Die glorreichen Sieben: Wirksame Alternativen zum Redispatch-Vorbehalt – Bundesverband Neue

From the Association of New Energy Businesses (bne) to industrial giants like RWE, the consensus is growing: the current proposal for a Redispatch Reservation is not only redundant but potentially destructive to the investment climate for renewable energy. A recent analysis by the bne has further fueled the fire, suggesting a perverse incentive structure: E.ON, a dominant player in the German distribution network that has lobbied for the measure for years, stands to benefit disproportionately, while new wind and solar projects face crippling financial risks.

As the Bundestag prepares to deliberate on the next phase of the energy laws, the bne has released a comprehensive seven-point manifesto titled "The Glorious Seven," aimed at synchronizing power generation and grid expansion without sacrificing the momentum of the Energiewende.

Chronology: The Road to the Grid Bottleneck

The current crisis did not emerge in a vacuum. For the last decade, Germany has successfully incentivized the rollout of renewable energy, but the physical infrastructure—the power lines and transformers—has failed to keep pace.

• 2021–2023: As the "Traffic Light" coalition took office, the focus was on accelerating renewable targets. However, the "Redispatch" phenomenon—where grid operators intervene to throttle generation in the north and ramp up fossil fuel plants in the south to prevent grid overloads—began costing consumers billions of euros annually.
• 2024–2025: Regulatory discussions shifted toward "Redispatch 2.0," attempting to integrate smaller renewable plants into the grid management system. During this period, major Distribution System Operators (DSOs), led by E.ON, began advocating for a "reservation" clause. This would allow operators to limit the grid connection of new plants based on projected future congestion.
• Early 2026: The federal government integrated the Redispatch Reservation into its legislative draft. Industry pushback was immediate, claiming the clause would allow DSOs to "gatekeep" the grid, favoring their own business interests over national climate goals.
• October 2026: The bne releases its analysis, revealing that the reservation clause could lead to higher system costs and an unfair advantage for established incumbents, prompting the current call for a radical pivot in strategy.

Supporting Data: Why the Redispatch Reservation Fails

The bne’s analysis highlights a critical flaw in the proposed legislation: it shifts the burden of grid inadequacy from the operator to the producer. Under the proposed "Vorbehalt," a grid operator could grant a connection but reserve the right to curtail the plant’s output without the traditional compensation levels if the grid remains unexpanded.

For a bank financing a €100 million wind farm, this creates an "uncalculable risk." If the revenue of a project can be slashed at the whim of a grid operator’s planning delays, the cost of capital increases. Higher interest rates for green energy projects directly translate to higher electricity prices for consumers.

Furthermore, the bne’s data suggests that E.ON’s unique position as both a massive grid operator and a participant in the energy market creates a conflict of interest. By restricting new, more efficient competitors through the Redispatch Reservation, incumbents can maintain the value of their existing assets while delaying the necessary, and costly, digitalization of the distribution networks.

The "Glorious Seven": bne’s Blueprint for Reform

To move past the deadlock, the bne has proposed seven concrete measures designed to replace the Redispatch Reservation with a system of "intelligent synchronization."

1. Guaranteed Grid Access for "Freedom Energies"

The bne argues that investment in renewables requires a reliable, statutory right to grid connection. This right should exist even where capacity is currently tight. "This claim must not be replaced by arbitrary individual contracts with uncalculable risks," the association stated. Furthermore, storage systems sharing a connection point with renewable plants must also benefit from this priority access.

2. Strategic Peak Shaving

A central tenet of the proposal is that "peak shaving" (limiting the top 3-5% of a plant’s output during rare peak production hours) must be used to create space for more connections. Currently, operators may cap production without using the freed-up capacity to allow other plants onto the grid. The bne demands that operators be legally required to factor this reduced peak load into their grid planning, effectively squeezing more "juice" out of the existing wires.

3. Mandatory Intermediate Storage

Instead of simply "turning off" wind turbines when the grid is full, the bne advocates for a "storage first" policy. During redispatch events, excess energy should be diverted into on-site batteries. Crucially, these storage units must also be allowed to take in "surplus" wind power from the general grid, preventing the wastage of green electrons.

4. Transparent and Standardized Construction Subsidies (BKZ)

Financing a project requires predictability. The bne suggests that nationwide, non-discriminatory standards for construction cost subsidies (Baukostenzuschüsse) are far superior to the uncertainty of a redispatch clause. These costs must be transparently calculated and should not "stack" on top of other fees, ensuring that the most economically efficient grid connection point is always chosen.

5. Radical Transparency in Grid Capacity

One of the most significant hurdles for developers is the "black box" of grid data. The bne calls for "Switchgear Transparency" (Schaltfeldtransparenz). Developers need to know exactly where capacity is available, which fields are underutilized, and the specific timelines for planned expansions. Transparency, the bne argues, is the only way to ensure that existing infrastructure is used efficiently.

6. Privatizing Grid Expansion as a Last Resort

If a grid operator fails to eliminate a bottleneck within 24 months of a project allocation, the bne proposes that project developers should be allowed to build or pre-finance the necessary grid infrastructure themselves. These costs would then be reimbursed or offset against future fees. This "right to build" would put pressure on DSOs to end the era of "waiting networks" (Wartenetze).

7. Legalizing Flexible Grid Connections in the EEG

The power dynamic between a multi-billion euro grid operator and a local solar park developer is inherently lopsided. The bne demands that the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) be amended to include a "Right to Overbuild" and clear, binding rules for flexible grid usage that protect the interests of both parties.

Official Responses: Industry and Political Fallout

The bne’s executive director, Robert Busch, was blunt in his assessment: "A grid bottleneck is, first and foremost, a work order for the grid operator. Anyone who wants to synchronize generation and grids must digitalize and expand the grids and let storage do its job. Our seven proposals show how a suitable legal framework can be created for this."

The reaction from the broader industry has been uncharacteristically unified. RWE, typically a more conservative voice in the energy sector, has signaled its disapproval of the Redispatch Reservation, noting that it creates an "investment barrier" at a time when Germany needs to triple its renewable installation rate to meet 2030 targets.

Within the Bundestag, the proposal has split the coalition. Pro-business members are wary of the increased costs and the "monopolistic" undertones of the DSO-led proposal, while some environmentalists fear that without some form of curtailment, the cost of redispatch—already in the billions—will become politically unsustainable.

Implications: The High Stakes of the Grid Crisis

The resolution of this conflict will dictate the success or failure of Germany’s climate goals. If the Redispatch Reservation is implemented in its current form, the following consequences are likely:

• Capital Flight: Institutional investors may pivot toward markets with more predictable regulatory environments, such as the U.S. (fueled by the Inflation Reduction Act) or other EU neighbors.
• Increased Consumer Costs: By raising the risk profile of renewable projects, the "cost of capital" increases. Since renewables are capital-intensive, this directly raises the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE), which is ultimately passed to the consumer.
• Stranded Green Energy: Without the storage and peak-shaving solutions proposed by the bne, Germany will continue to pay to "turn off" wind farms while simultaneously paying to "turn on" gas plants to balance the grid—a double-cost that undermines the economic logic of the energy transition.

The Bundestag now faces a choice. It can continue with a policy that favors the incumbent grid operators and risks a slowdown in renewable deployment, or it can adopt the "Glorious Seven" approach—treating the grid not as a static pipe that is "full," but as a dynamic, digitalized system that can accommodate the "Freedom Energies" of the future.

As Robert Busch concluded, "The Bundestag now has the chance to tackle the grid crisis at its roots. As a result, the urgently needed investments across the entire breadth of the economy will once again be possible."