FlexSource - FlexAbility Delrapport 2 (2025)

Source - FlexAbility Delrapport 2 (2025)


Metadata

FieldValue
TitleUtveckling av marknader och verktyg för flexibilitet
Sub-reportFlexAbility, delrapport 2 av 5
PublisherPower Circle (with Plexigrid, Ellevio, Uppsala University)
DateOktober 2025
Pages49
FunderEnergimyndigheten
Fileraw/flexability_delrapport_2.pdf
Extractionraw/flexability-delrapport-2-extracted.txt

Scope: Historical development and price analysis of Swedish flexibility markets (local and national balancing), combined with forward-looking analysis of tools, products, and conditions needed to unlock flexibility to 2030. Based on market data from E.ON, Ellevio, Göteborg Energi Elnät, Mölndal Energi Elnät, NODES, Sweco, and Vattenfall; Uppsala University thesis (Albrecht & Rosten 2025) for balancing market price modelling.


Summary

The report establishes three main findings:

  1. Local flex markets are growing and maturing, but activation remains rare (6% of hours in 2024/25). Availability products now dominate by volume. Prices are converging upward to 3,100–3,800 SEK/MWh across established markets, with Hässleholm as a persistent outlier at ~16,000 SEK/MWh.

  2. Local market prices are competitive with national balancing market alternatives during activation hours. During 2024/25, FCR-D exceeded local activation prices zero of 233 activation hours; mFRR exceeded local prices only 16 times. The economic case for value stacking across local and national markets is confirmed.

  3. The toolkit is wider than what DSOs actually use. Most DSOs rely on effekttariffer and villkorade avtal. Only ~15% consider participating in a flex market. Nine structural conditions — from cross-BRP aggregation to common APIs — must be addressed to unlock the technical potential identified in Delrapport 1.


Balancing market historical values and price forecasts

Market structure changes

  • FCR marginal pricing introduced 1 February 2024 (replaced pay-as-bid for all FCR products)
  • aFRR split by price zone since 11 May 2022 (previously one system price for all of Sweden)

Historical annual economic values (Uppsala thesis, 2024 data for FCR)

ProductAnnual value
FCR (all products)~50–100 million EUR/year
aFRR (up + down)~10–20 million EUR/year
mFRR (up + down)~20–30 million EUR/year

Price forecasts to 2030

Based on Svk’s four long-term scenarios applied to regression + SARIMAX modelling:

ScenarioElectricity use (TWh)NuclearWindSolar
FS (Färdplan småskalig)16246.5684.5
FM (Färdplan mixad)17549.0714.0
EP (Elektrifiering planerbart)22763.0736.5
EF (Elektrifiering förnybart)22750.5878.5

Forecast conclusions:

  • FCR prices: expected to decline as market matures and more actors join
  • aFRR: prices may increase in SE1; decrease in SE4; highest prices in FM scenario
  • mFRR: prices trending upward to 2030; SE1 < SE2 < SE3 < SE4 ranking preserved; EP/EF scenarios significantly more demanding
  • FFR: prices likely to decline over time despite growing volume need (more competition)

Local flex market comprehensive data

Volume-weighted average activation prices (all markets, all seasons)

Overall average all seasons: 700 SEK/MWh (dominated by large early CoordiNet Uppland volumes at 220–250 SEK/MWh) Two most recent seasons (ex-Hässleholm): 3,100–3,800 SEK/MWh Latest season 2024/25 (ex-Hässleholm): 3,300 SEK/MWh — highest to date

SeasonVol.-weighted avg (SEK/MWh)With Hässleholm
2019/20250
2020/21300
2021/22850
2022/231,500
2023/243,0003,700
2024/253,3003,900

Activation data by market and season (Tabell 6)

MarketSeasonHoursVolume (MWh)Avg price (SEK/MWh)
E.ON Bålsta23–24691,600
E.ON Hässleholm23–24794615,768
E.ON Hässleholm24–25653316,000
E.ON Kalhäll24–25553,000
E.ON Nordöstra Skåne24–2536392,353
E.ON Södra Skåne23–2431743,759
E.ON Södra Skåne24–25523893,785
E.ON Vaxholm23–244291,651
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg21–22921,811
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg22–2328233,052
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg23–24902833,975
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg24–251062132,900
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal22–2317104,351
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal23–24941313,412
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal24–2541352,712
CoordiNet Skåne19–2026651,670
CoordiNet Skåne20–21351221,503
CoordiNet Skåne21–223292,892
CoordiNet Uppland19–201723,300220
CoordiNet Uppland20–214126,600235
CoordiNet Uppland21–22100248
sthlmflex20–212,276485
sthlmflex21–22878883
sthlmflex22–2398742
sthlmflex23–24911,841
Uppsala Flexmarknad22–2335341,700
Uppsala Flexmarknad23–2419123710
Kinnekulle Flexmarknad23–2461.23,000
Kinnekulle Flexmarknad24–2515202,372

Availability data (Tabell 7, selected)

MarketSeasonHoursVolume (MWh)Avg price (SEK/MWh)
E.ON Bålsta24–2585.53,000
E.ON Hässleholm24–25496293387
E.ON Nordöstra Skåne24–25792527387
E.ON Södra Skåne24–252151,7982,753
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg24–256095,504217
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal24–25556490200

MaxUsage data (Tabell 8, selected)

MarketSeasonHoursVolume (MWh)Avg price (SEK/MWh)
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg24–257827171,000
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal24–25596221451
Kinnekulle Flexmarknad24–2581782350

Effektförmåga (qualified capacity by market)

Market21–2222–2323–2424–25
Effekthandel Väst Göteborg1 MW11 MW19 MW14.7/14.5/3.9 MW (activation/availability/MaxUsage)
Effekthandel Väst Mölndal2.5 MW5.5/0.5/0.04 MW5.5/1.75/1.1 MW
Kinnekulle Flexmarknad0.3 MW5.27 MW
E.ON Södra Skåne26.4 MW20.5 MW
E.ON Nordöstra Skåne1.1 MW
E.ON Hässleholm0.7 MW0.6 MW
E.ON Bålsta1 MW2 MW

Activation timing

  • 2023/24: most activations at 07:00–10:00 and 16:00–17:00; peak hour 10:00
  • 2024/25: most activations at 08:00–11:00; peak hour 09:00
  • Pattern consistent with general electricity demand curve

Season 2024/25 overall picture

MetricValue
Activation hours (any market)233 (6% of season)
Availability procurement hours893 (25% of season)
MaxUsage procurement hours906 (25% of season)
Total availability procured8,800 MWh (double prior season)
Total MaxUsage procured1,000 MWh (5× prior season)
E.ON total (all markets)3,185 MWh (all product types)
Effekthandel Väst total7,180 MWh
E.ON Södra Skåne cost~SEK 7.5M (50%+ from Södra Skåne alone)

Local vs national market price comparison

For hours when local flex was purchased, comparison of local price vs FCR-D, mFRR, and spot:

Season 2023/24 (329 activation hours):

  • mFRR > local price: only 11 of 329 hours
  • Spot > local price: only 18 of 329 hours
  • FCR-D > local price: only 1 of 329 hours

Season 2024/25 (233 activation hours):

  • mFRR > local activation: only 16 of 233 hours
  • Spot > local activation: only 13 of 233 hours
  • FCR-D up > local activation: 0 of 233 hours

Conclusion: confirms UppFlex result — local flex prices are competitive (mostly higher than alternatives) during the hours when DSOs actually buy. But activation happens only 6% of hours; for remaining 94%, national markets may offer better revenue opportunities → value stacking is essential.

Batteries in Effekthandel Väst that also held FCR-D positions received roughly equal revenue from both markets in 2024/25. This is the clearest empirical demonstration of value stacking to date.


DSO toolkit survey (Ei PM2025:03 — from DNDP analysis)

MetricShare of DSOs
Considered non-grid alternatives~65%
Only mention effekttariffer as alternative~40%
~55% have considered alternatives beyond effekttariffer
Currently use flexibility services or resources~20% (all large DSOs)
Use no flexibility services today~50%
Use or consider villkorade avtal / bilateral agreements~40%
Use or plan to use energy storage~20%
Consider creating or joining a flex market~15%
Have used redispatching (omdirigering)5 DSOs only

Most DSOs’ primary flexibility tool: effekttariffer (mandatory from 1 January 2027). Local flex markets and formal redispatching remain minority tools.


Villkorade avtal workshop (September 2024, 42 participants)

Tool suitability scores (1–10) by situation

For variable production (solel/vind):

ToolScore
Villkorade avtal with compensation7.1
Price signals (tariffs + spot)6.9
Bilateral agreements with compensation6.6
Voluntary flex markets6.6
Villkorade avtal without compensation5.9

For additional consumption (EVs, heat pumps):

ToolScore
Voluntary flex markets7.1
Villkorade avtal with compensation7.0
Price signals (tariffs + spot)6.5
Bilateral agreements with compensation6.0
Villkorade avtal without compensation5.6

For flexible resources generally:

ToolScore
Voluntary flex markets8.7
Bilateral agreements with compensation7.0
Price signals6.6
Villkorade avtal with compensation6.5
Villkorade avtal without compensation4.7

When are villkorade avtal most/least appropriate?

Highest-scoring situations (7.8/10 each):

  1. Areas where grid reinforcement will arrive within 3–5 years
  2. Areas where N-1 redundancy cannot be guaranteed if a fault occurs

Lowest-scoring: areas with many similarly-sized customers (3.2/10 — competitive market preferred)

Workshop consensus on overall role: supporting alongside other measures (majority view). Only 4 of 42 participants said villkorade avtal should be the primary solution.

Activation prioritization ranking (highest to lowest)

  1. Curtail based on societal benefit (samhällsnytta)
  2. Curtail all customers equally (proportional to subscription)
  3. Prioritize customers with connected energy storage
  4. Prioritize customers not participating in a local flex market
  5. Random activation

Network tariff reform

Ei Ställningstagande Ei2025:06 (June 2025) — tariff design clarification:

  • Effektavgiften must be time-differentiated based on actual grid stress — not just the customer’s three monthly peaks
  • Tariff components must be cost-reflective: energy component can be time-differentiated; power component shall be time-differentiated; fixed component covers residuals
  • Some 2025/26 tariffs introduced by DSOs already do not comply with the 2027 regulation
  • Tariffs that penalize consumption when grid has no capacity constraints create false signals and reduce flex market liquidity

Gotland pilot (Energicentrum Gotland 2025): demonstrated a bidirectional capacity-based energy tariff where:

  • Loading direction: always a positive cost (cost-reflective)
  • Relieving direction: always a negative cost (net benefit / nätnyttoersättning)
  • Tariff varied hourly, aligned with actual grid state — analogous to spot pricing for the network

Location signals (lokaliseringssignaler):

  • Currently prohibited in local networks (lokalnät) under ellagen
  • Ei proposed legalizing them (Ei PM2020:03); SOU 2023:64 (2023) proposed removing the prohibition
  • Ei has an ongoing review on how localisation signals can be introduced
  • SOU 2025:47 (Spänning i tillvaron, April 2025) supports location signal development

Standardization and new products

LFM-h / LFM-p / LFM-e — standardized product proposal

Swedish DSOs submitted a joint standardization proposal to Ei in 2024:

  • LFM-h: hourly availability product (capacity available during a specific hour)
  • LFM-p: period availability product (capacity available during a selected time period)
  • LFM-e: energy activation product (energy delivered from free bids or availability contracts)

New product categories not yet on Swedish markets

  • Voltage regulation (spänningsreglering) — urgently needed as distributed solar grows in LV/MV networks; would extend market to year-round operation (not just winter peak load)
  • Rotational inertia (mekanisk rotationsenergi) — SOU 2025:47 recommends compensation mechanism; not on any Swedish market
  • Ramping products — Ireland has three ramping products; not in Sweden
  • Emergency / comfort reduction programs — could activate before automatic disconnection; participants accept comfort reduction (e.g., room temperature −2°C) in advance
  • Effektreserven reform — should be reopened to industrial demand response; currently industrial flex appears at hourly timescales but at costs too high for regular activation (suitable for rare high-stakes events)

Nine structural conditions for flex development (from interviews)

  1. DSOs required to plan for capacity beyond dimensioned need (überanslutning / overanslutning) — creates genuine need to procure flex
  2. Incentives for DSOs to take risk — reward flexibility enablement, not only minimum opex
  3. Product harmonization across local markets — enables multi-market FSP participation
  4. Cross-BRP aggregation in a single bid — current BRP rules prevent aggregators from pooling resources with different balance responsible parties
  5. Common API for activation across all flex markets — same interface regardless of platform (SWITCH, NODES, or future)
  6. Identical activation formats and protocols — reduces operational complexity for multi-market participants
  7. Single prequalification valid across all markets — qualify once, participate anywhere
  8. Local network tariffs accessible via API — aggregators can self-serve tariff data
  9. Coordinated system development / national flex architecture — avoids each DSO building its own system

BSP role in Nordic neighbors

The Balance Service Provider (BSP) role — which enables cross-BRP aggregation into balancing market bids — is operational in Finland, Denmark, and Norway, but not yet in Sweden. This is a structural advantage of neighboring markets cited by Swedish aggregators. Also noted: Finland, Denmark, and Norway have easier API access and prequalification processes.


Key conclusions from the report

  • Flexibility markets function best when combined with good short-term forecasting by DSOs and clear long-term communication of need — DNDP-level transparency is a precondition for FSP investment decisions
  • Latent capacity (effektförmåga) far exceeds actual activation — the system has registered more capacity than it activates; the constraint is not physical but economic and organizational
  • Villkorade avtal work as a supplement for situations with grid safety urgency or where markets are not yet feasible; markets should be the primary tool for flexible resources
  • Local flex market prices are competitive during activation hours — the argument that local markets can’t compete against national markets is empirically disproven

Relevance to wiki

  • Flexibility Market — comprehensive price tables (all markets all seasons), effektförmåga table, activation timing, LFM-h/p/e standardization, DSO toolkit survey, nine structural conditions
  • Balancing Markets — FCR/aFRR/mFRR historical values, marginal pricing reform (Feb 2024), aFRR zone split (May 2022), price forecasts to 2030
  • Villkorade Avtal — workshop suitability scores by situation; appropriate use cases; activation prioritization
  • Aggregation — cross-BRP barrier, BSP role in Nordic neighbors, nine structural conditions list
  • Effekthandel Väst — first comprehensive price and volume data (Tabell 6–8)
  • Why Swedish Local Flex Markets Are Thin — Structural Causes — 6% activation rate; latent capacity finding; value stacking confirmation; DSO toolkit survey (only 15% consider joining a flex market)