14.11.2025
Iryna Biliaieva, CEO of Juscutum, will be one of the key experts at the Energy Club forum “Energy of Freedom: Resilience and New Opportunities for the Energy Storage Systems Market in Ukraine”, taking place in Kyiv on November 20. Juscutum is a recognized market leader, combining practices in law, security, investments, IT, AI, and accounting support. The company is actively developing its expertise in the energy sector: it supports projects in energy trading, generation, public procurement, environmental and land disputes, cooperates with market regulators, supports innovative energy initiatives, and provides comprehensive legal protection for industry participants.
The launch of any investment project in the energy sector, especially in a new field like energy storage systems, requires flawless legal support. A clear regulatory field and understandable “rules of the game” are the key signals for investors.
Therefore, Iryna Biliaieva’s speech will be an important part of the discussion on state strategy and the regulatory environment, ways to simplify the launch of ESS projects in Ukraine, and legal mechanisms for protecting investments in the storage market.
Ahead of the forum, in an interview with the Energy Club media department, Iryna Biliaieva spoke about how the legal field for the energy storage systems market in Ukraine is being formed, what factors are holding back investments in BESS, and what is needed to launch a clear revenue model for investors. The expert also explained what legal barriers enterprises face when installing storage systems for their own needs, what changes await the industry in the next two years, and why energy security is becoming a strategic, not just a technical, issue.
— Ms. Biliaieva, Juscutum is known for its support of innovative and technological markets. How do you assess the current legal “architecture” for the energy storage market? Is it already a driver for development, or does it remain the main brake for investors?
— It is more of a future driver than a brake. The NKREKP (National Energy and Utilities Regulatory Commission) is already issuing licenses for energy storage, notably to the Znamenska BESS. “Ukrenergo” is launching long-term auctions for ancillary services starting in 2026, so a predictable income stream is emerging for batteries, lowering risks for investors.
The legal transparency of connection processes for storage systems, as well as the safety techniques for their use, are primary issues, and that is why we can say it is more of a driver that can become fully operational in the future. In addition to these aspects, we must also talk about separate commercial metering for generation and storage, an agreed-upon algorithm for capacity limitation, properly configured protection schemes, and approval from the system operator.
— The forum focuses on attracting investments. What is the main legal “stop signal” for large Ukrainian or foreign capital today when considering ESS projects? Is it the lack of transparency in connection, the absence of guarantees for investment returns, or something else?
— BESS is a capital-intensive asset, so classic approaches to calculating CAPEX and OPEX are critically important. Without “stacking” revenues from multiple products (reserves, frequency regulation, arbitrage, peak shaving) and without long-term contracts or a clear payment formula, the investment model will not be attractive, even if high-quality equipment is used.
But the main stop signal for an investor in energy storage unit projects is an uncertain and unstable revenue model, along with unclear rules for accessing the grid and markets.
The use of specialized software that would allow for the effective operation of BESS is also a problem. We are talking about the lack of a certification procedure for battery storage system software that would confirm control algorithms, measurement accuracy, compatibility with dispatch systems, and cybersecurity requirements. There is no understanding of whether to certify the software separately or as part of the complex.
— Our target audience is the agricultural sector, retail, and industry, which need energy here and now. What non-obvious legal hurdles (licensing, permits, technical specifications) do they face when they want to install ESS for their own needs, rather than for playing on the market?
— For BESS for own needs, we have three main barriers. The first is access and metering. A license is not required for self-consumption, but separate commercial metering for charging and discharging and operation within the ordered capacity of the connection point are mandatory. The second is entry into the electricity market. As soon as there is a feed-in to the grid or participation in ancillary services, a license is required (from 150 kW) and compliance with market rules, including responsibility for imbalances. And the third is connection. Sharing one connection point with generation is only just beginning to find its reflection in the law, so the network operator often requires individual technical specifications.
We also shouldn’t forget about construction and fire safety requirements, including the category of the premises, detection and suppression systems, ventilation, access for firefighters, and for the agricultural sector, the designated purpose of the land plot.
— One of the main topics of the forum is how to make storage profitable. As a lawyer, which business models (operating in the balancing market, TSO services, arbitrage) do you consider the most viable? And what pitfalls are hidden in contracts with Ukrenergo or DSOs that businesses should be aware of?
— In Ukraine, the working models for BESS are already clear: long-term contracts for ancillary services through “Ukrenergo” auctions; hybrid RES+BESS models with a common connection point; and solutions for internal local balancing, which allow for controlling peak loads and reserving energy without exporting to the grid. This already provides a clear income and lower risks. There are auction products for several years, businesses are adding batteries to their solar/wind power plants, and large private players are launching industrial BESS for internal maneuvering.
Global trends align with Ukrainian ones. Regulators are opening markets to storage and allowing the combination of several income streams in one unit. In the US, this is BESS access to energy and ancillary markets; in the UK, there is a demand for fast frequency services; in Japan, there are long auctions and support for grid-scale BESS. Investments in storage are growing because it is flexibility that makes energy systems reliable. The risk is the same in all jurisdictions – regulatory policy uncertainty and frequent changes to rules within the implementation timeframe of energy projects. Therefore, contracts need protection from regulatory influence and a clear, transparent formula for penalties.
— Besides the obvious military risks, what new legal or regulatory risks for ESS owners do you see in the next 1-2 years? Perhaps changes in environmental legislation (battery disposal), new equipment certification requirements?
— In 2026–2027, BESS owners and users will face risks from the introduction of a separate storage license, double network payments during charging and discharging, stricter balancing market rules, and mandatory software certification and full testing, which could block or slow down connection.
Requirements for cybersecurity and physical protection of facilities, as well as environmental and fire safety, will increase. Changes in tax incentives and customs rules are possible, as are supply chain disruptions for components and software due to an expanding list of sanctioned countries.
The military aspect means priority commands from the dispatcher in the interests of defense, reservation of part of the capacity, restrictions on the publication of technical data, and untimely compensation for downtime.
We need software certification according to standard test procedures, the development of a network of accredited laboratories, and the recognition of equivalent foreign certificates. New requirements will include cybersecurity and physical protection standards based on capacity classes with backup time without satellite navigation, updated environmental and fire safety norms, simplified procedures for modular solutions, rules for reuse and disposal, and tax incentives with accelerated amortization and clear import classifications.
— How can one legally “package” and structure an ESS project today to best protect expensive investments? Are military risk insurance mechanisms really working, and what do you advise clients to do to protect their new energy assets?
— For the proper structuring of an energy business using BESS to protect investments, it makes sense to follow these recommendations: Conduct detailed legal DD and financial analysis of the project, including assessment of the regulatory environment, risks, and certain financing models. Identify key investment stakeholders and provide mechanisms for their involvement in supporting and protecting the investment asset. Develop a project structure that allows for flexible adaptation to changes in legislation and the political context. Include a risk allocation matrix with private investors in the structure, using financial instruments such as public-private partnership (PPP) or concessions.
Regarding military risk insurance, a state insurance system is being prepared in Ukraine that covers losses from combat operations. Compensation will be provided through two main mechanisms: via the Export Credit Agency (ECA) for frontline territories and through budget compensation for part of the insurance premium for other zones. This makes insuring projects against military risks a real and promising tool for protecting investments, although it requires regulatory formalization and adaptation to the specifics of each project.
— The forum will discuss state strategy. In your opinion, what is more important for the market: direct state incentives (like the “green” tariff once was) or the creation of maximally transparent, liberal, and stable market rules?
— In the long term, transparent and stable rules are more important for the investor. They remove regulatory risk, reduce the cost of capital, and allow for securing predictable cash flows. And all this makes calculations predictable at the CAPEX and OPEX estimation stage of energy projects. When the rules for grid access, network payments, charging/discharging metering, and participation in service markets are clear, the model using BESS becomes understandable to the investor and the banking sector, opening up the possibility of attracting credit funds.
Direct incentives are only needed as a catalyst. Competitive and term-limited mechanisms work best: auction-based contracts, CAPEX co-financing with clear KPIs, accelerated amortization, or an investment credit.
— Why should the owner of an industrial giant or the CEO of an agricultural holding personally attend the forum on November 20? What key legal advice or insight can they gain there to ensure the energy resilience of their business?
— Because in the new reality, energy security is no longer a technical issue, but a strategic one. This isn’t just about storing energy. It’s about accumulating trust, flexibility, and resilience. This is exactly what we will be talking about on November 20. See you there!
Форум «Енергія Свободи: Стійкість та нові можливості ринку систем накопичення енергії в Україні»
