Battery Storage in Germany: A Grid Operator’s View - 50Hertz

I'm your host, Ed Porter. Welcome back to Transmission. Around 180 projects applied to connect to 50Hertz's grid this year. That's more than 80 gigawatts, roughly Germany's entire peak demand. And 50Hertz is just one of four transmission grid operators. Not all of it will get built. Under first come, first served. Developers were, as today's guest puts it, putting their towel on the sun lounger. So, Germany changed the rules. Maturity now beats speed, but connecting is only half of it. Germany already spends about 4 billion euros a year on grid congestion. Tens of gigawatts of merchant batteries could push that up or bring it down. My guest today is Wilhelm Kiewitt, Head of Energy Economics at 50Hertz. His job, design a market where batteries are worth building and the grid still runs smoothly once they are. Building in Germany, ask Ko what a battery earns there today, how it stacks up against solar or wind, and where power prices are heading. Sign up as free at modoenergy.com. Let's jump in. Hello Wilhelm. Welcome to Transmission. Thank you. And as ever, let's get straight into it. So what is one thing that people get wrong about what it takes to build batteries in Germany and to keep them useful to the system once they're there? Well, one very first thing is that people usually uh think that there's only one grid allocation uh scheme in Germany for all different kinds of asset classes. That's not correct. So we have one scheme for power plants. We have one for renewables and then we have one for loads like electrolysers like industrial loads. And there was a huge debate in Germany which kind of grid allocation scheme should be used for batteries and that is the reason why the TSOs in Germany have then invented that so-called maturity based um allocation scheme and this is something super new and uh something that we still need to put into legal uh framework but um that was the kind of what what we just built in the last year. >> Mhm. And we're talking about here allocation of grid connection capacities. Right? So this is when people aren't yet connected to the grid but want to get connected. this is the process that's being changed and if you to summarize that like h how how is it changing for those batteries coming through like what's what's new about it? Yeah. Well, we were first stand in a so-called first come first serve principle. Um, and that is also one of the main explanations why we see that huge so-called battery wave over the last years in the German electricity system because people were just kind of putting their towel there um hoping to get a slot um and then be be the among the first ones. And obviously this is not from a system systemic point of view not an e- e efficient scheme just because you don't get rewarded because of your maturity because of if you really are able to actually use the connection but more about the speed that you just put on the button and that is that cannot be of course the way we allocate grid access. >> Yes. And does it does this new process does it create more connection capacity or is it more around deciding more fairly who's standing at the front of the queue? Well, it's actually not creating more connections. Well, partly I would say physically in the end the amount of grid co grid codes grid nodes that we can build is limited is limited by the amount of people we have by the >> engineers. Exactly. Exactly. But of course what it does it tries to increase the maturity of each and and and every single um applicant and that of course then hopefully also in the end leads to the fact that more really invested um assets can actually be connected. So I would say it's twofold. It physically not necessarily creates more capacity but it makes more capacity usable for more grid users. >> Mhm. And we should get excited about that, right? Because it allows companies that want to bring these projects to life to get their sort of assets deployed quickly, but also for consumers, it lets them see the benefits of having these technologies deployed quicker as well. So something like hopefully both parties can get behind. >> Correct. Correct. And this is specifically important because during the energy transition in Germany, we do need a different kind of asset fleet. So we we we cannot no longer rely only on renewables and on some fossil power plants, but we also need more flexibility in the system. And this is exactly where batteries come into play. >> Okay. And and when you're ranking sort of projects based on maturity, does that does that risk kind of favoring those who are kind of ready to go with the deposits, those that kind of have a good cash reserve, even though there might be other groups who have not got so ready access to cash, but they have got good projects. Are you worried about that? I would say partly it um the good thing is that about the maturity um u um process is that we have several indicators to actually evaluate maturity. It's not only about how how much cash can you bring on the table. It's also about do you have the ground, do you have the permission to build and so on. So there are other other criteria that are not so much depending on how big you are as a player. >> Yeah. And it's like a scorecard, right? So you kind of each project gets assessed on each of these each of these categories. >> And maybe for people listening outside of Germany as well, like I think this is the the type of thing that we're probably going to see in more grids worldwide, right? So just going beyond this kind of first come first serve to are you actually ready to deploy because we can't have people who are just sort of at the front of the queue because they happen to be at the front of the queue but they aren't really ready to go. Okay. It's a fascinating part. Uh I think one of the other things that's unique about Germany is that obviously four TSOs, so transmission system operators. How much kind of coordination is there from the TSO side? Obviously, there has to be coordination, but how how did they how did they coordinate to make sure that this uh reform was brought forward? That's something that most people don't know of. We are for transmission system operators, for independent companies, but of course, we have all the same business model. We have all exactly the same regulation in Germany. And that leads to the fact that we are forced to cooperate. And that is the reason why we have built up over the last years a huge uh organization of um several working groups of steering committees and so on in order to make sure that on various uh topics of market design of grid access of system operation and so on we can harmonize our ideas and also fulfill certain legal um obligations that we have. So the question of involving a new grid access scheme was not the reason for building that TSO cooperation. It was already there and it was just another topic on the table where we should align. >> Okay. And it's quite interesting like if I reflect to other grids some of them only have a single TSO and it's it's quite nice to have so there the downside is that multiple TSOs feel like some element of duplication and and maybe the in in Germany the DSO side is probably the bigger part of that rather than the TSO side 800 plus I think um but but the the nice part about it um is that in the uh in the like market design right it's it's if if you have a a system where it's a single TSO the kind of TSO comes up with an idea here and there's no real kind of challenge around that. There's challenge from outside the TSO, but in a system with four TSOs, it's kind of nice because I imagine you don't all agree. So, you kind of get this ability to have this debate before an idea comes sort of quote unquote like fully formed to the market. That is true where there is kind of a um I would say a natural rivalry uh among the four TSOs which is nice. Um I mean let's be very clear we are geographically monopolies that means nobody can enter into the area of the other. So that makes it very clear who is responsible for what. But I would say there's two main main benefits of that um um system we have right now. First one not every TSO has to do everything. So we are already today sharing specific tasks among each other most specifically about IT. So there's for example one IT system that only one TSO builds and then all the others can actually use it and then for another IT system it's the other one. So we are sharing several tasks among each other so that not everybody does everything. >> And secondly we have that um uh nice um uh nice way of um designing different ideas and I always tend to say we are four companies but if we are able to bring one opinion out of four companies this is more valuable than only four opinions. So the sum of four is more than four in my opinion. >> I like it. I like it. Okay. And one final kind of question on this grid connection allocation. So of developers who might be listening to this and they're sat on a wait list. How many should be sort of planning for a 2030s connection rather than a connection that might have been originally listed as 2029. >> First first this is going to be a longer answer because there's quite some history behind it. What we have to be clear about is that um getting grid access at the transmission system transmission system in Germany is nothing um like a mass process. It hasn't been a mass process over the last years. So you can basically say there was one or two or probably four applicants every year for grid access to the transmission system and now over the last two years we have seen a a very steep rise of over 100 applicants. It's super crazy and the mass the the vast majority of that is is batteries. So 50Hertz only has then decided to provide more than 30 GW of new capacity to these applicants and one out of these applicants the vast majority is batteries. So right now there is 14 GW of batteries that have already a positive um um grid reservation from from 50Hertz >> with a project starting in 2029 or earlier. >> Okay. >> And that means there's already 14 GW of batteries that can be sure that they are going to be connected to the 50Hertz grid alone. Now in the in big number >> that's a huge number. We are starting from less than one right now. So, so it's it's it's huge. >> And and if you kind of like if you look at 50Hertz and the other three TSOs and then you add in the DSOs as well in terms of those connections, if you kind of multiply that number up, I I don't think that's a number that if roughly I think that number is very hard number to deliver by 2030. Is that is that a little bit where you're going or or >> Yeah. What what I want to say is that one thing is you get the the agreement of a connection that's going to be built. The other thing is when is the actual commissioning taking place because of of course building the project from the from the battery point of view but also from the grid connection point of view takes time um not only because of the construction work but also because of the permissions and so on. So over overall we are going to see a lot of batteries being built and connected during the early 30s. That's my my best guess. And you're fully right. If you only sum up the the TSO um battery reservations already there today, we are talking about probably more than 50 GW of batteries only transmission system adding on top everything that's in the distribution level. And then comes this new maturity based uh allocation scheme that we just started this year for the first time. And just to give you one single number, we had on top of the figures that I just told you, we have on top roughly 180 new applicants of batteries only at the 50Hertz area. >> Mhm. >> With which are summing up to I think more than 80 gigawatts. >> That's crazy. >> Of extra batteries on top of that. >> To give you an an idea, the peak load of Germany is 80 gigawatts. >> Yeah. Yeah. And like when we run our forecast for Germany, I think our numbers for battery buildout by say 2050, we're looking at that like 60 to 80 gigawatts total number, correct? For like batteries that can get built. So when you're talking about these numbers, I'm kind of sort of thinking, well, hold on, something's something's got to give here. >> And that is exactly also the one thing that keeps us awake at night. We have given positive reservations to 14 gigawatt of batteries but of course we are not really sure how much of these 14 will actually be built because in the end it's a huge question of is there a business case still in the early 30s yes or no. Um so these are huge figures but how much of these figures is actually going to be built that's yeah not really sure at the moment. a fascinating space and if you're a developer who's thinking should I join the back of the queue I think these numbers should be really helpful for you because it's kind of there are a lot of projects that are already sort of planned to be built and are getting these offers coming through then there's an additional bucket of of projects that have also additionally applied and so if you're joining the back of that queue um and we're only trying to get something like 60 to 80 and it seems mad to say we're only trying to get 60 to 80 gigawatts because that is a huge number um just just know that there's kind of all these projects sort of slightly before you and so the chance of you kind of joining the back of the queue and then getting progressed could be quite slim. >> Yeah. Um I think what is very important to know is that we as a transmission system operator we are responsible for overall system efficiency, overall system operability. So we are interested in those battery developers who really want to build. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And my best guess is that there are still quite a lot of developers out there who probably are not fully sure whether they can actually build, whether they can actually get them the finance, whether they have a bankable case and so on and so on. So let's see it's how much of of the figures that we have just talked about are going to be built really in the end and probably then we may may come up to a figure that you were talking about like 60 to 80. So even if you are right now at the end of the queue, >> it may be the case that you still have a chance because there's a lot of of of the guys before you that in the end will not really build. >> Yeah, it's fascinating. Um I think it's funny. I think we might look back on like this period of time. Let's say we in 2040 we'll look back on this period of time. It's kind of this explosion from four applications per year to 50 to 100 and sort of how on earth did we try and sort of manage it all. Anyway, enough on grid connections because I I it's interesting but I also want to sort of talk about the the broader system. So 50Hertz. So your your buildout spend as 50Hertz moving from connections into generally system management. So uh your buildout spend has stepped up sharply in recent years. What's driving that? And perhaps just beyond kind of I think one answer will be yes we're trying to connect more renewables but like beyond that how come that spend's really moving up? >> That's a very very fair question. I would say if you look at uh how much investments we are doing and how much this costs um for sure the the connection of renewables and out of these I would say offshore connections are a huge cost driver um they are of course a very very big part but then and that is what I was saying beforehand we are in an energy transition right now that means we have to rebuild our whole electricity system and that means that load flows are moving That mean that means that on regional level we need different kinds of grids, different kind of connections and so on. And that also leads to the fact that in the transmission system itself we have to have new assets. Yeah. We have to have STATCOMs, we have a um um a much stronger AC network to build. So an um the the classical overhead lines that you can see in in in the country. So all these investments they all build up to this huge um investment portfolio. So part of that is renewables and probably also the bigger part, but then we also just have to strengthen our network in order to make it fit for the energy transition. >> Yeah. And STATCOMs don't get mentioned often enough on this podcast. Would you like to give a quick intro as to what a STATCOM is? >> Yeah. A STATCOM is basically a huge power electronics um um device I would say that helps you to balance your system um physically without going too much into detail. And it is basically a super nice instrument for the TSO for example to make sure that we have sufficient another physical term reactive power in the system which we need in order to actually transport electricity from A to B. >> Yes. And I I we talk in this podcast a lot about this that that sort of the first level of understanding of power grids is kind of power moves from A to B and then once you get beyond that you open up this sort of uh Pandora's box. Yes. of system stability terms, things like reactive power or fault current or voltage. And it's a it's exciting space. There's um there's a few good podcasts in there. If you want to go into that detail, look back through the back catalog. Things like uh Ben Braun's recent episode from Fluence will give you a nice uh sort of brief on on how that works. You will feel like you're doing the start of an electrical engineering degree. Uh but it's nice to get it's nice to get started. Um okay, so we've talked about why that's that spend has stepped up. So in terms of like making the system fit for purpose as we as we sort of make this transition that buildout is part funded by a grid fee subsidy and maybe we'll talk a little bit about why that grid fee subsidy exists but that is tapering down and runs only to 2029. So what kind of happens to your investment case as that support tails off how how do you kind of keep it going? First of all, I think one has to explain a bit how the whole remuneration of um grid operators works. And that in the end is that we are regulated companies. That means everything that we spend we have to um explain that to our regulator and then the regulator has to accept or non-accepts that we are incurring. And every costs that are expect accepted by the um regulator we can then take as grid fees from the distribution system operators who will then take it finally from the end users. Now since during the last years um the overall costs for building and operating that um grid has been increasing. There is a huge debate in Germany around okay can the end user still afford electricity because electricity price of course is existing of the wholesale market price but also of taxes of levies and of grid fees and this that is the reason why the polit politicians have decided okay probably it would be good to um give kind of a subsidy to these grid fees to lower the overall wholesale electricity price for end users. So what does it do to TSOs once the grid fees are not there anymore? Well, you can easily say nothing because we will still incur all the costs that we have to the grid users. But of course, this will then um um finally be effective as a sharp increase for the overall um electricity price that end users have to pay. So what I want to say is this subsidy is basically a political decision. >> Okay. And it's it's it's a really important one because um you see these conversations all around Europe actually around the cost of these systems and and uh some of those conversations aren't as nuanced as they need to be because in each of these systems there can be subsidies that bring the cost down. But but the the thing I really wanted to say was that um power systems get cheap when utilization is high. And so one thing that governments should be really aware of is that if you create these very high prices on the system kind of high prices uh are bad for demand growth. And so if you look back through the history of power markets, there's been this kind of consistent approach to making sure that power prices are low to bring demand up and then you get good utilization of systems. And so it's kind of a fascinating thing to see what what will happen with those network charges and and and how they'll be kept in a way that keeps cost down and keeps kind of demand growing and better utilization of the system. Correct. And and and historically you can see that the huge utilities we had in Germany. So before the liberalization and the unbundling were in the media sometimes the bad guys. the bad guys who were only earning money on the back of the end consumers basically dictating the electricity price for everybody and and and and taking all their the reward in their backs. Now we can see if you look at the at the the whole electricity price in Germany that the amount of grid fees is sharply increasing and the amount that actually goes to the generation is only a minor part of the overall bill that you are paying. So my best guess is that the pressure the political pressure on grid fees is going to increase in the future. >> But that's a bit a dilemma in in which we are in. If we want to really do that transformation then we have to rebuild our grids not only at the transmission level also at the distribution level that will incur costs that need investments and someone has to pay. So I fully agree with you. If we want to convince more people, for example, to buy an an electric car rather than um um um a diesel car, then of course we have to make sure that electricity prices are lower relatively than than than than gasoline or or diesel. And and and that's a bit um that's a dilemma. Um the more consumers we have for electricity, the lower it gets for everybody. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. and and without making a political comment, we are starting to see diesel prices become quite expensive. So, a little bit of that is happening without intervention on the power side. Um, but let's let's let's go down to something a bit more uh niche, right? So, uh the developers are paying for their own construction, but then there's wider reinforcement that happens in in a network. So, um maybe let's take an example where you're starting to add uh more batteries or more solar projects to a particular sort of spur potential. there's sort of more, let's say, fault current that could get injected there. And so, as a result, you're having to sort of upgrade your substation to be able to handle uh to be handled more of that. And and and so with lots of storage coming into the queue, potentially, you know, 100 GW, hundreds of gigawatts. Should we be trying to sort of tilt the balance a little bit so that storage pays for more of that like wider upgrade work or is it right that kind of the wider upgrade work gets um socialized? And maybe I've mentioned storage there, but I think this is probably a almost a better question for data centers um because they appear to have the money to be able to make those changes. So do do you see that there's a world in which you could start to get some of those wider reinforcement costs taken by particular projects. That's a very interesting question that the German regulator is right now also discussing in its AgNes process. So a process about how can we actually make sure that the grid costs are allocated correctly among the different society players. Um and it's not an easy answer to give you. I would say in general talking only about batteries um I'm a very very big fan of batteries. I call them the multi-tool. Um when I studied roughly 20 years ago I was told batteries will never play a a huge role in the electricity system. Well, now we're seeing just the opposite and I'm very very much looking forward to it because I am strongly believe that in the end batteries will um actually lower transmission costs. That is what we are aiming for. So what we want to do is we want to connect as much batteries as we can integrate into the system and finally therefore lower the system costs and that also gives you one answer to your question. So I would say no, it doesn't make sense that batteries take more of the costs for the let's say wider upgrade upgrading of of the network. This is something that let's say grid users should pay for because in the end we have to just make sure that the batteries really um uh do good for the system. Okay. And then for data centers probably the um the thing is a bit different but here again the actual operation of the data center and the actual location of the data center are probably more important for how much other system costs are actually being generated rather than that they pay for specific upgrades in a in a in in a in a I don't know in a substation 150 km away which is also a bit difficult to argue actually >> and if you take a super super simple um representation of Germany, you've got a lot of generation in the north, a lot of demand sort of towards the south and and if you can put that data center up in the north where you've got a lot of that generation, then that's it's a nice approach to be able to take. >> Correct. >> Okay. And and let's kind of carry on this this theme, right? Um so sort of moving on from the investment side, but more onto like the broader market design. So batteries tend to get built where where they've uh been able to kind of put a position in the queue and where the revenues seem sort of unconstrained. um uh not perhaps strictly speaking where the grid needs them, but can can the market design close that gap? Can can the market design give more of an incentive to do exactly what I think you were asking for, which is almost like transmission systems and batteries to be to be friends with the intention of lowering the end cost of the transmission system? So, can can a market design give that incentive to batteries to get them to be located in the right place? I think one has to start with a discussion that is currently ongoing and that is about um should we or should we not integrate um so-called dynamic grid fees in Germany. And to make it very clear, I'm not a fan of dynamic grid fees. I know there's a lot of people in the ecosystem right now, a lot of academia and consulting firms and so on who are talking a lot about dynamic grid fees. I personally believe that this is not what we actually need to have that better allocation of physics and market especially when it comes to batteries. Um however the idea is is is very straightforward. The idea is that if there is a regional constraint in a grid at a at a point then the grid fee gives you a signal whether you as a battery should char should rather charge or discharge. Um that sounds nice in theory. In practice it is super complicated because it's a question about okay at which point in time before real time do I have which information about the grid? Do I have which information about the certainty of congestion and so on and so forth. So therefore I would say grid fees is probably not the answer that we are looking for. >> Okay. >> And then there's another one that also is going to be discussed. Germany is a very huge bidding zone. is one single market, one single electricity market and there are of course a lot of players right now who are discussing should we probably divide that bidding zone into into smaller bidding zones because what what would happen then if a battery is in one bidding zone let's say in the west of Germany and one in the in the north or in in the south of Germany then electricity prices will differ among in these zones not a lot but a bit and will actually reflect if there is a scarcity of electricity or if there's an an excess of electricity in in that zone. So this could be for example one one idea to to to give a market signal to batteries um to actually help where the physics need it. >> Yeah, I I think this is a fascinating part. So maybe maybe I'll I'll I'll put my cards on the table to to borrow an expression. Um but I I like dynamic grid fees as a way of bringing like a locational signal into the market. I would prefer a proper locational market design. So like a nodal or a zonal system I think is a more clear way of doing it. I think about dynamic grid fees as like a proxy for that. And so I think it's a it's a it's a it's a better way than not doing it. But I I I agree with you that I don't think it's as clean as actually just having a proper market design. Uh I I maybe that combines kind of your part A and part B of your response. Um and so in in your in your mind like what would be the because this is a big decision for Germany, right? So, so what would be your um preferred path forward in this in this case? So, uh I think moving away from dynamic grid fees and moving towards like a more zonal system. I would put it a bit more openly and I would say um and this is exactly what the TSOs by the way are already doing right now. So, the TSOs have started already right now um a process together with some important stakeholders in Germany and also together with the ministry to discuss about market design options that can actually help system operation. um as of 2030 and and and and and uh moving forward and what I would like in this discussion is to have a very open debate about what kind of instruments can we really talk about. Mhm. >> One another option could for example be to integrate um so-called flexible connection agreements for every kind of asset that we find there or to have so-called feasibility ranges another market design instrument which is more or less similar to a flexible connection agreements. So there's a lot of instruments on the table being discussed right now. What my wish would be is let's openly without let's say um closing the door um too early let's openly discuss all options which are on the table. One of them also being um uh let's say introducing regional markets or or or um splitting the the one bidding zone and and and have that open debate on the table because in the end what I think is important we are now in the second half of the energy transition in Germany. So we are moving against our target system. >> Mhm. >> And that means we also have to have a fair view of how the target system looks like. >> And that is why we cannot no longer talk about proxies or nice um and small ways of of healing the problem. So we should let's say aim for something that is also sustainable in the longer run. >> Yeah. There's a there's a a brand in the UK. I'm not sure whether Pringles have made it over to uh Germany, but the the catchphrase is once you pop, you can't stop. And uh I think about like good regulation a little bit in that way that you kind of go, "Oh, well, let's just bring in this sort of dynamic grid fee here and then, oh, that's kind of working. Let's bring in this thing over here." And then before you know it, you've got 20 different iterations of things that you're adding on and all these small incremental changes >> and this is where we are right now. So the electricity regulation right now is so complicated that even my own experts in my team, they don't understand everything. uh and I mean we are talking about really a super small set of people so it is very complicated already today and we are only talking right now about market design if we would open everything that happens after the market so congestion management and so on it's getting even more complicated and that is why I would say we we should aim for simplification we should aim for sustainable measures that really help um al also in the longer run >> okay I I love this is a really this is a really good review of kind of what's going on within within the space. One one final question on the sort of market design. So this merchant battery fleet is going to be trading to try and optimize their revenues. So do you feel that gives you a system that you can reliably operate or or do you feel like you need things like the flexible connection agreements that will prevent them from exporting or prevent them from importing at certain times? Like h how do you how do you think about that problem? >> Well, first of all, one thing is very important to mention. Um my feeling is that transmission system operators and I'm a representative they don't have fully understood the whole um let's say a set of players who are behind one single battery. Yeah. So we haven't understood that there are operators investors developers then how works with tolling and so on and so forth. So one thing I think is very important to mention that the whole way of how batteries are actually financed is something that that grid operators still have to understand. So we are there on a learning curve. But what we also see is on the other hand if batteries would just do as they want that could um at least if we don't integrate them good or well um that could lead to huge inefficiencies in our congestion management. Just to give you a figure in Germany, grid users are paying roughly 4 billion euros every year just for congestion management. So just for managing the inability of the grid to actually transport transport electricity from A to B. And we are aiming for reducing that huge figure. >> But if we want to reduce that figure, what we cannot allow for is to get more insecurity in the system. And if very very large scale batteries, we are talking about 500 megawatts or above would just operate as they want when they want that would increase the uncertainty for grid operators and that would finally also increase congestions without measures or at least without efficient measures to manage them all in all then increasing congestion management costs. So what we want to do is we want to find ways how to integrate batteries into the congestion management procedures in a way that they ultimately as I said before um decrease congestion management costs and one way to do that is these so-called um requirements for batteries that we have um published in May this year um which are valid for all batteries located at the transmission level which are by the way also a four-TSO product. Um and these requirements they basically set the scene how we want to make sure that on the one hand the investment case for batteries is secured because that's also very clear. So TSOs, we do not want with these requirements to reduce the overall queue. >> That's where we have um built the this maturity um allocation scheme for >> with these TSO requirements. We want to make sure that once they are connected, the operation is done in a way that kind of finds the sweet spot between on the one hand giving the battery as much freedom to do what it wants and on the other hand make it predictable and have it integrated into congestion management at the TSO level on the other hand. >> Okay, we could talk about this for much longer, but I'm going to bring us to a close with one final question. So what is one contrarian view you hold about the energy or electricity market in Germany? one uh very important thing that I believe is electricity electricity costs electricity price is nothing natural is nothing that just comes as a physical law in the end it's all about politics um and we have talked about the grid fee subsidy for example this is just a political decision so I think and that is why I mentioned the second half of the energy transition if we really want to bring society to a more electrical relying society, then we have to talk openly about how can we lower electricity system costs. Even if it would mean that we have to subsidize electricity even more than we are doing today in order to give the right signals to investors, the right signals to grid users. So let's be very open. We can do this transition but it will cost us money and if we still want to have let's say society um backing this development we have to reduce electricity costs in one way or the other. >> Yes. Okay. I think I'm I think I'm with you. If we get given this system and we use it badly, then we can end up with a an overall worse system on our hands. But if we get given the system, we get given the right incentives and we learn to use it well, uh we can find ourselves with a much better solution than what we had in the past. Yeah, I'm super excited about that. Um I'm not sure how contrarian it is. I think I think I just agree with you wholeheartedly. So but but uh but I I I I love it as a as a final point. So um Wilhelm, thank you very much for coming on. You've been a fantastic guest and we hope to have you on again soon. Thank you.