Why flexibility is becoming mandatory for companies in the energy sector

Germany is currently fundamentally restructuring its energy system – and on multiple fronts at the same time. Just a few years ago, the calculation for companies was simple: electricity came largely consistently from coal, gas, and nuclear power plants, grid fees were a manageable, predictable cost block, and sustainability reports were a voluntary bonus.

This starting situation no longer exists. Today, what counts is Flexibility. Renewable energy sources now account for nearly 60 % of Germany’s electricity, but they are weather-dependent and unevenly distributed across regions. Wind power is generated primarily in the north, while it is consumed mainly in the south and west. This shift from constant to volatile generation is not a footnote, but rather the structural core of nearly all current regulatory initiatives—from industrial electricity prices to the new AgNes grid fee system, dynamic electricity rates, and CO₂ pricing.

On-site generation & flexible consumption as success factors

In addition to generating your own green electricity using PV systems, what matters today is when electricity is drawn or fed back into the grid, and how flexibly loads, generation plants, and storage systems can respond to price signals or grid requirements. The new regulations are catching up, and companies that can actively manage their energy supply benefit from lower energy costs, reduce grid fees, and tap into new sources of revenue – for example, by providing flexibility to the electricity market.

Anyone who does not follow the news from the energy sector on a daily basis faces the challenge of having to classify several overlapping sets of rules at the same time—industrial electricity prices, electricity price compensation, AgNes, MiSpeL, CO₂ pricing, and reporting obligations may appear independent of one another, but they all point in a similar direction: they reward companies that can flexibly manage their energy consumption and tend to penalize those that continue to rely on rigid, inflexible procurement structures. This is precisely where CUBE CONCEPTS comes in.

How CUBE CONCEPTS promotes flexibility

CUBE CONCEPTS plans, implements, and operates photovoltaic and battery storage solutions for businesses – not as isolated individual projects, but as coordinated energy systems. They are tailored to the specific location, consumption, and regulatory situation. A battery storage system sits at the center and is indispensable today. Depending on its design, it can be used behind the meter for self-consumption optimization and peak shaving, or in front of the meter to generate its own revenue on the balancing energy and electricity markets – or a combination of both, depending on market conditions and operational needs.

Buy, Contracting & CPFS

Companies can choose between the traditional option of investing in their own system or a Contracting model. For battery storage systems, there is also the CUBE Profit Flex Solution® (CPFS) is possible. In this context, CUBE CONCEPTS assumes the initial investment, operation, and both technical and regulatory risks until ROI (typically 2-2.5 years) and takeover by the client. Through a profit-share model, the company benefits from the very beginning without having to tie up its own capital or build up expertise in market roles, redispatch, or grid connections. For companies that are primarily capital providers or site developers and whose core business is not in the energy industry, this is often the decisive difference: they gain access to flexibility as a service instead of having to build up flexibility themselves.

Our standard

Our underlying standard can be stated simply: through flexibility, we equip companies in the energy sector for a market environment that is changing faster than in the preceding decades – regulatory, technical, and economic. The following sections show precisely where this change is currently taking place and why PV and battery storage are increasingly becoming a structural necessity rather than an optional supplementary investment.

Rising costs – and how companies can specifically cushion them

Rising grid fees and grid expansion costs

To contextualize the current cost dynamics, it is first worth looking at the structure of the electricity price itself. For industrial customers as well as private households, it consists of three blocks whose weighting has shifted noticeably in recent years:

The grid fees fell by around 15 percent nationwide at the beginning of 2026, triggered by a state subsidy of 6.5 billion euros to the grid operators. This is temporary political relief—not a structural turnaround. This is because it is offset by an investment requirement that exceeds this subsidy many times over. Various studies assume the following figures:  

The grid expansion costs of 650 to 730 billion euros through 2045 will be passed on to all grid users via grid fees, even though their exact distribution has not yet been determined. Raising the necessary annual investment of approximately 34 billion euros in the future is one of the key issues in the Federal Network Agency’s current AgNes proceedings. However, it is controversial whether the total amount will be necessary by 2045. Counter-studies argue that costs could be reduced by up to 17 % through higher grid utilization achieved via digitalization and increased flexibility. This is a clear indication that flexibility (storage, smart load management) can help curb costs not only from a business perspective but also from an economic one.

CO₂ Pricing vs. Relief Measures

Besides grid fees, two other cost blocks affect companies – partly relieving, partly burdening:

• CO2 pricing: ETS 1 will trade at around €65–75/t in early 2026 with an upward trend; ETS 2, postponed to 2028, will additionally increase the costs of fossil fuels in the medium term.
• Relief instruments: Industrial electricity price and electricity price compensation

Both instruments can be combined upon application and only in 2026 for the same amount of electricity. The 5-cent industrial electricity rate remains in effect through 2028, and there is no end in sight for the SPK. However, the following applies to both relief programs: 50 % of the subsidy must be reinvested in decarbonization – Battery storage and Contracting are explicitly included. In addition, since 2026, a reduction in the electricity tax to the European minimum (0.05 ct/kWh) has applied to the manufacturing sector, which is expected to remain in effect in Germany for the long term.

The AgNes grid fee reform

With AgNes (Allgemeine Netzentgeltsystematik Strom), the Federal Network Agency is fundamentally restructuring the grid fee system—the current StromNEV expires on December 31, 2028. We have detailed information on the current status of the procedure in our AgNes interim report for industrial clients In summary. The most important new features from 2029:

• New base model: The previous capacity charge (measured annual peak load) is being replaced by a capacity charge based on self-ordered capacity – consumption above the ordered amount costs significantly more (up to 3.5 times as much). As a result, peak shaving is losing importance while load shifting is gaining importance.
• New cost allocation: No longer the local grid load, but the total „grid-related final consumption” determines the cost distribution – this noticeably alters regional tariff differences, regardless of the basic model.
• Feed-in tariff For the first time, generation plants > 30 kW will also pay a capacity contribution for feed-in (approx. €4–7/kW/year).
• Storage: Battery storage systems that are connected to the grid before August 4, 2028, are grandfathered in and exempt from grid injection fees for 20 years. New storage systems will pay a moderate capacity fee from then on.
• Belt load & Atypical grid usage: Both discount models under Section 19 of the StromNEV will remain in place for existing customers on a transitional basis until December 31, 2031 – the future design will not be decided until early 2027.

The framework definition is scheduled to be finalized by the end of 2026, and the formal consultation is expected to begin in the summer of 2026.

Reporting obligations & certifications as a lever

The CSRD was significantly streamlined by the EU Omnibus Directive (in force since March 18, 2026). Anyone planning today should know the new thresholds:

More on this in our report: Update 2026: New CSRD Thresholds & CSDDD Changes via EU Omnibus Directive

For many medium-sized companies, this eliminates the formal obligation—however, their large corporate customers subject to reporting requirements continue to request corresponding ESG and energy data along the supply chain (trickle-down effect). Regardless of the formal obligation, certifications such as EMAS or ISO 50001 Regarding tangible economic leverage: They can lead to grid fee reductions and make it easier to provide energy data to banks, subsidy providers, and business partners. Storage systems and PV plants with coupled energy management systems (EMS)—which not only intelligently coordinate consumption and generation, but also generate reports at the push of a button—are worth their weight in gold in this regard.

Capacity market (Electricity Supply Act): Reward for flexibility with restrictions

Stabilizing grid services provided by storage systems are already being financially rewarded today. However, with the Electricity Supply Security and Capacity Act (StromVKG), which was initiated by the German federal government on May 13, 2026, a German capacity market is being created for the first time. The set of rules, initially designed for gas-fired power plants at launch, will be broadened in subsequent tenders in 2027 and 2029. At that point, it will also be explicitly open to storage systems, load management, and aggregated facilities.

Section 14a of the Energy Industry Act (EnWG) is already having a much more immediate impact: companies with controllable consuming devices receive reduced grid fees if, in return, they allow the grid operator to curtail their power draw in bottleneck situations. Unlike the capacity market, which is still under development, this mechanism is already established and closely integrated with the future AgNes system.

Flexibility through PV, storage, and EMS as a joint response

Looking at the previously described levels together, a pattern emerges: flexibility is rewarded, and in almost every area, the same technical combination noticeably mitigates the regulatory impact. An EMS controls consumption, PV generation, and battery storage in such a way that load peaks are cut, self-consumption is maximized, and consumption is purposefully shifted to favorable time windows. Exactly this capability impacts several of the aforementioned control levers simultaneously:

• Regarding the industrial electricity price and the SPK An investment in storage and EMS directly fulfills the reinvestment requirement and, depending on the structure, may even qualify for an additional flexibility bonus of 10 %.
• In terms of network fees peak shaving reduces the individually ordered annual peak load—and thus directly the basis of assessment in the future AgNes capacity price model. Those who actively manage their loads also avoid the risk of being billed at up to 3.5 times the rate for consumption exceeding the ordered capacity.
• CO2 costs: Every self-generated and consumed kilowatt-hour improves a company's carbon footprint and thus its overall energy costs. It also saves grid fees, electricity taxes, and expensive external purchases.
• Certification An EMS delivers complete, automatically recorded consumption and generation data – precisely the data basis required for EMAS or ISO 50001 verifications as well as for CSRD-relevant energy data in the supply chain. This facilitates access to subsidies and reduces internal administrative effort.

None of these instruments overrides the underlying regulations. But taken together, they shift a company's position from reactive cost absorption to active management – and that is precisely what makes flexibility the connecting element across all three regulatory levels.

Conclusion

What was once a largely constant power generation has become increasingly volatile – and virtually every one of the aforementioned regulatory levels rewards companies that respond to this volatility with their own flexibility: whether through the reinvestment obligation of the industrial electricity price, future flexibility incentives in the AgNes system, or certifications that lower grid costs. Photovoltaics and battery storage are the concrete corporate response to this change.