After the 7,000-hour rule large consumers of electricity in Germany are entitled to individual grid charges if their electricity consumption is uniform, which leads to Discounts from up to 90 % leads. Around 580 companies with an average annual consumption of 155 GWh will benefit from this every year. These companies, primarily from the chemical, paper and non-ferrous metal industries, will benefit from a reduction in grid fees of around €15 per MWh. In total, this will save the electricity-intensive industry around €1.5 billion in 2024. However, this regulation, which is still set out in Section 19 (2) StromNEV, has been heavily criticized because, in contrast to the atypical network use hinders the flexibility of electricity consumption and makes the use of cheap green surplus electricity more difficult.
Criteria & calculation of the 7,000-hour rule
The 7,000-hour rule is available to companies whose systems are at least 10 GWh with 7,000 full load hours per year. The full load hours are calculated by dividing the annual consumption in kilowatt hours [kWh] by the maximum peak load in kilowatts [kW]. This type of electricity demand is also generally referred to as Belt load and the constant quantity of electricity as band current. § Section 19 (2) StromNEV provides for a staggered reduction in grid fees: At 7,000 full load hours, the grid fees are reduced by 80 %, at 7,500 full load hours by 85 % and at 8,000 full load hours by 90 %. Another factor that is taken into account when calculating the individual grid fees is the physical distance between the consumer and the nearest base load power plant.
Criticism of the 7,000-hour rule
The main criticism of the 7,000-hour rule is that it wrong incentives for energy-intensive companies. The discount for uniform grid usage does not reflect the true savings in grid costs and thwarts grid-friendly behavior on the part of the companies concerned. The Threshold values tempt industrial companies to artificially increase their electricity consumption in order to achieve the next discount level. No wonder, for example, that a company with an annual consumption of 9.5 GWh can save 80 % of grid charges in one fell swoop by increasing its consumption. This Paradox can not only increase real operating costs, but also contradicts the need to save energy and the energy transition.
In addition, the 7,000-hour rule encourages pointless Physical proximity from energy-intensive companies to base load power plants. These are being shut down less and less and gradually as part of the energy transition. In addition, this usually makes the Logistics for consuming operations, as the energy market of the future will be characterized by decentralized generating units. The administrative effort involved in determining individual grid fees should not be underestimated either.
The regulation inhibits the urgently needed Flexibilization of production processes and promotes the preservation of old consumption habits. This blocks innovation and investment in energy-flexible technologies and, in the long term, the competitiveness of German industry. The 7,000-hour rule distorts the market by favoring certain consumption profiles and disadvantaging others. This has already led to inefficient investments This is unequally distributing the costs of the energy transition and underpins the demand for longer operating times for fossil fuel power plants, which is slowing down progress in the decarbonization of the energy system.
Overall, the 7,000-hour rule contradicts all the objectives of the Green Deals of the European Union, which aims for comprehensive decarbonization and the promotion of renewable energies. It prevents the necessary innovations and adjustments in production processes that are required to achieve these goals.
Abolition of the 7,000-hour rule & discount reform plans
In view of the criticism of the 7,000-hour rule and the EU Commission's rejection of special discounts, the Federal Network Agencyto phase out this regulation at the end of 2025. The abolition was announced in July 2024 as part of the debate on a reform of the grid fee rebates. The aim is to align the grid fees with the Actual network loads of consumers. Grid fee discounts should be clearly aligned with the signals of the Spot electricity market prices orientate and Barriers to flexibility reduce. In addition, they should provide clear and targeted incentives to Power grid relief and the energy-intensive Industry at a similar level relieve. There are various approaches to this.
New reform approaches under discussion
Which regulation will replace the 7,000-hour rule or the band load privilege in the future is currently being discussed. In general, experts advise that the Flexible prices on the spot market and the Limits reduced should be introduced. The rebates must be more targeted, cause lower costs and relieve the burden on electricity-intensive industry in a similar way to the current regulation. One of the most important starting points is the Network serviceability. Prices should be based on the actual costs of the electricity grids and offer incentives to reduce the load.
The cost-reflective approach is based on the grid loads caused. Companies that relieve the grid or do not cause any grid congestion therefore pay lower grid fees. As these depend on the time of day and weather, the Dynamic chargesThe discount can vary from region to region and be set at short notice. Instead of the 7,000-hour rule, flexible electricity consumption or a volume discount could also be a prerequisite for discounts. Regionalization would also serve to map longer-term grid bottlenecks.
Conclusion: flexibility instead of rigid electricity discounts
The 7,000-hour rule still grants large German consumers up to 90 % discount on grid fees for consistent electricity consumption, saving around 580 companies 1.5 billion euros a year. This rule will expire at the end of 2025 because it creates inefficient incentives, hinders flexibility in electricity consumption and makes it more difficult to use green electricity. In future, grid fees should be more closely aligned with actual grid loads and designed more flexibly in order to promote grid relief and at the same time provide appropriate relief for energy-intensive industry. Reform proposals include aligning discounts with spot electricity prices and introducing incentives for flexible electricity consumption that takes regional grid bottlenecks into account.