlexBG

To understand the current friction, one must look at the legislative trajectory of the past three years.

• 2023–2024: The Power Plant Strategy (Kraftwerksstrategie): The German Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) announced a strategy to build up to 10 GW of new hydrogen-ready gas power plants to serve as a backup for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow (the so-called Dunkelflaute).
• 2025: The StromVKG Framework: The Power Plant Security Act was passed to provide the financial mechanisms and subsidies necessary to incentivize these new plants, arguing they are essential for national security as coal is phased out.
• Early 2026: The Flexibility Gap: Critics pointed out that while subsidies were in place, the actual construction of these plants (and the storage needed to complement them) was still taking 6 to 10 years due to planning and environmental litigation.
• June 23, 2026: The FlexBG Draft: The government released the FlexBG draft to solve the "speed problem." However, as the bne statement highlights, the draft’s focus shifted from "flexibility" in a broad sense to "gas plant acceleration" in a specific sense.

Supporting Data: The Role of Storage and the Cost of Inaction

The bne’s push for a technology-neutral approach is backed by significant market data. According to recent grid studies by the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur), Germany requires a massive expansion of battery storage to minimize "curtailment"—instances where wind turbines are turned off because the grid cannot handle the excess power.

In 2024 and 2025, Germany saw a record-breaking surge in utility-scale battery installations. Data suggests that these systems can react to grid imbalances in milliseconds, whereas gas turbines take minutes to ramp up. Furthermore, the cost of lithium-ion and iron-phosphate batteries has plummeted, making them more economically viable than peak-load gas plants in many scenarios.

The bne highlights that under Section 11c of the existing Energy Industry Act (EnWG), energy storage is already legally defined as being in the "overriding public interest." The FlexBG, however, threatens to dilute this status by elevating fossil-fuel plants to an even higher priority level, potentially pushing storage projects to the back of the queue for land use and grid connection.

Official Responses: The bne’s Detailed Critique

The bne’s statement is not merely a protest but a technical deconstruction of the draft law. The association’s experts point to specific legal mechanisms that they believe are being weaponized against the renewable transition.

1. The Discrimination Against Storage (Sections 4–9)

"If the legislator wants to accelerate the expansion of flexibility with the FlexBG, then electricity storage must be covered equally as a central flexibility option," the bne statement asserts.
The association notes that Section 4 of the draft allows power plant operators to waive public hearing dates to speed up the process. However, this privilege is denied to storage operators. Similar exemptions regarding immissions (noise and air quality) and procedural simplifications in Sections 5 through 9 are reserved for "Section 1, Paragraph 1, Number 1" facilities—legal shorthand for power plants, excluding batteries.

2. Questioning the "Overriding Public Interest"

The bne takes issue with the blanket classification of all StromVKG-subsidized gas plants as being in the "overriding public interest." Unlike storage, which inherently supports the integration of renewables, the bne argues that the climate benefit of new gas plants is "not necessarily given" and depends heavily on their actual usage and eventual transition to hydrogen—a transition that many experts still view with skepticism.

3. The Land-Use Conflict (Section 44b EnWG)

One of the most controversial aspects of the FlexBG is the proposed amendment to Section 44b of the EnWG. This would allow for "early possession" (Besitzeinweisung) of land for the construction of gas pipelines and high-voltage lines.
The bne calls this "overstated," noting that it grants private-sector project developers direct access to private property with minimal recourse for landowners. "The draft must not lead to a situation where, under the title of flexibility, a special status is created primarily for fossil power plant infrastructure," the statement warns.

Instead, the bne recommends using the existing Section 11a of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) as a blueprint. This section allows for the laying of cables on private land under fair compensation and legal protection—a model the bne argues should be expanded rather than replaced by the "aggressive" measures in the FlexBG.

Implications: What Is at Stake?

The bne’s intervention has sparked a wider debate about the future of the German energy market. If the FlexBG passes in its current form, several long-term implications emerge:

Fossil-Fuel Path Dependency: By making it easier and faster to build gas infrastructure than storage, the government may inadvertently lock Germany into a gas-reliant system for the next 30 years. This could make the 2045 climate neutrality goal significantly harder and more expensive to reach.

Economic Efficiency: Storage and demand-side management (adjusting industrial consumption based on supply) are often cheaper than building and maintaining "standby" gas plants. A law that favors the more expensive option could lead to higher electricity prices for consumers and industry alike.

Legal Challenges: The bne’s critique suggests that the law may be vulnerable to legal challenges. If storage operators feel systematically discriminated against despite their "overriding public interest" status, they may take their cases to the European Court of Justice, potentially stalling the very "acceleration" the law seeks to achieve.

Grid Stability vs. Climate Goals: The government argues that gas plants are a "bridge" to a hydrogen future. However, the bne and other critics argue that the "bridge" is being built at the expense of the "destination." If the legislative focus remains on central, large-scale plants, the development of a decentralized, smart, and flexible grid could be stifled.

Conclusion: A Call for Technology Neutrality

The bne’s conclusion is clear: the FlexBG needs a radical overhaul before it becomes law. The association demands that all acceleration measures be applied equally to all flexibility options—including batteries, pumped hydro, and sector-coupling technologies like power-to-heat.

"Acceleration is necessary," the statement concludes, "but it must not lead to new fossil path dependencies or disproportionate interventions."

As the draft moves toward the Bundestag, the pressure is on the Ministry for Economic Affairs to prove that the FlexBG is truly about "flexibility" and not just a fast-track for the fossil-fuel industry. For the innovators represented by the bne, the soul of the Energiewende hangs in the balance.

About the bne:
The Bundesverband Neue Energiewirtschaft (bne) represents the interests of grid-independent energy service providers and innovators in Germany. Its members focus on renewable energy, digitalization, and market-based solutions for the energy transition.