16.09.2026
On September 17, Energy Club will hold the forum “Energy of Freedom: Resilience and New Opportunities for the Energy Storage Systems Market in Ukraine” in Kyiv. And this is no longer a discussion only about batteries and backup power. It is about what Ukraine’s energy sector will look like tomorrow – centralized and vulnerable, or distributed, flexible and capable of recovering quickly after attacks.
Energy storage systems are gradually ceasing to be a technology “for when the power goes out.” They are becoming a tool for balancing the energy system, reducing costs for businesses, integrating renewable generation and creating new ways of earning money in the energy market. At the same time, scaling ESS in Ukraine depends not only on the cost of equipment. Clear rules, access to the grid, long-term contracts, insurance and financial instruments are needed – and, most importantly, investors need to trust that the rules of the game will not be changed retroactively.
One of the forum’s speakers will be Andriy Kobolyev – founder of “ENEY” and Chairman of the Management Board of NJSC “Naftogaz of Ukraine” (2014-2021). Ahead of the forum, in an interview with Energy Club journalist Olena Karpachova, he explained why Ukraine has a chance to become one of Europe’s centers of expertise in energy storage, what could open the door to large-scale capital, and why future energy freedom begins not with the number of megawatts installed, but with the consumer’s ability to choose where to generate, when to consume, how to store and whom to sell energy to.
They also discussed the post-war reconstruction of the energy system, Ukraine’s competition for international investment, the future of energy storage for businesses, communities and households, the emergence of aggregators and new energy services, the risks of chaotic development of own generation, and the mistakes Ukraine must avoid when shaping the new market.
– Mr. Kobolyev, the world is entering a new energy era in which energy storage systems are becoming a strategic asset just as gas or oil once were. In your opinion, what position can Ukraine occupy in this market in 5–10 years: catch up with Europe or shape its own rules of the game?
– I see an opportunity for Ukraine to become one of Europe’s centers of expertise in energy storage. In oil and gas extraction, geology plays a major role. In energy storage, a country’s position is determined primarily by technology, human capital and market rules. Here, to a large extent, we shape our own opportunities. At the same time, we are addressing the tasks of reconstruction, resilience to attacks and modernization of the energy system. I can see this from the experience of our Elektryka project as well. Our strengths may emerge in engineering, software, energy storage management and the integration of storage with generation and consumers. This is precisely where Ukrainian products and companies capable of operating in the international market should be created.
Equipment manufacturing also has potential where there is a competitive economy. In five to ten years, Ukraine can become a full-fledged participant in the European market, exporting technological solutions and expertise. For this, we need rules compatible with the EU and the ability to implement projects quickly. Influence over the rules emerges when you can demonstrate results.
– Many investors are closely watching Ukraine, but so far they are not rushing into large investments. What signal from the state or the market could become a turning point and open the door to large-scale investment in ESS?
– An investor is ready to work with a risk that can be assessed and allocated. Investment is already taking place: Oschadbank provided “Elektryka Ukraine” with EUR 23.6 million in financing for a 50 MW / 131.2 MWh energy storage system. The project combines a long-term contract with Ukrenergo and international insurance involving Lloyd’s syndicates.
This is a practical example of attracting capital during wartime.
The strongest signal for scaling is consistent fulfillment of obligations: a signed contract works, the service provided is paid for on time, and the rules allow businesses to plan for years. Insurance coverage protects against the risks specified in the contract. Trust in the market’s day-to-day operation is built by the institutions themselves and by their decisions. Scaling requires transparent grid access, predictable pricing, a clear schedule for integration with the European market, and broader access to insurance and guarantee instruments. This creates an opportunity to finance more high-quality projects.
– After the war ends, Ukraine will become a platform for large-scale post-war reconstruction. Speaking specifically about energy, should we already be building a new system around energy storage today rather than trying to restore what existed before 2022?
– Energy reconstruction needs to begin now, based on future needs and the constant security threat. Energy storage must become one of the key elements of this system. With every investment decision, we should ask: will it reduce the consequences of the next attack and the time required to restore electricity supply?
At the same time, a battery stores generated electricity, with certain losses. Its capabilities depend on the amount of stored energy and the availability of charging. Therefore, we need a well-designed combination of nuclear, hydro and renewable generation, flexible generation capacity, energy storage, strong grids and controllable consumption.
For critical consumers, the ability to operate autonomously for a specified period should be designed in from the outset. For the energy system as a whole – distributed capacities, redundancy and rapid recovery after damage. It makes sense to repair and modernize some existing facilities; the decision on each should take into account cost, timelines and its future role in the system. It is important to calculate the full life-cycle cost, including the risk of repeated damage and downtime.
I would assess the outcome of reconstruction by how reliably and at what total cost the consumer receives energy.
– There is increasing talk around the world about competition for capital. If an international investor today has a choice between Poland, Romania and Ukraine, what can we use to convince them that the Ukrainian energy storage systems market has the greatest potential?
– Ukraine has a large unmet demand for reliable and flexible energy supply. In addition, there is the need for reconstruction and the prospect of deeper integration with the European market.
A strong argument is the ability to contract part of the revenue: Ukrenergo’s special auctions provided for five-year contracts for ancillary services with the price fixed in euros. This helps with financial planning, provided both parties properly fulfill the contract. But an investor compares expected income with the risk of losses and the cost of capital.
Poland and Romania have the advantages of EU membership, while Ukraine currently carries the risk of war. Therefore, the attractiveness of our proposition depends on how a particular project is structured: its contracts, grid connection, technology, team, investment protection and sources of financing. I would emphasize the opportunity to secure a strong position in a market that needs deep modernization: build a team, implement the grid connection and gain operational experience. At the same time, the financial model must withstand normalization of the situation as well: a reduction in the deficit, the emergence of competitors and changes in prices. The best argument for capital is a project that remains useful and profitable under different scenarios for Ukraine’s development.
– It is often said that energy storage systems are a solution only for large companies. To what extent is this true? When, in your opinion, will ESS become a common tool for medium-sized businesses, communities and even households?
– The technology scales from a home system to a large industrial installation. For many Ukrainians, their introduction to energy storage began with backup power. The next step is to use this resource more broadly for daily savings and, under appropriate conditions, to generate income from providing services to the energy system.
For a medium-sized business, an energy storage system can reduce losses from disruptions, help use its own solar generation and shift electricity purchases to more favorable hours.
For a community, it can support the operation of a water utility or another critical facility. For a household, the main value is often backup power; savings depend on the tariff and consumption pattern. Mass adoption will come through clear standard solutions, reliable service, lending, leasing and energy service models.
An important factor is the development of aggregation, so that small installations can enter the market together. It should be easy for consumers to understand what they receive, how much it costs and who is responsible for the result. If operation during outages is required, the relevant autonomous mode should be included in the project. In the coming years, I expect faster adoption where the cost of disruptions is high and the financial effect can be convincingly calculated.
– If we imagine that in five years Ukraine will have thousands of energy storage systems across the country, how will this change the very model of the energy market? What professions, services or even new businesses could emerge as a result?
– The value of flexibility will grow – the ability to consume or deliver energy precisely when the system needs it. An energy storage system can change its role throughout the day. Consumers will be able to influence their bills more actively: choose when to consume, store energy and earn income from providing services to the energy system. Convenient mechanisms for small installations to participate in the market are needed for this.
Aggregators will play an important role – companies that combine many small storage systems and controllable consumers and coordinate their operation. The owner of an individual installation will be able to entrust trading and technical management to a professional operator under clear contractual terms. Demand will grow for power electronics engineers, data analysts, control system developers, traders and cybersecurity specialists. Algorithms will help choose charging and discharging times, taking into account prices, battery life and contractual obligations. Insurance, cash-flow-based lending, diagnostics, life extension and equipment recycling will develop.
A separate promising niche for Ukraine is the integration of energy storage with uninterruptible power supply systems for critical infrastructure. Some of these services could well become an export business.
– Today many enterprises are investing in their own generation. Do we risk seeing chaotic development if energy storage does not become an integral part of these projects?
– Such a risk exists if each project assesses only its own balance and does not take into account what is happening in the grid. For example, a large number of solar plants may simultaneously produce a surplus during the day, while consumer demand remains in the evening. Energy storage systems help align these schedules. European experience already shows that an increase in solar generation can reduce daytime prices while simultaneously increasing the difference with evening prices.
For an investor, the cost of energy in a particular hour is also important. I support the requirement to assess the flexibility of every new project. At the same time, requiring the same battery at every installation may create unnecessary costs.
The optimal solution depends on the technology, consumption and condition of the local grid. It may be an on-site storage system, a change in the load schedule, a shared system or a service provided by another market participant.
The task of the state and network operators is to establish transparent technical requirements, ensure proper metering and create economic incentives for behavior that benefits the system. Rules for paying for excess generation should take into account its market value. Then an enterprise will be able to choose the solution with the best economics, while the grid will receive a predictable outcome. Incorrect incentives can create chaos even with a large number of regulatory requirements.
– You often talk about energy freedom. If we translate this concept into practical terms, what, in your opinion, needs to change in Ukraine in the near future for this freedom to become a reality rather than just a concept?
– For me, energy freedom means that a person or an enterprise has a real choice: from whom to buy energy, whether to generate it independently, how to store it and whom to sell the surplus to. And the country has enough sources of supply and partners to withstand energy blackmail. Distributed capacities and backup connections reduce dependence on a single vulnerable facility.
The most immediate practical steps are clear timelines and costs for grid connections, equal conditions for access to the market, effective competition, protection of property rights and enforcement of contracts. Prices should show when the system needs additional energy or flexibility. I believe support for people who have difficulty paying for energy should be targeted and transparently financed.
A separate condition is high-quality corporate governance in state-owned energy companies. From my experience heading Naftogaz, I know how important professional supervisory boards, transparent appointment of executives and clear accountability for results are. The quality of these institutions affects confidence in contracts and the cost of capital for the entire market.
European integration expands our choices and opportunities for mutual support. At the same time, freedom implies responsibility for every participant to pay, fulfill obligations and ensure the safe operation of equipment. Its practical result is when a consumer can make an economically sound decision and implement it through a clear procedure.
– What mistakes could Ukraine make today in developing the energy storage market? What must we categorically avoid repeating from the experience of other energy reforms?
– First and foremost – changing the terms of already made investments retroactively and accumulating non-payments. After that, any new project becomes more expensive because investors and banks build additional risk into it. We should promise only what can be delivered, and deliver what has been promised.
The history of payments under the green tariff showed that the solvency of the entire payment system must be ensured in practice. Long-term contracts for ancillary services also require a reliable source of funds.
The second mistake is building financial models on the assumption that today’s revenues will remain unchanged throughout the battery’s operating life. The ancillary services market has limited capacity, while new storage systems increase competition. Price differences between hours may also change. This needs to be taken into account before the investment decision is made.
The third is choosing equipment solely based on the purchase price. Degradation, warranties, service, availability of spare parts, software and cybersecurity are also important.
The fourth is creating privileges for individual players or excessive barriers for small participants. A resilient market requires fair competition and confidence in the rules. This lesson from previous reforms should be learned before new problems accumulate.
And one more mistake is assessing success solely by the megawatts installed. We need to measure available capacity, execution of commands, services provided and the actual contribution to reliability. This is what shows whether an investment is working for the benefit of the energy system.
– What argument today is the most convincing for the managers of Ukraine’s largest enterprises who are still unsure whether they should invest in energy storage systems?
– I would suggest starting with three figures.
The first is the cost of one hour of downtime: lost output, spoiled products, restarting equipment and unfulfilled obligations to customers.
The second is the cost of diesel backup.
The third is the potential savings from shifting electricity purchases from expensive hours to cheaper ones.
Next, it is necessary to determine what portion of these losses and costs the energy storage system can actually help avoid. A properly designed system can combine three functions: backup power, cost reduction and revenue from market services. For an enterprise, this is a way to gain greater control over the cost and reliability of its core business.
At the same time, the effects should be calculated for consistent scenarios so that the same benefit does not enter the calculation twice. I would start with hourly consumption modeling and several operating scenarios. The calculation should include the cost of charging, energy losses, degradation, financing and service. It should also separately account for how much charge reserve is needed for backup and what portion of the resource remains available for other tasks. If such a calculation shows a sustainable economic effect, the enterprise has a sound basis for investing. Energy resilience is increasingly determining the ability to fulfill contracts and compete.
Energy storage systems are one of the key elements of what Ukraine will look like after the war and what energy system it will build instead of the one that proved vulnerable to large-scale attacks.
The energy system of the future implies the ability to generate, store, consume and sell energy when this is economically and systemically appropriate. But technology alone will not create energy freedom. It will be created by rules that allow investment; a market that people trust; institutions that fulfill their obligations; and businesses that see resilience not as an unavoidable expense, but as an investment in their own competitiveness.
So the key question today is: will we be able to seize this opportunity and build an energy system in which freedom of choice, resilience and economic efficiency work simultaneously?
