The question is typically asked only after an actual stop: a power outage, a voltage dip that knocked out a control system, or a bill with an unexpected powe...

The question is typically asked only after an actual stop: a power outage, a voltage dip that knocked out a control system, or a bill with an unexpected power-based tariff. But production security is no longer only a question an operations manager or electrician answers afterwards. It has become a topic leadership needs to be able to address in advance: how vulnerable is our production actually to power interruptions, voltage dips, power peaks, and limited grid capacity, and what can we realistically do about it?

This article is a combined guide to that question. It covers why production security has become a management topic, how to distinguish between security of supply at societal level and at company level, which electricity problems a production site can actually experience, what an industrial BESS (battery energy storage system) can and cannot contribute, what STS (Static Transfer Switch) is, how to calculate the value of avoided downtime, how to prioritise critical loads, and how a production security case is built from risk analysis to technical and economic design. At the end we answer the questions we most often hear from COOs and production managers.

Why production security has become a management topic

It is tempting to place responsibility for power interruptions with the electrician or operations department: it is, after all, a technical event with a technical cause. But the consequence of an interruption rarely hits operations alone. It hits revenue, delivery capability, customer trust, and in some cases safety, which is precisely the type of risk leadership has responsibility for knowing and addressing, not only reacting to when it occurs.

That development is already visible in practice. In 2026, Dansk Industri (the Confederation of Danish Industry) placed preparedness as a management discipline at the centre of one of its leadership conferences, with the message that preparedness is not only about technology, IT, or emergency procedures, but about the whole company from leadership and employees to customers, suppliers, and communication. The same direction appears in the regulation of those parts of the energy sector where the consequence of failure is greatest: the executive order on resilience and preparedness in the energy sector, which applies to companies covered by the act on strengthened preparedness in the energy sector (companies that are material to the energy supply itself), places risk management and preparedness explicitly with the company's governing body, which must approve risk and vulnerability assessments and preparedness plans. That is not a rule that applies to an ordinary manufacturing company, but it shows a clear direction: for companies where the consequence of power outages is serious, preparedness and risk management belong at management level, not as a technical detail that can be delegated entirely away from the boardroom.

For ordinary manufacturing companies there are no equivalent legal requirements, but the logic is the same. The Danish Energy Agency's guidance on emergency power for companies points out that many organisations have a direct economic interest in securing continued operation during power interruptions, and that the assessment in practice is about weighing the estimated costs of lost operation against the costs of establishing a solution. That is a trade-off that belongs at management level, because it requires a complete picture of what interruptions cost the company, not only a technical assessment of what is possible to install.

Security of supply at societal level versus at company level

The most widespread misunderstanding in the debate on production security is to assume that high national electricity security of supply automatically means low risk for the individual company. The two measures are connected, but they do not measure the same thing.

Electricity security of supply is defined in Denmark as the probability that electricity is available to consumers when it is demanded. It is reported as a national average across millions of electricity customers and is secured by a combination of power plants, decentralised plants, wind power, solar PV, the electricity grid, interconnectors with neighbouring countries, and flexible demand. The Danish Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities sets the desired level, and Energinet, Denmark's transmission system operator, is responsible for maintaining it and monitoring developments. Measured at this level, Denmark has an electricity security of supply that is among the highest internationally, and the large majority of interruptions originate in the local electricity grid, not from a lack of generation capacity in the system as a whole.

Security of supply at company level is something else. It is not about a national average, but about the consequence of the particular incident at the particular site: which processes are hit, how long it takes to restart them, and what it costs when it happens. An average for the whole country says nothing about when the minutes fall, where they hit geographically, or which equipment is running at that moment. For an ordinary household, that difference is of little consequence. For a factory with continuous processes, temperature-sensitive production, or automated control, that difference is the whole point.

The two levels should therefore be kept separate in any conversation about production security. National statistics tell something important about the Danish power system as a whole. They tell almost nothing about what a particular interruption costs a particular company, and that is the question a production security assessment must actually answer.

Energinet's forecasts and planning targets

Because the company's risk is connected to how the overall power system develops, it is relevant to know the official figures and forecasts, even though they do not in themselves answer the company's own question.

In 2024, a Danish electricity customer was on average interrupted for 26.7 minutes across 0.48 interruptions, corresponding to a delivery reliability of 99.995 percent of the year's hours. Over the past ten years, the average level according to the latest official figures has been around 23 interruption minutes annually, corresponding to an electricity security of supply of 99.996 percent. Interruptions are, in other words, rare, and when they occur they are typically short.

The level is not a constant, however. In February 2026, the Danish Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities, following a recommendation from Energinet, set a new planning target for 2035 of 38 interruption minutes, an increase of two minutes relative to the previous target of 36 minutes for 2034, corresponding to power at the socket 99.993 percent of the time. The background is partly increased electrification, and partly that a large number of components in the electricity distribution grid are ageing at the same time. The planning target sets direction for investment in long-term electricity security of supply.

The figures do not justify drama. There is no basis for saying that the Danish electricity grid is becoming poor, or that power outages will become everyday events for Danish companies. But the development means that the officially accepted level of interruptions rises slightly over time, while society becomes more dependent on electricity as electrification advances. For a company where the consequence of an interruption is serious, that means the statistically acceptable level may become a little less comfortable than it has been, even though it remains high by international comparison.

Why a few minutes of interruption can cost more than the statistics suggest

The statistics measure interruption minutes. They do not measure what those minutes cost. That is the decisive difference when moving from a national figure to a company's own risk assessment.

For an ordinary consumer, ten minutes of interruption is an annoyance. For a manufacturing company, the same ten minutes can trigger a chain of costs that far exceeds the duration of the interruption itself: lost contribution margin, wages during standstill, scrap of raw materials or intermediate products in process, a restart period that is often longer than the interruption itself, cleaning and recalibration, tightened quality control after restart, delayed deliveries, and in some cases overtime to recover the lost production. None of these items is necessarily expensive on its own, but they typically appear together and are rarely recorded in the company's accounts as a direct consequence of that particular interruption.

That picture is confirmed by how the authorities themselves value a power interruption. The Danish estimate for Value of Lost Load, abbreviated VoLL, sets the average value Danish electricity consumers are willing to pay to avoid a power interruption at 176 DKK per kWh, with wide variation: large industrial companies value an interrupted kWh at around 200 DKK, compared with around 76 DKK for smaller industrial companies. An earlier Danish Energy Agency analysis based on responses from 645 companies finds that a typical industrial company has a cost of around 136 DKK per kWh for a four-hour interruption, and that lost production plus the extra costs of recovering it, for example through overtime, together account for around two thirds of industry's total cost. The analysis also shows that advance warning matters a great deal: two hours' notice can reduce the cost by nearly one third for several groups, while 24 hours' notice can reduce it by around 40 percent.

International industrial research points in the same direction. A survey from ABB, based on responses from more than 3,200 maintenance decision-makers globally, finds that more than two thirds of industrial companies experience unplanned downtime at least once a month, and that a typical unplanned interruption costs in the region of 125,000 dollars per hour. An analysis from Siemens/Senseye, based on 181 interviews over five years, finds that unplanned downtime costs the world's 500 largest industrial companies the equivalent of 11 percent of their total revenue per year, and that the cost per hour of downtime has risen even though the number of incidents has fallen, because production has become more complex and interdependent.

The conclusion is the same across all these sources: how many minutes are statistically involved is not what determines the bill. It is which process is hit, how long the restart time is, and whether the interruption comes with or without warning.

The different types of electricity problems a production site can experience

The debate on production security often focuses only on the one dramatic scenario: total power outage. In practice, that is less often the type of event that actually stops production. There are at least seven types of electricity problems worth knowing.

Total power outage is when all or parts of a site lose supply completely, typically because of faults in the local electricity grid. It is the most visible scenario, and it is here that the concepts of emergency power, backup, generator, UPS, and BESS typically come into play.

Voltage dips are a short reduction in voltage lasting from milliseconds to a minute, which does not appear in the official interruption statistics, but which can knock out sensitive equipment such as PLC controls and frequency converters, because digital electronics can react to deviations lasting less than a tenth of a second.

Frequency fluctuations belong at system level: there must at all times be balance between generation and demand across the whole power system to keep frequency stable, and it is in that context that batteries are often described as fast flexibility resources, one of the most versatile technologies for delivering short-term flexibility in the power system. That is a system property, not a guarantee of emergency power for the individual company.

Power peaks arise when the company briefly draws significantly more power than on average, typically because several large consumers such as motors, compressors, or furnace processes start at the same time. This has gained increasing economic importance because more Danish distribution system operators have moved to a power-based component of the grid tariff under the industry-approved Tarifmodel 3.0 (Denmark's common tariff model for distribution grids), where part of the payment depends on the highest power draws over a period, not only total consumption.

Limited grid capacity is related: when the company cannot get the power it wants without an upgrade of the grid connection. Pressure on Danish grid capacity is currently considerable, driven among other things by large demand projects such as data centres and Power-to-X plants, and for the largest connections the time horizon for an upgrade can stretch over several years.

Planned grid interruptions are typically announced in advance in connection with maintenance or rebuilding of the grid, which, as the figures above show, in itself reduces the consequence noticeably.

Unannounced interruptions conversely give the greatest consequence per incident, precisely because the company has not had the opportunity to prepare a controlled shutdown or changeover.

Common to all seven is that you cannot know how exposed your own site is without looking at your own measurement data, historical incidents, and operating conditions first. Nationwide statistics cannot replace that exercise.

What a BESS can help with

An industrial BESS is a battery container with substantial energy capacity that can charge and discharge power to or from the electrical installation. That property makes it relevant for several of the problems this article has just covered, but not in the same way for all of them.

Peak shaving is the most direct contribution. The system can discharge for short periods to cover part of a peak demand, which reduces the power peak, can dampen the consequence of a power-based tariff, and physically relieves the main switchboard, cables, and transformer. In ZynexGroup's model, peak shaving can often form a natural part of the commercial optimisation that already controls the system, provided it supports the overall optimisation.

Short-term stabilisation and energy flexibility is a broader property: batteries can react quickly and help balance the power system, which is the background for battery storage being described as a fast flexibility resource. That is a property of the technology and a role in a market, not the same as emergency power for the individual company's own site.

Backup, if the system is technically set up for it, is the third possibility, but here the wording matters: "if" is not a formality. A battery can technically deliver power immediately, without the start-up delay a combustion engine has. But using that capability to actually supply selected critical loads when the collective electricity grid is gone requires a deliberately designed system: the installation must be able to detect the grid outage, disconnect safely from the failed grid, and supply the prioritised load isolated from the rest of the installation, a process often referred to as island mode or "islanding". That presupposes additional components and a site-specific analysis, not only sufficient battery capacity.

Integration with STS, if it is selected as an add-on, is the fourth possibility and is directly connected to the backup function. If a BESS is combined with an STS, the battery can become one of the two sources a selected critical load can switch between, without a noticeable interruption. We cover that in more detail below.

What a BESS does not automatically do in the standard model

The limits are just as important as the possibilities, and they should stand just as clearly.

A standard BESS does not automatically provide emergency power. It is not necessarily a UPS, and it does not necessarily keep the whole factory running during a power outage. None of these functions comes with the system unless it is separately dimensioned and selected for that purpose.

The reason is technical, not commercial. A battery connected to the collective electricity grid is by default designed to interrupt its own exchange with the grid during a fault, for the safety of those who may be working to repair the fault. Keeping selected loads running during a power outage therefore requires a deliberate, separate technical solution on top of the underlying system. A review by two consulting engineers who specify this type of system describes precisely the increased system complexity this requires: correct measurement of grid voltage, automatic control of breakers, and in some configurations an extra source of voltage reference.

In ZynexGroup's standard model, we commercially optimise an industrial BESS's flexibility in the market, and the customer in return receives a fixed contractual availability payment. Peak shaving can be included if it supports the overall optimisation. Emergency power, backup, STS integration, and reserved capacity are, by contrast, add-ons that never come automatically, and that always require a site-specific analysis of the customer's electrical installation, critical loads, switchboard structure, and risk level, plus a separate technical design.

What STS is, and why it is relevant for critical loads

A Static Transfer Switch, STS, is not an energy source. It is an electronic switch with two inputs and one output that monitors two independent power sources and switches a selected critical load from one to the other if the active source falls outside acceptable limits for voltage or frequency. Because the switching happens electronically without moving parts, the transition can occur quickly enough that sensitive equipment such as PLC controls, servers, and automated production lines do not register the event as a real outage. The international standard for STS performance and testing, IEC 62310-3, defines precisely the requirements for how such a controlled transition between two AC sources is to be specified and tested.

That distinguishes an STS from an ordinary automatic transfer switch, an ATS (Automatic Transfer Switch). An ATS uses electromechanical components (relays, contactors, or motor-driven breakers) to physically move the load between two sources, typically between grid and generator, and the physical movement creates a short, noticeable interruption during the switch itself. An STS instead uses semiconductor components without moving parts, which makes it relevant precisely where even a short interruption can trigger faults or stops in the equipment, while an ATS is typically sufficient and more robust where a short interruption is acceptable.

A widespread misunderstanding is that an STS sits as a kind of main breaker for the whole factory. That is rarely how it is used in practice. A research review of STS application points out that an STS is most effective when placed as close as possible to the critical load it is meant to protect, because it only protects against faults between its own installation point and the load, not against faults further out in the installation. Several smaller STS units close to each of their critical loads therefore typically protect better than one large STS near the top of the installation.

When an STS is combined with an industrial BESS, it is typically because the battery supplies one of the two sources the STS monitors, while the grid supplies the other. That requires the system to be dimensioned and controlled to deliver the necessary power to the prioritised loads when the grid fails, while the remaining capacity continues to be used commercially when the grid is stable. Before an STS can be selected, a site-specific technical analysis must clarify at least six points: which loads are actually critical, their combined and simultaneous power demand, starting currents from motors and other equipment with moving parts, whether the load is single-phase or three-phase, the switchboard structure in the existing installation, and the requirement for transition time as well as run time on backup. That is an analysis that is always specific to the individual installation, and that is why STS in ZynexGroup's model is always an add-on, never a standard component.

How the value of avoided downtime is calculated

The value of a backup solution can only be assessed fairly if you know the downtime cost the solution is meant to mitigate. A usable approach is to set out the cost as the sum of the most important categories, rather than trying to capture everything down to the smallest amount:

Downtime cost per hour = lost contribution margin + labour cost during stop + scrap + restart cost + delay cost

Lost contribution margin is the value of the production that did not happen minus the variable costs the company also saves. Labour cost during stop is the fully loaded hourly wage for employees whose work depends directly on the power. Scrap covers raw materials, intermediate products, or finished goods that are discarded as a result of the interruption. Restart cost covers the time and resources it takes to bring the process back to normal operation, including any cleaning and recalibration. Delay cost covers the consequence of planned deliveries moving, including any overtime to recover the production.

The model is deliberately simple and does not capture loss of customer trust, which is real but hard to put a number on; that should enter as a qualitative consideration alongside the calculation. The model is also not the same for all processes in the same company: one hour of interruption with short restart time and low scrap risk can cost significantly less than one hour of interruption where an entire batch is lost, even with identical duration. The calculation should therefore be made for each of the company's critical processes, not as one combined average figure, and it answers in itself only the consequence question, not the probability that an interruption will occur. Probability must be assessed separately, among other things from the grid connection, local grid conditions, and history of voltage dips and interruptions.

How critical loads are prioritised

Once the downtime cost is known for the most important processes, the next question arises: which loads should actually be prioritised if part of the capacity is to be reserved for backup? The answer is rarely "the whole factory". The Danish Energy Agency's guidance on emergency power for companies states the point precisely: "It is not given that it is necessary to be able to maintain all of the organisation's functions in the event of a power interruption." Each organisation must itself assess which functions actually need to continue, and for how long.

In practice it is useful to go through production category by category, because the requirement for response speed varies considerably from function to function, a point the Danish Energy Agency's guidance itself illustrates with a scale from one second to one week:

The whole factory: Requires a system that matches the full power demand for the full operating period. That is significantly more expensive than securing the loads that are actually critical, without necessarily delivering more real security if the consequence of briefly losing non-critical production is manageable.
Production lines: Often only selected lines carry the most valuable or vulnerable part of production, rather than the whole plant.
Cold storage and freezing: A temperature excursion over minutes to hours can destroy an entire batch of raw materials or finished goods.
IT and control systems: Servers and systems that support production control, quality data, or traceability can lose data or enter a fault state even with short interruptions.
PLC and SCADA: Control and monitoring of production equipment can enter a fault state from a short voltage fluctuation, even if the underlying machine physically could have managed without power.
Ventilation: According to the Danish Energy Agency's guidance, can often tolerate a short interruption of limited consequence, but it depends on the specific process requirement.
Safety systems: Emergency lighting, alarms, and access control are often critical for reasons other than economics.

The list must always be adapted to the individual company, but it gives a shared language for the conversation about what actually needs to be protected, and for how long, before discussing which technical solution makes sense.

How a production security case is built

With the electricity problem types, the downtime cost, and the critical loads in place, the individual elements can be assembled into a coherent case. It typically follows five steps.

Risk analysis. The starting point is not to ask whether the power can disappear, but which of the company's processes genuinely cannot tolerate that, and what history of power outages, voltage dips, and switchboard problems has occurred at this particular location. National statistics are useful context, but do not replace own history, because the risk of interruption is not evenly distributed geographically.

Critical load analysis. The critical processes are translated into specific electrical loads: which equipment, which switchboards, and which circuits supply them, and how large is their combined and simultaneous power demand in kW.

Downtime cost. For each of the most important critical processes, calculate what one hour of interruption actually costs, using the model covered above, supplemented with a documented restart time that is often longer than the interruption itself.

Technical design. With data in place, determine whether and how a solution such as STS, reserved battery capacity, or other backup should be designed: which loads it must cover, how quickly the transition must happen, and how long supply must be maintained.

Economic trade-off. Finally, market optimisation and reserved capacity must be weighed against each other. The more capacity that is reserved for emergency power, STS, or backup, the less the system can be optimised commercially, because the same limited capacity cannot fully do both at the same time. In practice that can mean that the calculation basis and the fixed monthly availability payment are adjusted proportionally in the specific agreement, without any fixed percentage, table, or guaranteed model. Reserved capacity is an option assessed after the analysis, not a standard product with a fixed price.

As a simple rule of thumb that does not replace the site-specific analysis: low downtime cost typically points toward full optimisation under the standard model, medium downtime cost points toward considering partial reservation for the most critical functions, and high downtime cost, where a short outage can cost an entire batch or a safety-critical function, points toward examining a proper STS and backup design.

ZynexGroup's approach to system assessment

We never start with the system. We start with the company's data: the size of the grid connection, the consumption profile across the day and the year, and the operating conditions that determine the consequence of an interruption, for example critical loads, restart times, and historical incidents.

On that basis we can have a data-based dialogue about what an industrial BESS can realistically contribute at your particular site: whether the standard model's commercial optimisation and any peak shaving are sufficient, or whether there is a specific reason to proceed with an add-on such as STS, emergency power, or reserved capacity. If the analysis points toward an add-on, we coordinate the process and work with partners on the technical design and the installation on site. We do not recommend generator or UPS as part of the architecture we help specify, but describe them as the general categories they are if they form part of the overall picture.

A standard module in an industrial BESS typically has a capacity of approximately 261 kWh and a power rating of approximately 125 kW, and a project price of approximately 396,000 DKK excluding VAT covers in total the battery module, electrical switchboard, contractor work, electrician, IoT, setup, metering, integration, and project coordination, paid with 40 percent on agreement and 60 percent on technical completion of installation or at the latest at start of operation. The standard offer typically assumes a grid connection of minimum 400A. When we assess that installation is technically and economically realistic on that basis, it also includes that we offer an actual 6-year payback guarantee on the BESS. That guarantee applies to the payment model in the standard model and does not change the fact that any add-on such as reserved capacity is always assessed separately, on top of the underlying model.

Frequently asked questions

Can the battery keep the whole factory running? That is rarely the right way to frame the question. The answer does not depend on whether the system is "large enough" in an abstract sense, but on which specific loads must genuinely never go down, and for how long they must be kept in operation. A system dimensioned for selected critical loads can often be secured far more economically than a system that must cover the whole production's power demand, without necessarily delivering less real security.

How quickly can it switch over? That depends on which technology is used for the transition itself, and on the specific design. An STS is electronic and without moving parts, and a well-designed STS solution can complete the transition between two sources quickly enough that sensitive equipment such as PLC controls does not register the event as a real outage, in contrast to a mechanical switch, where the switch itself creates a short, noticeable interruption. We do not publish specific transition times in seconds or milliseconds, because they always depend on the specific equipment and the particular configuration, and because that is a detail fixed in the technical design, not a general figure that applies across systems.

What does one minute of downtime cost? It varies enormously from company to company, and there is no single answer that covers everyone. The relevant exercise is to apply the calculation model covered above to your own processes. As orientation, the Danish Energy Agency's analyses of Value of Lost Load show that Danish industrial companies on average value an interrupted kWh at between 76 and 200 DKK depending on company size, while an earlier analysis based on 645 companies finds a cost of around 136 DKK per kWh for a typical industrial company for a four-hour interruption. Both figures are averages that illustrate the order of magnitude, not a final answer for your particular production.

What is the difference between UPS, generator, BESS, and STS? A UPS reacts almost immediately, but typically only delivers backup for minutes to a few hours, and protects sensitive equipment such as servers and control systems. A generator can deliver long-duration backup, in principle for as long as there is fuel, but has a slower start-up and requires ongoing maintenance and fuel management. An STS is not an energy source, but an electronic switch that transfers a selected critical load between two sources quickly enough that sensitive equipment does not register the transition. An industrial BESS has large energy capacity that is primarily used for commercial optimisation and power peak reduction, and that, if deliberately designed for it, can also contribute to backup. None of the four automatically replaces the other three.

Can we get both return and backup? The question assumes a connection that does not exist in our model, because ZynexGroup's standard model is not an investment with a return in the traditional sense. The customer receives a fixed contractual availability payment for us commercially optimising the system's full flexibility in the market. If part of the capacity is reserved for emergency power or backup, it is no longer fully available for commercial optimisation on the same terms, and the calculation basis as well as the fixed monthly payment can therefore be adjusted proportionally in the specific agreement. In other words, it is not a matter of getting both fully at the same time, but of a specific trade-off between the full payment under the standard model and the value of the lower downtime risk a reservation can provide for precisely the loads it is dimensioned for.

What happens if we reserve capacity? The more capacity that is reserved for emergency power, STS, or backup, the less is available for commercial optimisation in the market. In practice that can mean that the calculation basis and the fixed availability payment are adjusted proportionally in the specific agreement. There is no fixed percentage, no table, and no guaranteed model for how much a given reservation affects the payment. The adjustment always depends on the particular agreement and on an analysis of how much the reserved capacity actually constrains commercial use of the system.

Can we start with the standard model and add emergency power later? Yes, and that is in practice how the process already normally works, because add-ons such as emergency power and STS are always assessed case by case through their own technical analysis, whether the customer is new or already has a system in the standard model. Starting with the standard model and later assessing an add-on is therefore not a special exception, but the ordinary path. Whether it is in practice straightforward to add depends on the existing installation, and it still requires its own site-specific technical and economic analysis at that time, exactly as it would for a new customer. We cannot in advance guarantee a particular compatibility or a particular cost level without having seen the installation.

The deeper articles, and when to go into them

This article is an overview. The articles below go deeper on each topic. They can be read independently, depending on what is relevant.

How stable is the Danish electricity grid, really?: How stable the electricity grid actually is, and why it has become a management topic. Relevant as an entry to the whole subject.
What does 1 hour of production downtime cost?: How downtime is valued in practice. Relevant when the business case needs to be quantified.
Power outages, voltage dips, and power peaks: The three electricity problems production actually feels: The three electricity problems production actually feels. Relevant for risk assessment.
BESS, UPS, generator, and STS: What is the difference?: The difference between BESS, UPS, generator, and STS. Relevant when choosing a backup strategy.
What is STS, and why is it decisive for emergency power in production?: STS and transition times explained. Relevant for critical load and emergency power.
Can a BESS keep the whole factory running during a power outage?: What a battery can and cannot do during a power outage. Relevant before technical design.
What is the business case for emergency power and reserved battery capacity?: The business case for emergency power and reserved capacity. Relevant when backup is under consideration.
Peak shaving as production security: When the battery relieves your electrical installation: Peak shaving as production security. Relevant for power peaks and installation.
How to do a risk analysis for power and production: Risk analysis for power and production. Relevant when the case needs to be built systematically.
From analysis to installation: How ZynexGroup builds a production-secure BESS solution: From analysis to installation in practice. Relevant when you want to see the full process.

Overall perspective

Production security is not about whether the Danish electricity grid is good or poor. The Danish electricity grid has a high electricity security of supply by international comparison, and the new planning target for 2035 does not change that decisively. The question that actually matters for a manufacturing company is a different one: what does it cost us if the power disappears at the wrong time, and which of our processes must never go down?

That question is not answered by national statistics, but by a site-specific review of critical processes, critical loads, downtime cost, and historical incidents. An industrial BESS can contribute directly to parts of the picture, especially power peak reduction and commercial flexibility, and can, if deliberately designed and selected for it, become part of a backup solution for selected critical loads, often in combination with an STS. That does not automatically make it emergency power, a UPS, or a guarantee that the whole factory remains in operation, and that is precisely why production security is something designed from the company's own risk, not something that comes automatically with a battery.

Assess the potential for your facility

If you want a clear picture of whether and how an industrial BESS can form part of your production security, the starting point is your own data: grid connection, consumption profile, and history, ideally supplemented with your own knowledge of critical loads, restart times, and any historical incidents. On that basis we make an initial assessment of whether there is a match between your situation and the standard model, and whether there is a specific reason to proceed with a technical analysis of an add-on such as STS, emergency power, or reserved capacity. You are welcome to contact us here.

How do you protect your production against an unstable electricity grid?