18.09.2026
On September 17, 2026, in Kyiv, Energy Club held the forum “Energy of Freedom: Resilience and New Opportunities for the Energy Storage Market in Ukraine”.
The participants discussed investment prospects for the BESS market, potential monetization models, bank financing, war risk insurance, project preparation requirements, legal models for operating Energy Storage Facilities (ESF), technological and grid constraints, as well as the use of energy storage systems by industrial enterprises, communities, and critical infrastructure facilities.
The forum partner was Temperi Logistics Ltd.
The first panel, “Strategy, Investments, and Business Models: Making BESS Profitable in Ukraine”, was moderated by Valerii Bezus, Vice President of Energy Club.
Opening the discussion, he noted that energy storage systems had become an important part of the Ukrainian business response to both market and security challenges.
“Energy storage systems have literally burst onto the electricity market. Ukrainian companies responded very quickly to both market and security needs, offered their own solutions, and already have practical experience in implementing them,” Valerii Bezus said.
According to him, the challenge is not only to use energy storage systems during the war and Russian attacks, but also to determine their place in the future configuration of the Ukrainian electricity market and create viable long-term business models.
Andriy Kobolyev, Founder of Eney, said that the company he works for was among the first participants in ancillary services auctions. Its first system was commissioned last year, and two more are planned to be launched by the end of this year.
“The market is currently very interesting and developing rapidly. I would say it is hot. Now is the ideal time to enter, and the market is gaining momentum. It is already attractive and profitable, so now it is important not to break anything,” Andriy Kobolyev emphasized.
Among the key conditions for further development, he identified predictable actions by government authorities and NPC Ukrenergo, resolving the issue of settlements in the balancing market, and the availability of war risk insurance.
According to him, payment delays prevent companies from receiving funds they have actually earned in a timely manner. At the same time, without war risk insurance, investments in energy projects remain extremely risky.
“We solved this problem for ourselves: we have an American partner and we have war risk insurance. Commercial insurance is very expensive. Without it, the risks for an investor remain high,” he explained.
Andriy Kobolyev also supported the initiative to introduce a first-loss coverage mechanism of up to EUR 10 million and emphasized that war risk insurance is needed not only for energy storage projects but for energy investments in general.
During the further discussion, he warned against trying to build projects based on a single market development forecast.
“Nothing is obvious here. We do not know what the spread will be because it depends, among other things, on the war. Volatility is a derivative of an open free market. You cannot create it artificially: it either exists or it does not,” Andriy Kobolyev said.
In his view, a sustainable project should be adapted to different scenarios and capable of combining several revenue streams. He identified behind-the-meter models as a promising area, while noting that they have many different variations and must be calculated individually.
“In every project, we leave five different development options. If I am told that a project can operate under only one scenario, I do not believe it. I want to see flexibility and variability,” he emphasized.
Yuriy Podolyak, CEO of IKNET, divided the ESF market into four main areas: an energy storage system as a standalone investment project, as part of consumer backup power, as a component of a generation facility, and as an element of an energy island.
He recalled that the company had participated in DTEK’s first energy storage project back in 2021 and began work on an industrial-scale system in 2023, when the respective auctions had not yet been launched.
One of the main obstacles for new projects, Yuriy Podolyak identified connection conditions, including short deadlines for implementing technical specifications and requirements for emergency automation. As an example, he cited a project where organizing a backup communications channel could require three years of work and approximately UAH 180 million.
In his view, the standalone commercial ESF market may go through two waves of development: the current one, driven by high price spreads and demand for ancillary services, and the next one, closer to 2030, when renewable generation owners will install energy storage systems more actively.
At the same time, he noted growing demand from industrial consumers, for whom energy storage systems, solar power plants, gas-piston generation, and backup power sources are becoming tools for ensuring business continuity.
“An ESF cannot be exclusively a standalone facility. It must be part of a system,” Yuriy Podolyak emphasized.
He also focused on the creation of energy islands combining generation, storage, consumption, automation, and balancing. Technically, such solutions are already possible, but their implementation is constrained by the lack of a fully developed legal model and high costs.
“We are moving two steps forward and one step back. But we have already reached the point where we can talk about the peak of the current wave and what will happen in the coming years,” Yuriy Podolyak concluded.
Vitaliy Shevchenko, CEO of Panorama Group and Chairman of the Board of the Ukrainian Association of Energy Service Companies, presented opportunities for using the energy service model to modernize municipal and critical infrastructure.
According to him, energy service companies can modernize water utilities, hospitals, and other municipal facilities using private capital. The investment is repaid through the savings achieved, while the community does not have to make the initial capital investment.
“The community does not invest its own funds and at the same time receives guaranteed savings. Today, around 800 energy service contracts have been concluded in Ukraine, with a total investment volume of approximately UAH 5 billion,” Vitaliy Shevchenko said.
He noted that the potential market includes more than 100 water utilities, around 600 hospitals, approximately 5,000 critical infrastructure facilities, as well as municipal enterprises of territorial communities. Even if only 10–20% of these facilities prove suitable for investment, this represents a significant volume of potential investment.
At the same time, when concluding long-term energy service contracts for energy storage systems, battery degradation and the potential need for additional capital expenditure must be taken into account.
“Today, there is no experience that would allow us to accurately forecast what this equipment will be like in 10–15 years,” Vitaliy Shevchenko noted.
Olga Romaniuk, Commercial Director of CPG Energy, focused on the needs of Ukrainian industrial enterprises. According to her, the manufacturing sector has undergone an extremely rapid transformation in recent years: while initially backup power was viewed as an urgent solution needed to prevent production shutdowns and product spoilage, businesses are now taking a comprehensive approach to energy independence.
Before preparing a project, the company conducts a full energy consumption audit, analyzes the load profile, available capacity, and opportunities to create an energy island.
“I have participated in the calculations and implementation of a large number of projects, and I have not seen a single model that could be repeated. Every model is unique,” Olga Romaniuk said.
In her view, it is impossible to name a universal payback period for an energy storage system. It is necessary to determine whether the system will be used for self-consumption, backup power, arbitrage, or several market segments simultaneously.
“To say that your particular project will pay off in two, three, five, or ten years is possible only after a very in-depth analysis,” she explained.
Olga Romaniuk also identified insurance as one of the key issues for attracting investment and called for continued dialogue with government authorities and the insurance market.
Serhiy Harmashev, Head of Energo Group, presented an approach to developing multi-component energy projects. According to him, Energo Group was formed on the basis of four companies whose competencies cover construction, engineering, development, and equipment supply.
Under separate brands, the company has already contracted approximately 260 MWh of equipment for delivery to Ukraine.
Among the market’s key needs, he identified long-term and clear rules for grid connection, ESF operation, and investment recovery. In his view, limited project implementation deadlines and regulatory uncertainty may slow the inflow of direct investment into energy storage systems.
Serhiy Harmashev gave the example of a project prepared for implementation that combines a 5 MW / 20 MWh ESF, cogeneration based on gas-piston units, a municipal boiler house with the possibility of using heat, and industrial infrastructure.
The site also has buildings, opportunities to connect large consumers, and potential for the future development of a data center.
“We need to look one or two steps ahead already now, so that in the future we can add new opportunities to projects that will generate additional cash flows,” Serhiy Harmashev emphasized.
During the discussion, he also presented a 30 MW / up to 120 MWh ESF project connected to the NPC Ukrenergo grid. The 2.8-hectare site has the potential to expand to 20–30 hectares. Solar generation, gas-piston units, and an industrial park are planned to be added to the project.
Vitaliy Khrypun, Head of Direct Sales at Solar Stalconconstruct, shared the company’s experience as both an integrator and investor in energy storage systems.
The company works with both small industrial systems and containerized solutions for arbitrage and ancillary services. The total capacity of solar generation projects being adapted to operate with energy storage systems is approximately 190 MWh.
One of the company’s implemented projects, with a capacity of 5 MWh, combines operation in the ancillary services market with subsequent electricity sales through a trader. According to Vitaliy Khrypun, this combination improves the project economics, while opportunities to participate in long-term auctions remain limited.
He identified behind-the-meter ESF use as the most attractive model for Ukrainian businesses — for internal arbitrage, self-consumption, and operation in energy island mode. Such projects are more readily financed by banks and are less dependent on regulatory changes.
The company has managed to switch a system into island mode in less than 20 milliseconds. Such solutions can be used at water utilities and other critical infrastructure facilities that must continue operating during prolonged outages.
Vitaliy Khrypun identified a detailed study of the load profile, starting currents, the condition of internal networks, and service requirements as key conditions for a successful project.
“Preparing a feasibility study or conducting an in-depth load analysis and collecting baseline data is the key task of every project,” he emphasized.
According to the company’s assessment, projects combining solar generation and energy storage may have a payback period of four to six years, depending on their complexity and operating modes.
Illia Chaban, Director of the Energy Division at EDS Engineering and Investment Group, presented the results of a comparison of different investment models for solar generation and energy storage systems.
The company’s financial model is updated monthly based on actual day-ahead market prices. According to EDS calculations, the payback period for a standalone solar power plant is approximately ten years in hryvnia and almost 15 years in US dollars. For a solar power plant with an energy storage system used solely for internal arbitrage without separate technical specifications, the figure is also approximately ten years.
If an energy storage system of the corresponding capacity is connected to a solar power plant and performs one cycle per day, the calculated payback period falls to approximately 4.6 years in hryvnia and around five years in US dollars. Moving to two cycles per day improves the indicators by approximately 10%, but does not produce a twofold effect.
“Facilities need to become more sophisticated. The key to the long-term and stable operation of a project lies precisely in combining different ways of working with electricity,” Illia Chaban said.
The company considers mobile energy hubs to be one such solution. They combine solar generation, ESF, fast-charging stations, a retail zone, and participation in the electricity market. According to Illia Chaban, different revenue streams can compensate for a decline in the profitability of one of the segments.
Among the projects prepared for investment, he named a 40 MW solar power plant and a 40 MW ESF in Zakarpattia, as well as several standalone storage systems with capacities of 5–10 MW.
During the concluding discussion of the first panel, participants focused on the future saturation of the ancillary services market, the possibility of combining several revenue streams, and the need to account for battery degradation.
Valerii Bezus emphasized that degradation parameters must be taken into account at the very beginning of project preparation — in the financial model, operating strategy, and calculation of future capital expenditures.
The second panel, “Bankable Project: Financing, Legal Structuring, and Technical Implementation”, was moderated by Artem Martyniuk, Vice President of Energy Club, Acting Director General of Ukrainian Distribution Networks JSC (2023–2025).
Pavlo Prytyko, Director of the Department for Work with Medium-Sized Corporate Clients at FUIB, explained which characteristics of a BESS project the bank focuses on.
The company’s and its partners’ experience, the depth of the business model, an understanding of technical and financial risks, and the realism of projected cash flows are of primary importance.
It is particularly difficult to forecast future electricity prices for projects focused on arbitrage, as prices are influenced by a large number of factors.
“When we assess the resilience of such projects, we conduct not one or two, but six, seven, and sometimes ten stress tests that cover different scenarios for electricity availability for charging, demand, and price,” Pavlo Prytyko said.
The bank also assesses the timeline for commissioning the facility, since delays in launching directly affect cash flows. Important conditions include the investor’s equity contribution, risk allocation between the borrower and the bank, alternative collateral, and the availability of an additional cash flow to service the loan.
Projects combining self-consumption with arbitrage are assessed separately by the bank, since part of their payback is provided by the company’s core operating activity.
Denys Samchuk, Deputy Head of the Sales Department of SME at Oschadbank, reported rapid growth in demand for financing energy projects.
While there were virtually no such applications in 2022–2023, the volume of financed projects reached approximately UAH 1 billion per year in 2024–2025. In 2026, the bank expects to reach approximately UAH 2 billion in the micro, small, and medium-sized business segment, excluding large corporate clients.
Around 60% of projects in previous years were solar power plants. The number of applications for adding storage systems to already built solar power plants is now increasing, as is the number of integrated projects that include both generation and ESF from the outset.
Among the latest examples, Denys Samchuk cited a project signed one week before the forum to build a large solar power plant with a 50 MW energy storage system in Khmelnytskyi region.
The bank uses the state “5–7–9%” program, partnership programs with equipment manufacturers, EBRD guarantees, state guarantees, and grant instruments to finance projects.
According to Denys Samchuk, Oschadbank signed guarantee agreements with the EBRD initially for EUR 200 million and later for another EUR 500 million. The Cabinet of Ministers’ guarantee instrument for lending through the bank amounts to UAH 5 billion.
Oschadbank primarily works with accredited equipment manufacturers, suppliers, and installers. Projects involving other suppliers require additional independent technical verification, which increases the client’s costs and extends the timeline.
Regarding war risks, Denys Samchuk noted that the bank partially covers them through guarantee instruments, while borrowers use insurance from accredited insurance companies. At the same time, insurance premiums remain high.
Maksym Fedotov, Attorney, CEO and Founder of FEDOTOV&PARTNERS, spoke about legal models for operating energy storage systems.
He divided them into two main categories: an ESF as a standalone market asset and an ESF as part of an enterprise. The second category includes models for self-consumption, active consumer operation, placement of a third party’s ESF on a consumer’s premises, and energy storage as a service.
For a standalone facility with an output capacity of up to 5 MW, no license is required. Possible monetization mechanisms include arbitrage, the balancing market, ancillary services, and electricity imports or exports.
Maksym Fedotov also highlighted practical problems in combining solar generation and energy storage. In one project, the solar power plant and ESF were commissioned separately, after which difficulties arose in including the equipment in the list of assets used for licensed activities.
He identified the conflicting provisions concerning the postponement of double grid connection charges until January 1, 2027, as another problem. One provision of the relevant resolution requires one of three specified conditions to be met, while another allows the system operator to recalculate the charge if at least one of them has not been fulfilled.
Among the promising solutions, Maksym Fedotov highlighted the “ESF as a service” model.
“The operator does not actually buy or sell electricity to the consumer. It provides a service for ensuring power and capacity reserves,” he explained.
Under this model, the system owner receives an indexed fee for the use of its power and capacity, while the enterprise receives backup power without having to purchase the equipment itself or take on all the related operation and maintenance responsibilities.
Dmytro Olefir, Deputy Director for Strategic Development at NVP Energo-Plus LLC, devoted his presentation to the technical and systemic risks associated with the rapid development of energy storage.
According to data from open sources cited by him, approximately 700 MW of ESF is already in operation in Ukraine across 33 facilities. Another approximately 1.5–2 GW of storage systems have been installed by small residential and non-residential consumers as backup power sources.
At the same time, Dmytro Olefir warned against uncontrolled construction of energy storage systems without taking into account the actual needs of the power system, available generation, and grid capacity.
“Energy storage facilities should be built in the volumes required by the power system. Market conditions are favorable today, but an excessive volume could lead to a situation where there is insufficient conventional generation to charge them,” he said.
Technical obstacles include grid constraints, the need to reconstruct distribution networks and emergency automation systems, as well as the lack of publicly available up-to-date assessments of generation adequacy.
Due to restrictions related to martial law, investors do not have complete information about the amount of energy storage the power system requires, how much has already been built, and how transmission and distribution networks will develop in the future.
Among the financial risks, Dmytro Olefir identified future changes in grid connection charges, possible increases in battery prices, uncertainty surrounding PSO and price caps, as well as low liquidity in the balancing market and lengthy settlement periods.
He also gave several examples of typical mistakes made during project preparation. In one case, the permitted capacity of an enterprise was 500 kW, while its own consumption was 300 kW. This left only 200 kW for charging the storage system, meaning that a 2 MWh battery required approximately 9–10 hours to charge instead of the time assumed in the model.
In another project, an investor planned to provide ancillary services continuously for 24 hours using a system with 1 MW of power and 2 MWh of capacity, without taking into account technical limitations and the need to maintain a minimum battery state of charge.
Dmytro Olefir also emphasized that the price of battery modules does not reflect the total project cost. In addition to the inverter, BMS, and battery modules, a project requires SCADA, EMS, telecommunications equipment, and systems for interaction with the grid operator.
For critical infrastructure facilities, cybersecurity and the absence of uncontrolled inverter connections to external cloud services are of particular importance.
“The state must provide clear and transparent signals to potential investors: what volume of ESF is required, what types of generation are planned for development, how much storage has already been built, and what additional volume can still be implemented,” Dmytro Olefir emphasized.
He also called for the development of Ukrainian manufacturing of energy storage equipment and for considering storage applications not only in the electricity market but also in transport, housing and utilities, and critical infrastructure.
Immediately after Dmytro Olefir’s presentation, a red alert level was announced. The participants left the hall and moved to the bomb shelter, where professional discussions continued.
A common message repeatedly voiced by the speakers was that there is no universal BESS project model. Its viability depends on a high-quality feasibility study, a realistic financial model, the combination of several revenue streams, risk insurance, equipment reliability, and predictable market rules.
Energy Club thanks the speakers, the forum partner, and all participants for a professional and candid discussion.
