Abstract
This article analyses actors in the storage niche during the German electricity transition. Thus, we develop a more differentiated understanding of actors and their storage activities. For that, we employ the analytical multi-level-perspective (MLP) framework to focus on interactions between old and new storage technologies. Using data from expert interviews, we investigate whether the storage pathway resembles any of the four ideal types of transition pathways for interactions between niche and regime. Through our interviews, we identify five types of actor in the storage market: Big 4 (EnBW, RWE, E.ON, Vattenfall), project developers, innovative municipal utilities, small rural municipal utilities and independent green electricity providers. For each actor, we analyse four main aspects (1) previous orientation and motivation, (2) structural strategies, (3) institutional strategies, and (4) product-related strategies. Parallel to the classification of actors, we also classify available storage technologies according to their primary field of application. We conclude that interactions between regime and niche actors are cooperative, but weak, and no specific actor type currently dominates the niche activities. Hence, applications in the storage niche are not yet ready for a larger market. In sum, our results point to a future system that is characterized by reconfiguration, not substitution or transformation of current market actors.
Highlights
IntroductionElectricity production in Germany is increasingly shifting to larger and larger shares of renewable energy sources (RES), currently about 54% for electricity and 39% for heat [1]
Electricity production in Germany is increasingly shifting to larger and larger shares of renewable energy sources (RES), currently about 54% for electricity and 39% for heat [1].This transition is accompanied by challenges in regard to adjustments in the system architecture, most notably market design [2,3], grid expansion [4] and storage [5]
Do we see a substitution pathway more characterised by central or decentralised RES generation? It is important to note that future storage development is not so much a technical question but rather one of utilisation: for what tasks will future storage technologies be applied, resulting in which system structures? To answer these questions, we develop a clear definition of different storage options by extending the usual differentiation between central and decentralized power generation that has been widely used for analyzing electricity transitions
Summary
Electricity production in Germany is increasingly shifting to larger and larger shares of renewable energy sources (RES), currently about 54% for electricity and 39% for heat [1]. This transition is accompanied by challenges in regard to adjustments in the system architecture, most notably market design [2,3], grid expansion [4] and storage [5]. We see increasing global investments in storage facilities (e.g., by Tesla or Volkswagen) [7], which will have an impact on storage in electricity production Another reason for the growing importance of storage is the increasing role of flexibility options in the electricity system. Storage options will be a crucial part of that
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
