Vattenfall Eldistribution Nätutvecklingsplan 2025-2034

Source metadata

Summary

Vattenfall Eldistribution‘s first mandatory DNDP (nätutvecklingsplan), published December 2024, covering 2025–2034. Covers grid overview, capacity forecasts, planned investments (22 major projects), flexibility service needs, and adequacy assessment — plus a Chapter 5 responding to consultation feedback. Bilaga 1 (municipality-level local grid forecasts) is a separate document (Source - VF NUP Bilaga 1 Prognos Lokalnät per Kommun).

Key claims

Grid overview

Vattenfall divides its network into five areas: Norr, Mellan, Stockholm, Öst, Väst. This coarser-than-county division was deliberate — justified by NDA agreements with large industrial customers and by the fact that regional grid constraints span multiple municipalities. The choice was contested in consultation (see FAQ below).

• Total current load: approximately 11,000 MW
• Expected growth 2025–2034: +7,500 MW consumption (of which ~3,800 MW in Norr), +4,500 MW production
• Local grid: characterized as “stable” for the period — moderate growth manageable with planned investments in most areas
• Pipeline not in the forecast: 18,000 MW consumption applications + 38,000 MW production applications excluded due to low maturity or stamnät capacity block

Forecast methodology

• Only includes customers who have signed a förstudieavtal (pre-study agreement) — the maturity threshold is high
• Local grid: annual collection of municipal exploitation plans from ~90 municipalities; sannolikhetsjustering (probability-adjusted) by planning stage
• Regional grid: bottom-up from customer project maturity; production forecast based on live connection applications only (no top-down production scenarios — a limitation acknowledged)
• Price-driven demand reduction NOT modelled (raw text states only that the forecast doesn’t account for consumption changes from e.g. high prices or efficiency gains — it doesn’t itself characterize this as an acknowledged “systematic upward bias”; that framing is this wiki’s own inference)
• Prognosen’s per-point peak-summation methodology yields a maximum-possible-demand figure at each point, but Vattenfall’s own text calls the overall scenario an “expected scenario” (förväntat scenario) — the “maximum, not expected” framing applies to the point-level methodology, not the overall scenario characterization; no hourly resolution yet (under development)

Demand drivers per area

• Norr: steel industry electrification (Gällivare), car-testing industry (Arvidsjaur/Arjeplog), wind/solar
• Mellan: solar build-out throughout, NordSyd restructuring, industrial servers/data centers
• Stockholm: residential/commercial growth, EV charging, 70→130 kV grid rebuild
• Öst: industrial electrification (Sörmland), Gotland demand growth, wind/solar
• Väst: petrochem electrification (Stenungsund), energy-intensive industry (Göteborg area, Projekt Ture), automotive industry (Väst region generally — not specifically tied to Projekt Ture in the raw text), solar

Flexibility stance — no market-based procurement

The most significant finding: Vattenfall explicitly states it sees no conditions for market-based flexibility services at any of its constrained locations. The stated reason:

Vattenfall’s assessment is that the preconditions for market-based flexibility services don’t currently exist at these locations, so bilateral agreements with the individual operations are considered instead.

Vattenfall’s threshold for a viable flexibility market:

• Supply ≥ 5× demand
• More than 5 independent actors (raw text: “fler än fem” — strictly >5, i.e. at least 6, not “5 or more”)
• No single actor providing >50% of the need (demand) — a materially stricter concentration limit than “>50% of supply” would be, since Vattenfall’s own threshold already requires supply ≥5× demand

Their conclusion: these conditions are not met anywhere in their network.

DNDP Section 3.3.1: with current forecasts, Vattenfall sees no need for flexibility solutions other than villkorade avtal (conditional agreements) with customers.

This directly explains why Vattenfall reported N/A for all flexibility service needs in Ei’s DNDP data tool — a deliberate policy choice, not a reporting gap.

Flex market pilot closures

Vattenfall has closed both of its flexibility market pilot projects:

• Uppsala pilot (UppFlex, CoordiNet-era): “Med nya förutsättningar har Vattenfall Eldistribution beslutat att avveckla detta pilotprojekt”
• Stockholm pilot (sthlmflex participant): same language — “Med nya förutsättningar har Vattenfall Eldistribution beslutat att avveckla detta pilotprojekt”

The “new conditions” (nya förutsättningar) are not further specified but context points to stamnät constraints in Stockholm (Vattenfall was managing subscriptions against the overlying grid, not local congestion) and insufficient liquidity in Uppsala.

Vattenfall does use Villkorade Avtal in both Mellan (Uppsala area local grid) and Stockholm local grid. The flex market pilots were addressing regionnät constraints against Svk subscriptions — a different problem from local grid congestion.

Cost comparison: flex vs grid

Section 3.1.2 contains Vattenfall’s explicit cost comparison, based on their approved methodology for villkorade avtal:

Vattenfall notes this is a theoretical calculation and acknowledges that few actors currently meet the technical requirements for grid-replacing flexibility services. The ratio (≈15–30×) is their primary argument against market-based flex as a grid substitute.

Compare with FlexAbility’s quantified DSO value cases from Ellevio’s network (utnyttjandegrad, abonnemangsoptimering: 10,000–122,000 SEK/MWh) — a different framing of the same question. The Vattenfall calculation addresses capital cost per MW, not marginal value per activation.

Investment programme — 22 major regional grid projects

90% of Vattenfall’s growth investments are covered by these reported projects; 75% of total investments are for other purposes (renewal, safety) not captured in the DNDP.

Adequacy assessment (Ch. 4)

Key qualifiers: Vattenfall explicitly excludes from this assessment all applications blocked by Svk capacity — the plan only covers what can actually be connected given current stamnät subscriptions.

Consultation FAQ responses (Ch. 5)

Seven recurring consultation issues addressed:

1. Coarse geographic resolution — justified by NDA obligations and grid structure; bilaga 1 added as compromise
2. No capacity map — Vattenfall declines; notes EU requirements coming (likely before 2026/27 DSO publication deadline); describes capacity in terms of ability, not MW figures
3. Only mature-project customers in forecast — deliberate; immature projects too uncertain; separately discloses excluded volumes
4. Customers blocked by Svk capacity — excluded from forecast; Vattenfall actively lobbies Svk for capacity grants
5. Transparency on queue position — customer-specific confidential; fair queue principles described
6. Anticipatory investment based on municipal plans — constrained by need for välgrundade antaganden (well-founded assumptions) per licensing requirements
7. Apparent dismissal of flex — extensive FAQ response clarifying that flex is not rejected, but conditions for market-based flex not yet met; villkorade avtal are the current operative tool; flex development work ongoing

Relevance to wiki

Resolves existing data gaps

• Distribution Network Development Plan: “DNDPs from Vattenfall Eldistribution and Ellevio” — Vattenfall now resolved
• Flexibility Market: Vattenfall closed both pilots — now explained and sourced
• SWITCH: UppFlex (Vattenfall/Uppsala CoordiNet extension) closure — now confirmed

Contradicts / updates existing wiki

• Flexibility Need Assessment: Vattenfall’s N/A in Ei’s data tool is now explained
• Villkorade Avtal: Vattenfall’s use of villkorade avtal in both Mellan (Uppsala local) and Stockholm local grid — adds detail

New concepts / entities

• Vattenfall’s 5-area structure (Norr, Mellan, Stockholm, Öst, Väst) — new granularity
• Vattenfall’s explicit flex market liquidity threshold (5× supply/demand, more than 5 actors) — first DSO to quantify this
• 0.27 MSEK/MW/year grid cost benchmark — adds to Congestion Management value cases
• Projekt Ture (Göteborg industrial, 2025–2031) — new major project
• Kapacitet Stockholm (~100 sub-projects, 70→130 kV, 2023–2034) — major investment programme