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

From the Association of the New Energy Industry (bne) to the energy giant RWE, critics argue that the proposed mechanism is not only redundant but actively harmful to the expansion of renewable energy. A recent analysis by the bne has further fueled the fire, suggesting that the policy contains a perverse incentive: E.ON, a major grid operator that has lobbied for the proposal for years, stands to profit significantly, while new wind and solar projects face escalating risks and deteriorating financing conditions.

As the German Bundestag prepares to deliberate on the matter, the bne has presented a comprehensive seven-point alternative plan designed to synchronize power generation with grid expansion through intelligence and transparency rather than restrictive mandates.

I. Main Facts: The Redispatch Controversy and the Allegation of Market Distortion

At the heart of the dispute is the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt." In the context of the German power grid, "redispatch" refers to the intervention by grid operators to adjust the power output of generating plants to prevent local grid overloads. Traditionally, if a renewable energy plant is forced to throttle its output to protect the grid, the operator is compensated for the lost revenue.

The proposed "Redispatch Reservation" would change this dynamic fundamentally. It would allow grid operators to connect new renewable plants to the grid under the condition that they can be curtailed without the usual compensation or under highly restrictive, "uncalculable" contractual terms.

The E.ON Factor

The bne’s analysis highlights a troubling imbalance. The association alleges that the mechanism is tailored to the interests of large distribution grid operators, specifically E.ON. By shifting the financial risk of grid congestion onto the shoulders of plant operators, grid companies can theoretically avoid or delay expensive infrastructure upgrades while maintaining control over the flow of energy.

Risks to the Energy Transition

For developers of new wind and solar parks, the reservation introduces a "toxic" level of uncertainty. Without guaranteed grid access and predictable compensation for curtailment, the risk profile of these projects skyrockets. This leads to:

• Higher Interest Rates: Banks and investors demand higher returns to compensate for the "redispatch risk."
• Increased System Costs: Higher financing costs translate directly into higher Levelized Costs of Electricity (LCOE), ultimately burdening consumers.
• Stalled Investment: Many projects may become unbankable, threatening Germany’s 2030 climate targets.

II. Chronology: From Grid Bottlenecks to Legislative Gridlock

The path to the current crisis began several years ago as the pace of renewable energy installation began to outstrip the speed of grid expansion.

• 2021–2023: As the "Easter Package" and other legislative reforms accelerated wind and solar deployment, grid operators reported a massive surge in connection requests. Distribution grids, in particular, became the primary bottleneck.
• 2024: Lobbying efforts intensified for a "flexible" connection model. Proponents argued that it is better to connect a plant with the caveat of occasional curtailment than to not connect it at all until the grid is reinforced.
• Early 2025: The concept of the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" gained traction within the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK), despite warnings from independent power producers.
• Mid-2026: The proposal was integrated into the latest draft of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) and the Energy Industry Act (EnWG).
• October 7, 2026: The bne officially launches its "Glorious Seven" proposal package, signaling a unified front of critics—ranging from small-scale developers to traditional utilities like RWE—against the government’s current trajectory.

III. Supporting Data: The bne’s Seven-Point Plan for a Smarter Grid

The bne argues that the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" is a blunt instrument. Instead, they propose seven specific, intelligence-driven solutions to solve the synchronization problem between generation and infrastructure.

1. Guaranteed Grid Access for "Freedom Energies"

The bne demands a reliable, statutory right to grid connection for renewables, even in areas where capacity is currently tight. They argue that this right must not be replaced by "arbitrary individual contracts" with incalculable risks. Furthermore, energy storage systems that share a connection point with a renewable plant must also benefit from this priority access.

2. Strategic "Peak Clipping" (Spitzenkappung)

The association supports the idea of limiting injection peaks (e.g., cutting off the top 3-5% of output during peak production hours). However, they insist that this must be a "system-serving" measure. If a plant limits its peak, the "freed up" capacity must be legally and technically reserved for additional new connections. Currently, grid operators often curtail plants without accounting for the newly available space in their grid planning.

3. Mandatory Integration of Storage

Instead of simply "turning off" wind and solar parks during redispatch events, the bne argues that the energy should be diverted into on-site storage.

• Bidirectional Flexibility: Storage units at renewable sites should be allowed to absorb excess grid power (e.g., surplus wind energy from other regions) during periods of high production.
• Efficiency: The bne claims that current regulations prevent "Multi-use" storage (MiSpeL), resulting in wasted energy and poor utilization of existing infrastructure.

4. Standardized Construction Cost Subsidies (BKZ)

Financial planning is the backbone of the energy transition. The bne suggests that standardized, nationwide, and non-discriminatory Construction Cost Subsidies (Baukostenzuschüsse – BKZ) are far more predictable for developers than a "Redispatch Reservation." However, these costs must not "stack" on top of other fees like the "Flexible Connection Agreement" (FCA) and redispatch risks, which would make projects economically unviable.

5. Radical Grid Transparency

A central pillar of the bne’s proposal is "Switchgear Transparency" (Schaltfeldtransparenz). Project developers currently operate in a "black box," often not knowing where grid capacity is truly available.

• Open Data: Grid operators should be required to publish real-time data on free and reserved capacities, available bays in substations, and planned completion dates for expansion projects.
• Efficiency: Transparency would reveal that many switchgear fields are underutilized and could immediately accommodate more storage or generation.

6. Accelerated Expansion and Private Initiative

The bne calls for a "24-month rule." If a grid operator is assigned a connection project but fails to complete the necessary network reinforcement within two years, the project developer should have the right to build the infrastructure themselves or pre-finance it. These costs would then be reimbursed or offset against future grid fees. This removes the "waiting game" that currently kills projects.

7. Statutory Right to Flexible Connection in the EEG

Finally, the bne argues that developers and grid operators do not negotiate on equal footing. To level the playing field, the EEG must include clear rules: a right to "overbuild" (installing more generation than the connection capacity, managed by smart controllers), mandatory usage rules, and clear obligations for both parties.

IV. Official Responses: A House Divided

The reaction to the bne’s analysis and the government’s proposal has split the German political and industrial landscape.

Robert Busch, CEO of bne, stated emphatically:

"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."

RWE, traditionally a rival to the decentralized members of the bne, has found common ground in this fight. A spokesperson for the utility giant noted that the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" creates an "uninvestable environment" for large-scale renewables, which are essential for Germany’s industrial base.

E.ON and other Grid Operators, meanwhile, maintain that the reservation is a necessary "emergency brake." They argue that without the ability to limit new connections in congested areas, the physical integrity of the grid is at risk. They dismiss the "perverse incentive" allegation, claiming that their primary goal is maintaining supply security in an increasingly complex system.

The Federal Ministry (BMWK) has remained cautious. While acknowledging the need for investment certainty, officials suggest that the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" is a pragmatic solution to the "immediate crisis" of grid connection delays. However, sources within the coalition suggest that the FDP (Free Democrats) and the Greens are at odds over the "private grid expansion" proposal, with the FDP favoring more private initiative and the Greens focusing on state-regulated expansion.

V. Implications: The High Cost of the "Easy Way Out"

The "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" represents what many economists call a "short-term fix with long-term costs." If the government proceeds with the current draft, the implications could be far-reaching:

1. The Financing Gap

If wind and solar become "high-risk" assets due to uncompensated curtailment, the cost of capital will rise. In a capital-intensive industry like renewables, a 1-2% increase in interest rates can determine whether a project is built or abandoned. This could lead to a significant slowdown in the "Energiewende" just as it needs to accelerate.

2. Market Concentration

Small and medium-sized developers, who have been the backbone of the German energy transition, are less able to absorb the risks of the "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" than large corporations. This policy could inadvertently lead to a market dominated only by the largest players, reducing competition and innovation.

3. Technological Stagnation

By relying on curtailment (turning things off) rather than storage and digitalization (managing things smartly), Germany risks falling behind in the global race for smart-grid technology. The bne’s proposals regarding storage and transparency are designed to push the industry toward a "24/7 carbon-free" reality.

4. Consumer Prices

Ultimately, if the "system costs" increase due to inefficient grid management and higher financing rates, these costs will be passed on to the taxpayer through the EEG levy or directly to the consumer through higher grid fees.

Conclusion

The "Redispatch-Vorbehalt" has become a symbol of the friction between the old world of centralized grid control and the new world of decentralized, flexible energy. The bne’s "Glorious Seven" proposals offer a roadmap out of the deadlock, emphasizing that the solution to grid bottlenecks is not to stop the flow of green energy, but to build a smarter, more transparent pipe to carry it. The Bundestag now faces a choice: protect the status quo of the major grid operators or pave the way for a resilient, investment-friendly energy future.