Expert Talk: Why the Energy Transition Is Not an Ideological Project

Austria is at a crucial turning point: With a current renewable energy share of around 40 percent, the goal of climate neutrality by 2040 is still a long way off – and it will remain that way if the existing pace continues unchanged. Rather than a shortage of know-how or capital, this is primarily due to sluggish implementation and a lack of political consensus.

Christoph Dolna-Gruber knows what levers are important for this transformation. As one of the leading figures behind the Austrian Energy Agency’s project “Our Energy World 2040”, in this Enery Talk he provides answers to how a secure, clean and affordable energy system can actually succeed. He also explains how we can manage the energy transition and why one focus must be on increasing flexibility using digitalization and battery energy storage systems (BESS).

First, let’s take stock: Where does Austria currently stand regarding renewable energy?

Christoph Dolna-Gruber: Even though we repeatedly hear contradictory statements, the overall direction is clear: We are heading for climate neutrality by 2040. However, we are currently at a renewable energy share of just above 40 percent, and this goal will be unattainable at the current pace. On a technological level, we can be optimistic: The solutions for production, heating and mobility without fossil fuels are well known and for the most part already market-ready. Moreover, Austria is a wealthy country despite its budget constraints, especially regarding private capital. The task now is to mobilize this capital, which includes providing long-term frameworks such as tax incentives.
Financing models and sources must become more innovative because there will be a massive need for investment in grids, storage, power plants and other infrastructure – and this will last for decades. That is arguably part of the problem, as the benefits of these investments will only become apparent on a large scale in the medium to long term, especially regarding grid expansion. The goal is now to shorten this “waiting period” as well – to become faster, more pragmatic and more effective. Today, not tomorrow.

What is currently lacking? How can we speed things up?

A key factor is achieving shorter lead times, for example regarding ground-mounted photovoltaics or wind power expansion. Theoretically, there are enough attractive spaces in Austria where these power plants could be built more quickly. This requires the designation of acceleration zones that fall under the responsibility of the federal states. It is a process that demands discussions between the states and municipalities, involving the energy industry, project developers and the local population. One consideration should accompany all stakeholders here: Today, we outsource a large part of our energy production to distant countries. As we regain greater control of our own energy supply – and we should definitely do that –, our energy supply will move closer to us and become more visible. That might bother some people. But we are taking our destiny back into our own hands and becoming more independent, and that becomes visible.
Yes, people will see wind turbines, power lines and ground-mounted photovoltaic arrays when they look out of the window. Acknowledging and resolving this – being able to associate it with something positive, like self-determination or breaking free from dependencies – is a significant factor.
It is here that the mayors play an important role in their municipalities; they bear immense responsibility, and I do not envy them for that. But they shouldn’t be left alone with this huge responsibility. They need backing on a national and regional level, from interest groups – and also from local companies that need an affordable energy supply to remain competitive in future.
In short: We will have to pull together much more than is currently the case. What we see today is often the exact opposite. The expansion of renewables is used for political mobilization, partly to fuel a kind of culture war. And those things have no place in existential issues such as a secure, affordable and clean energy supply – without major dependencies.

What narrative needs to be told, and what arguments can win people over?

I believe the two main arguments are, on the one hand, more control of our own energy supply, and on the other hand, greater independence from severe price fluctuations. The climate issue is currently less relevant; instead, the focus is precisely on stronger control. And you can also see this in the number of smaller photovoltaic systems in Austria. Statistically speaking, 1 in 4 buildings already have a PV system. That is the most direct way for a country to regain control of its own energy supply. In turn, this forms the basis for integrating battery storage systems to increase flexibility throughout the entire power system. You cease to be dependent on oil and gas, which are energy sources with an import level of up to 95 percent. This applies not only to private individuals but to companies as well.

Grid infrastructure is always a stumbling block. How do we solve this problem?

The grid is not a bottleneck everywhere. There are distinct regional differences. But what is important is that grid bottlenecks occur locally and at specific times. For long stretches of the year, there is sufficient capacity in the grids. This means that the way we can shift grid feed-in and consumption time-wise is decisive for how much we need to expand the grids. Storage systems play a crucial role here, as does improving flexibility with regard to consumption. This means that PV systems must be geared more towards on-site private consumption. Currently, we have PV systems in Austria that feed an oversupply of electricity into the grid at weekends in the spring. It doesn’t have to be like that. There are various instruments that can help us to get a grip on it. Adjusting funding or tariff conditions, for instance, to hold back electricity from PV systems at midday – not feeding it in, but rather consuming or storing it so it can be put to good use later.

What is still needed for this at present?

We are lacking the widespread, intelligent management of these PV systems. This needs to be made as accessible as possible, via digitalization and data exchange. With attractive apps and energy management systems that are easily implemented and then automate the process. Storage optimization is a key factor, also in connection with energy communities. The basis of this is digitalization, both behind the meter and in front of the meter at grid operators. It is an absolutely essential aspect in overcoming the bottleneck of grid congestion.

Who will bear the grid costs in the medium term?

With rising on-site private consumption and therefore lower grid draw, there is naturally a growing challenge to spread increasing grid costs across ever fewer kilowatt-hours drawn. That is a fact. The gap is widening, and the situation will become more difficult for those who cannot participate in decoupling from the grid.
Therefore, the systemic responsibility of those who increasingly opt out must be enforced. Restructuring grid tariffs also plays a role here. Making grid tariffs more flexible will help to create incentives on the one hand, and pass on systemic responsibility to a greater degree on the other.
What also helps is expanding the use of electricity. In other words: being able to allocate costs to a larger number of kilowatt-hours. Here, I mean electrification in terms of mobility, heating and industry, which is so crucial for greater control and lower import dependency. By doing so, we can switch from coal, oil and gas to energy sources that we can produce ourselves. In Austria, in Europe.
And then, in the medium term, the question of alternative financing concepts also arises – opening up grid cost financing to institutional investors and private individuals who not only provide capital but may also do so on better terms.

How relevant is system-serving capability?

The ElWG (Electricity Act) defines this term, and E-Control establishes the criteria. In the context of large-scale storage systems, this is highly relevant because it involves exemption from system usage charges for a period of 20 years. That can make or break a business case. As things currently stand, there are a number of criteria that must be met cumulatively – and these, overall, are very restrictive. This means that the number of storage systems that qualify as system-serving in the strictest sense is likely to be small. Understandably, there is caution when exempting certain assets from grid cost financing for 20 years.
On the other hand, these system-serving large-scale storage facilities are also relevant for dampening or altogether reducing the rise in future grid costs. As mentioned earlier: To accelerate the expansion of renewables, we must vastly open up the realm of possibilities. Batteries are important, and this must be taken into account when defining system-serving capability. However, time-of-use grid tariffs, grid tariffs for controllable loads, grid connection costs being avoided, and – above all – dynamic tariffs, are major incentives in favour of flexibilization and battery storage well beyond the definition of system serving.

How do we get the public on board?

Despite various campaigns that have brought uncertainty and fearmongering in connection with electromobility, heat pumps and renewables, things are progressing well. If we manage to de-politicize – and specifically, “de-partisanize” – the debate, then we can succeed. The energy transition is not a green or ideologically motivated project. It is fundamentally sensible, and that is why it would be important for everyone to pull together. And for companies to raise their voices and state what they need as well. With wind power, this isn’t working well at all right now. There, the politicization and mobilization of this culture war are highly successful in creating uncertainty, especially on a regional level.
But the wind is changing again now. With the Iran war. With the realization that we have to pay more attention to our own affairs again. That we cannot simply rely on energy flowing continuously no matter what, including through the Strait of Hormuz. And as this realization is now returning with greater strength, I remain entirely optimistic.

Fact Sheet: About the Expert

Mag. (FH) Christoph Dolna-Gruber, BSc is an energy expert and Head of Strategy & Business Development at the Austrian Energy Agency (Österreichische Energieagentur). For over 15 years, he has been focusing on key issues concerning the future of energy, the transformation of the energy system, decarbonization, and the implementation of the energy transition in Austria and Europe.

• Current Position: Head of Strategy & Business Development, Austrian Energy Agency (AEA)

• Key Expertise & Focus Areas:

  • Energy system analyses and climate neutrality scenarios (including as part of the project “Our Energy World 2040”)

  • Transformation and decarbonization of the industrial, heating, and mobility sectors

  • Reduction of dependence on fossil fuel imports, energy efficiency, and strategic energy autonomy

  • Digitalization and Artificial Intelligence (AI) in energy management

• Education: University of Applied Sciences Burgenland (Diploma Degree, International Business Relations), EHSAL Management School Brussels (International Management), UAS Technikum Wien (B.Sc., Urban Renewable Energy Technologies)

• Role & Responsibilities: Development of evidence-based analyses, strategic concepts, and decision-making frameworks for policymakers, government ministries, and industry to achieve Austrian and European climate targets.

INTERVIEW: MICHI REICHELT
PHOTO: AUSTRIAN ENERGY AGENCY