Energinet's projections: What the figures mean for industry's electricity supply

Each year, Denmark's Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities sets a planning target for electricity supply security, based on a recommendation from Energinet, the national transmission system operator. The target states how many minutes without electricity an average electricity consumer is expected to experience in a future year. The figures are often cited as a signal that the Danish electricity grid is either robust or under pressure. For an industrial company, the more precise question is what the figures actually measure, and what they mean for that company's own production.

This article walks through the latest planning target, what the number covers and does not cover, what drives the development, and why a national average does not answer a single company's question. It updates the picture relative to our earlier article on Energinet's projections and connects to production security, which is the subject of another pillar.

The latest planning target

The current planning target is set at 38 interruption minutes for 2035. That is an increase of two minutes relative to the previous target of 36 minutes for 2034. The target corresponds to electricity being available at the socket 99.993 percent of the time. Denmark thereby remains among the countries in the world with the highest electricity supply security.

The actual figures sit close to the targets. In 2024, the average electricity consumer experienced about 27 interruption minutes, which was slightly above the average for the past ten years, especially because of more weather-related events. Over the past ten years, Danish electricity consumers have on average experienced about 23 interruption minutes per year, corresponding to an electricity supply security of 99.996 percent. The figures do not give grounds for drama. They describe a system that delivers electricity almost all of the time, but where the accepted level is adjusted slightly.

What the figures actually measure

The planning target is a national average. It is calculated across all electricity consumers and describes how many minutes without electricity a typical customer can expect. It says nothing about how the minutes are distributed, where they hit, or when they hit. For the large majority of consumers, that difference does not matter. For an industrial company, it is decisive.

There are also two things the figures do not capture. First, most interruptions originate in the local distribution grid, not from a shortage of generation, and the risk therefore varies locally. Second, the statistics record supply interruptions. Short voltage dips that can cause sensitive production equipment to stop do not count as interruptions, even though they can have noticeable consequences in a production environment. Electricity supply security is defined by the Danish Energy Agency (Energistyrelsen) as the probability that electricity is available when it is demanded, and it is precisely a probability and average concept.

The drivers behind the development

The increase in the accepted number of interruption minutes is not accidental. According to the ministry, the rising number of interruption minutes in the electricity distribution grid is due partly to the increased electrification of society, and partly to a large number of grid components ageing at roughly the same time.

Electrification pulls consumption up from several sides at once. Transport, heating and industrial processes shift from fossil fuels to electricity, and new large consumers such as data centres and power-to-X plants enter the picture. At the same time, the generation side is changing, with the phase-out of traditional power plants and more variable production from solar and wind. The combination of rising consumption, ageing grids and more fluctuating generation is the core of what the projections describe. Those conditions form part of Energinet's ongoing report on electricity supply security, including the 2024 consultation version and the subsequent 2025 report, which provide the basis for the political decisions.

It is worth noting that the development does not mean Denmark is getting a poor electricity grid. It means the system is changing, and that investments and new measures are required to maintain the high level. The government has, among other things, started preparatory work on a capacity mechanism: that is, a mechanism intended to support the availability of sufficient capacity in scarcity situations. We cover that topic in more detail in the article on the electricity market reform.

From national average to the company's reality

Here lies the most important point for an industrial reader. An average of a few dozen interruption minutes per year describes the whole country as one. The consequence of an interruption does not depend primarily on its duration, but on what it interrupts, and when. Ten minutes of interruption in a private household is an irritation. Ten minutes of interruption in continuous production can mean lost batches, discarded raw materials, cleaning, recalibration and a restart period that is far longer than the interruption itself.

Vulnerability is not evenly distributed. It is typically greatest where processes are continuous, temperature-sensitive or highly automated. A process industry with continuous operation, a food production facility with hygiene and temperature requirements, a cold or freezer store, or an automated production line with controls that must be restarted in a specific sequence, experiences an interruption very differently from a company without critical, time-dependent processes. For them, downtime does not end when the power returns, but only when production is running normally again. That is the difference the average statistics cannot show.

It is also documented that the cost of an interruption hits industry harder than other consumer groups. An analysis prepared for the Danish Energy Agency has assessed the cost of a four-hour interruption at about 136 DKK per kWh for industry, compared with under 30 DKK for households. The analysis is some years old, but it illustrates a relationship that has not changed: lost production and restart account for most of the cost, and it can therefore be many times higher for a company than for an ordinary consumer. That is the background for why the electricity supply question for a company cannot be settled on national statistics alone.

A management responsibility, not only a technical one

Because the consequence of an interruption can differ so much, assessing electricity supply risk is ultimately a management question, not only a technical detail. It is about knowing the company's critical processes, the real restart time and the consequence of the individual event, and about deciding how much robustness is worth investing in. A projection from Energinet can point to the direction for the system, but it cannot make that prioritisation for the individual company. It is a trade-off that average figures cannot make, and that belongs at management level. We cover the concrete method for such an assessment in our pillar on production security.

BESS as a partial local response

A battery can improve robustness locally, but it is important to be precise about what it can do. A battery on a company's own site does not change the national statistics for the electricity grid, and it does not solve the national balancing task. What it can do is serve as a local component in an overall energy strategy and, with the right technical design, support critical loads for a limited period.

Here the limits are as important as the possibilities. A standard BESS facility does not automatically provide emergency power. Backup of critical loads requires separate technical design, and functions such as reserved capacity or integration with fast switching are options that presuppose a concrete analysis. A battery is therefore a partial local response to a systemic condition, not a universal solution. Presenting it as an answer to the entire challenge would be misleading.

ZynexGroup's approach to facility assessment

We start with the company's data: the size of the grid connection, the consumption profile and the operating conditions that determine the consequence of an interruption, for example critical loads and restart times. On that basis we can have a data-based conversation about what an industrial BESS facility can realistically contribute locally, what belongs to the standard model, and what would in that case require options and separate design. If the conclusion is that a facility does not materially change the company's risk, we say so.

Overall perspective

The latest planning target of 38 interruption minutes for 2035 confirms two things at once: Denmark still has a very high electricity supply security, and the accepted level is adjusted slowly as electrification, ageing grids and a changed generation mix put pressure on the system. The figures are a national average and a signal about direction, not a description of the individual company's risk.

For industrial decision-makers, the useful point is that the projections should be read as an occasion to assess one's own robustness, not as a promise that the average also applies to that particular production. A battery can be part of the answer locally, but only as a conscious, properly sized decision.

Get an assessment of your facility's potential

If you want to know what an industrial BESS facility can mean for your robustness, we start from your own data: grid connection, consumption profile and history, preferably supplemented with your knowledge of critical loads and restart times. On that basis we make an initial assessment of whether there is a match, and what the next step could then be. You are welcome to contact us.