The electricity is generated on the roof and is used directly in the house below. Only what cannot currently be used or stored flows into the network. And if not enough energy comes from the roof, the house gets its electricity from outside. The idea is as simple as it is impressive – and could become an important building block in the energy transition. This works quite well in many single-family homes. In larger buildings with rented or condominiums, however, things have not really got going so far, with thousands of roofs lying unused in the sun.
Climate protection and economics minister Robert Habeck (Greens) now wants to change that. Part of the planned “solar acceleration package” should therefore also include “an improvement in tenant flow” be like he was in his last week opening balance had announced. How exactly the reform should look like, however, is still open, according to the ministry: “The process is still in its infancy, talks are ongoing,” says a spokeswoman.
Great hopes have been placed in this topic for years: the many small photovoltaic systems together could produce a large amount of the green electricity that is urgently needed, according to the calculation. And unlike wind energy from offshore plants, for example, it would not first have to flow long distances through expensively expanded networks. In addition, tenant electricity systems do not take up any additional space – the roofs are already there, and solar cells on houses do not cause any disputes, unlike wind turbines.
So far, however, little has happened. Not even 4,000 tenant electricity systems are currently registered with the Federal Network Agency. The potential would be many times greater. So revealed a study on behalf of the Ministry of Economics in 2017 that up to 370,000 buildings in Germany with a total of 3.8 million apartments could be suitable for tenant electricity models.
Specifically, there are two questions at stake: At what price is the electricity from the in-house solar cells delivered to the rented or condominiums below? And how much bureaucracy is involved? So far, the following has applied: If the landlord operates the system himself and the energy does not flow through the public line, grid usage fees, concession fees and electricity tax do not apply. In addition, since 2017 the energy has been supplied with the so-called Tenant electricity surcharge promoted. Depending on the size and age of the solar system, this is currently a maximum of 3.79 cents per kilowatt hour of electricity. However, the full EEG levy of a good 3.7 cents per kilowatt hour is now due on tenant electricity.
Consumer advocates, landlords, suppliers – actually everyone is in favor of the concept
The EEG levy is to be eliminated in the coming year, according to the traffic light parties in their coalition agreement agreed upon. “This should also benefit the offers for tenant electricity, because the subsidy then does not go straight back to the levy,” says Thomas Engelke, who is responsible for energy and construction at the Federal Consumer Association (VZBV). The consumer advocates support the tenant electricity model – but call for significant simplifications. “So far, the stream of tenants has failed mainly because of two things: the subsidy was obviously not high enough and the bureaucratic effort was far too high, especially for landlords of smaller apartment buildings with few apartments,” says Engelke. Tenant electricity must therefore be legally equated with self-consumption in single-family homes. “This is the essential adjustment screw to help the model succeed.”
The suppliers also want better framework conditions for tenant electricity. For example, the Association of Municipal Enterprises (VKU) in a paper, to grant subsidies not only for residential buildings, but also for commercial properties. Their roofs are often particularly well suited for solar systems, and the electricity can then also be supplied to neighboring houses. In addition, tenant electricity that is sold by service providers to residents must be exempt from electricity tax. This would allow professional suppliers – such as municipal utilities – to offer cheaper tariffs if they operate systems for homeowners. The Federal Association of Energy and Water Industries (BDEW) is also in favor of a trend towards higher subsidies: between 3.5 and 5.0 cents per kilowatt hour are appropriate.
Landlords are also very interested in the topic. In-house electricity could mean an additional source of income for them and at the same time help to achieve the climate goals in the real estate sector. The use of solar power in apartment buildings should therefore “no longer be discriminated against”, demands Vonovia boss Rolf Buch. The Dax group already has big plans: by 2030, its own solar capacities are to increase more than tenfold, by 2050 30,000 roofs in the stock are to have solar panels. This green electricity must then be used “to also generate heat and drive energy,” says Buch. “The aim is to replace fossil fuels.”
Freedom of choice or tenant electricity as a fringe benefit?
However, there is likely to be a dispute over the question of whether the residents can only accept the flow of tenants – or whether they de facto have to. “As a replacement for the complicated tenant electricity surcharge, heat and electricity should be put on an equal footing,” says Axel Gedaschko, head of the central association GdW. Tenant electricity should become “quasi an ancillary service under tenancy law” and thus a position in the ancillary costs, similar to heating or water. This would put it practically on a par with self-consumption in a single-family home, argues the GdW.
For the owners, this would have the additional charm that the electricity in the house would be safely taken from them. A basic supply of tenant electricity would be part of the rental agreement, only what goes beyond that could be bought by the residents from a supplier of their choice. The price for this would then be at least ten percent below the basic service tariff, according to the plan. The necessary investments in solar systems would thus be secured, argues the GdW.
However, the tenants would then have to pay what the landlord or service provider calls for. There should therefore be no obligation to buy electricity from the landlord, demands consumer advocate Engelke. “Residents must retain freedom of choice.” Either they let the landlord supply them with their own and purchased electricity. Or they tried to get a contract themselves. In any case, as usual, they would only have one supplier and one bill. Experience shows anyway that many residents like to use their own electricity, especially when the price is right. And that is possible – maybe with a few improvements.