Skip to content
RiDERgy RiDERgy
Smart Charge · S2 · Episode 5 · 24 August 2026 · 58 min

Michael Dammann, Geschäftsführer der Hamburger Energienetze

Netzkapazität, das Fair Grid Projekt und Wasserstoff im Hamburger Hafen

Transcript

Cleaned up from a machine transcript. Translations are machine-generated and may contain errors.

Welcome to the Smart Charge by RiDERgy Podcast. This is Claudio Geyken, Founder and CEO of RiDERgy. This is your show to learn about all things energy management and smart charging innovation for electric vehicles and fleets. Hamburg has decided to become climate-neutral five years earlier than the federal government – in 2040 instead of 2045. For the distribution network operator, this means the entire network planning must be recalculated, while at the same time connection requests are exploding. Michael Dammann has been in the energy industry since 1998, starting as a trainee.

and today leads Hamburger Energienetze, a hundred percent municipal company that operates electricity and gas networks in Hamburg and operates, with 60 kilometers, the first hydrogen industrial network of a distribution network operator in Germany. Currently, 1,800 MW peak load is on the network. Forecasts calculate an almost threefold increase by 2045. In this episode, we discuss the Fairgrid procedure, which replaces the first-come-first-served principle for network connections, and why battery storage and data centers are currently the bigger drivers than electric mobility.

Michael Dammann in conversation about networks that are not just cables, but the backbone of the energy transition. Hello, Michael. I hope you're doing well today, and it's great that you're here on Smart Charge. A hearty hello from me in Hamburg as well. I'm doing well. I just had a longer vacation behind me and today is my first day back in the office. Then welcome back. I hope you're well-rested and in good spirits before we dive into the details and the in-depth topics that keep a distribution network operator like Hamburger Energienetze busy.

Tell us a bit about yourself, Michael. What was your background? How did you come to become managing director of Hamburger Energienetze? Well, it's quite a long story actually, but ultimately I decided in 1998 after my studies to go into the energy industry because the EU directive from 1998 on market liberalization was being implemented at that time. Did I have an inkling then of what was to come in the energy industry and how the transformation of energy supply would take place all over the world? No, I didn't.

But I'm all the happier that I became part of this transformation. I started in 1998 as a trainee and went through many positions in the technical side of a network operator. At that time it was an integrated company, and then I kept moving toward management. And then one thing led to another. So how do you become a managing director – if that's the question, which I'm sometimes asked – it was more of a chain of circumstances.

And that's always the question of whether you want to take it into your own hands or whether you don't trust yourself to do it or don't want to do it. I trusted myself to do it at some point. And it remains an exciting task. And I'm very pleased that I'm now in a position to have shared responsibility for the energy transition in the city of Hamburg. Yes, exciting. And what were some of the highlights for you, if you could sum that up briefly?

So if I understood correctly, you've been with Hamburger Energienetze the whole time – I think the name changed over time too. Yes, I think I worked for eight or nine companies in total. I started at Hein Gas back then, an integrated gas network operator – or gas supply company, as we would have said at the time – and it was also much larger than today's gas network of Hamburger Energienetze.

It was acquired back then, and also had storage facilities, sales, heating systems, large district heating networks. It was bought by E.ON. That was a very exciting time because then of course a large corporation moved in. Then we merged with the former Schleswig AG and Hansegas, which was a subsidiary of Hein Gas. This made it a very large company that supplied the north of Hamburg and also the east with gas, partly Germany. And so it continued from there. That was an exciting part.

The corporate affiliation was also very exciting and interesting. The topic of storage played an important role, and then experiencing all the IT projects. And later, when I took root in Hamburg again or returned more strongly to Hamburg, to Hamburg Netz – back then it was Gas Hamburg – of course the starting signal and the development of the hydrogen industrial network. That was an important milestone, which continues to have an impact and remains an important topic for us today.

And so that the listeners, who perhaps aren't from Hamburg – and maybe those who are from Hamburg too – get a sense of it: what exactly do you do with the company, and how many of you are there? Maybe some key figures, employees or revenues. Well, first of all, we're a 100 percent municipal company. We were bought back into municipal hands bit by bit after the referendums – not the referendum from 2012 – from Vattenfall and E.ON at the time.

And we have around 2,500 employees, colleagues, specialists, who take care of around 31,000 kilometers of electricity networks, around 8,000 kilometers of gas networks, and in the future also – that's the current plan – 60 kilometers of hydrogen network. And that's the perspective we currently have. We're naturally expanding significantly right now, which is the case equally throughout the country as regards network kilometers in general, but we're also reinforcing. We're building new substations, new local network stations.

And if you were to say what the issues are that currently present the biggest challenges or the biggest goals you have in mind for the coming 12 months, what would that be? We just had what is called a future decision in Hamburg last year, where the citizens of the city of Hamburg made it clear that they want to achieve climate neutrality five years earlier. That is something that we have of course not yet incorporated into our network planning. We have calculated up to 2045 so far.

And since we are a major enabler for our customers, namely providing renewable electricity, green hydrogen and so on, we need to adapt our network planning accordingly. That is an issue that is currently occupying us. At the same time, of course, we need to integrate more intelligence, to digitalize, and to implement more strongly all the topics we currently have in view – via intelligent metering systems, intelligent local network stations, data platforms and so on.

And ultimately of course also what is currently generally in the media: our Fair-Grid project, where we have found – as has also been established in the republic – that the network capacities that we receive from the transmission network are currently still sufficient for our existing customers, but in the medium term they will not be sufficient for the requests we currently have in house. And that is why we said we need to deal with this, because we want to enable the energy transition.

And that is of course a particular situation that other cities certainly also have, but which Stromnetz Hamburg currently faces, which of course – I can understand it – causes irritation in politics and among customers. But ultimately we are of course responsible for operating the network safely and reliably and also for tackling the energy transition well. And that is something that is a major challenge – in addition to network expansion and the issues of personnel, space, materials, partner companies for construction and so on.

So those are I think the main points currently. Yes, and you have also done very good work on that so far. I think network stability in Germany is among the best – I heard this morning on the FT how blackouts are occurring in Tunisia because the grid operators are unable to keep the networks that stable. So that is definitely a location advantage. And distribution grid operators play a huge role in that. And where are the loads currently greatest if you take e-mobility for example as an example?

Within Hamburg there are places where the bottlenecks are very, very large. Yes, so e-mobility is a factor that has also grown very strongly in recent years and months. We now have roughly 40 percent more charging points in the network. However, it should be said: these are currently around 5,000 to 5,100 public charging points that we have, in addition to all the private wallboxes. But that is not yet something we are seeing strongly in network loads.

Currently it is actually more the industry that is decarbonizing – on one hand – but on the other hand also incredibly many requests for battery storage, which is also currently affecting the entire republic, because of course many see it as a gold rush market and many of course also want to connect to the grid within the network tariff exemption. And secondly of course data centers via AI digitalization. Energy is needed for that too of course. And whether Hamburg is the best location for that is questionable. But those are the current topics – e-mobility,

I think also somewhat heat pumps. In recent years, efficiency gains have somewhat dampened the higher demand. We continue to become more efficient – with LEDs, with new electrical appliances and so on. And that is why the load in Hamburg has remained relatively constant for years, even though new customers have been added and mobility has grown. But now we are at a point where this probably will not continue to work well for much longer, or where the load will also increase.

We calculate in our forecasts – we currently have 1,800 MW of power in the network, that is the actual power measured simultaneously at the transfer points – by 2045 an almost tripling of the load. By when? That is currently the question. Of course that always depends on the customers. This is so to speak the full scenario from municipal heat planning, from industrial decarbonization and so on. If we want to be climate neutral – 2040, 2045 – then there are, and you already mentioned it, all the battery storage, the AI data centers and so on.

Electric vehicles with charging infrastructure. You are being presented with so many network connection requests. Traditionally and historically this was always done on a first-come, first-served basis. I think now there is a changeover. How are you approaching this? And was it really urgently necessary to change the system? Yes, that is what I was just describing somewhat. We have 1,800 MW of power in the network and we have a certain capacity that we can take over from the transmission grid operator. And this capacity is

no longer sufficient for all the requests we currently have. And if we simply filled up the network on a first-come, first-served basis, then we would have – to put it bluntly – no more capacity for heat pumps, even if those are only many small systems, and for mobility or also for industrial decarbonization. That is why we said we need to look much further ahead, which is also part of the discussion in the industry in the network package and so on.

First, of course, we need to not just connect renewables and prioritize them, but also get the energy into the cities. And I think we've somewhat neglected that over the past years. And I believe that's a really important point. It does no good to generate renewable energy if you can't get it consumed in the cities because we can't manage the handover points. And that's why we decided to introduce a citizen-friendly repatriation procedure

– that's the Hellgrit project, which has several other components – to introduce it, which we're already doing in Berlin and so on, and which ultimately is about fairly and transparently allocating the capacities we still have when we get them. That's our job. There's also a lot of criticism, I think, especially about battery storage projects and data center projects that simply try to secure grid connection capacity without a concrete project coming along that then takes that capacity away from actual concrete projects.

That's without hope. Yes, of course it is. However, the planning-ready procedure – you could do that with, so that you have a certain planning maturity, land, building permit and so on. You have to have already invested a lot of money to then get a grid connection. But clearly, ultimately the thing is that we're expecting clear rules by 2030, 2031, 2032 for the concrete activities of a battery storage, but the connection is available now. And in my view, that's much too late.

You really need to overlay that much more, so that we look at having clear rules – so a Marshall plan, you could call it – about where battery storage is needed and how much, and definitely not let the market decide that. Because the market is of course economically rational right now. But it certainly won't stay that way long-term, rather there will also be some battery storage that operates in the wrong location with the wrong capacity and the wrong energy quantities. And that's of course something that economically

and ultimately costs a lot of money too. Yes. Let's dig a bit deeper into this point, because I think it's an important one that the public maybe doesn't fully understand. I'd also be interested in your view. So there's the electricity market in the power system, which in turn is a signal of this supply and demand of renewables and available energy and the demand side

reflects. But it doesn't give a signal about the grids and how the grids exactly have bottlenecks now and where exactly this bottleneck is – those are different signals again. And that means that's exactly what you're just addressing, that you can have many battery storage projects that only orient themselves to this one signal and not to the available network. What's your wish, or how would you most like to see it? We do need battery storage, precisely because renewables are volatile and only produce at certain times.

And we want to get to 100 percent renewable, not just 60. And nevertheless, the grids of course have to remain stable. That means, how would you best see that solved? Most efficiently. Well, if I had the best solution for that, I certainly wouldn't just be CEO of Hamburg Netz – joking aside. So I think there are two essential points. One is of course to smooth the feed-in. That, which is increasingly happening, that

photovoltaic systems, which ultimately only produce during the day, or also wind farms or combined producers PV and wind farms together, use battery storage and thereby smooth the feed-in, which would also lead to being able to reduce grid expansion at that point. Ideally. The other is of course that you also create the possibility for grid operators to operate battery storage at certain points or set clear requirements for it or to compensate for it.

Because of course right now it's like this: if I tell the battery storage operator, you can't feed in at that point unless I give you a profile, then he of course assumes that at some point it will be possible for him to participate in the market game. But that's not visible right now. And that's why you have to create a solution that can then practically compensate the battery storage operator for the avoided grid expansion. It's complicated and complex. It's going to take years, I think, until we have a reasonable model for it.

And the last point regarding battery storage is of course, if you smooth the power at the customer, if you have industrial customers who maybe only have certain peaks at startup or in the year because of 100 hours or so that can be curtailed. Those are use cases that are good, that are then also grid-neutral in a way. Why is that even like this? That's I think also a quite interesting question that should also be discussed by policy makers

should be. We have a nationwide electricity market in Germany, and electricity flows especially when the sun shines and the wind blows. So when the surplus is large across the entire grid area, or rather across the entire German market area. But that has nothing to do with local bottlenecks in the grid because I can certainly say that I have a local bottleneck in northern Germany or in Schleswig-Holstein or in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, at the same time though a shortage of electricity. That means, with the control effect that we

Always say it that way, please storage, we're ultimately not working with it anyway. Then you haven't segmented the market finely enough. There was also just an initiative from northern Germany about forming a market zone together with them. That's been hotly debated in politics. I'd have to comment on that because it's a completely different question that, from a market economy perspective, doesn't really work well with the grid operator.

But of course that's a topic: this network affinity of storage and consumers is naturally the big market area we have, which one could also say more nicely: somewhere the wind is always blowing and somewhere the sun is always shining. That's of course a bit different in Germany, but that's sort of the situation we find ourselves in. And what do you think about it now that we have increasingly more smart meters?

Hopefully we'll then have a very good overview of where bottlenecks arise and exactly when they arise, and based on that we could also demand dynamic grid charges. And then all market participants would have both an incentive based on the available renewable energies and combined with these grid charges. The grid charges would probably then have a kind of traffic light system where you also say: from the moment – the grids of course have a capacity limit, they can't just collapse on us.

What do you think about that – there's also AgNeS, I think, that's also being discussed in that context. What's your opinion on it? Yes, that's the future. So we need to get there. We must – and we're already working on turning the customer into a prosumer, as it's nicely called, so the consumer but also the producer. Not just producers by generating energy, so PV and wind and so on, but on the other hand also that they push power when there's surplus.

That's actually something everyone who has a PV system at home has experienced, that somehow when electricity is fed into the grid, you think: oh man, now I could wonderfully run a washing machine – but I'm not at home. Those are things where you certainly shouldn't underestimate the social component on one hand. So who can really control their household power consumption that flexibly? In the end, those are the people who own their own home. So

those living in cities in apartment buildings certainly have greater difficulties with that. That's one point. Nevertheless, I believe we need to get there and that we need to develop a system where we let customers participate more strongly – on one hand – and secondly of course also where the customer goes along with this change in their energy consumption structure. And that needs to be incentivized. It's a bit like how someone would have installed LED bulbs,

which would have been much more expensive at home but had the same consumption – or you have to calculate: an LED bulb pays for itself today because it simply consumes much less and is cost-effective. You have to see this prosumer logic the same way. In the end it has to be worthwhile for the customer to switch to it. And there's still a bit of road to go there. But there are interesting approaches underway. And it certainly helps that we hopefully eventually have intelligent metering systems across the board, because those are naturally necessary,

to roll out. That's still somewhat difficult. It took a long time until the standards were set. And now it's supposed to all happen very quickly. That's a bit of a shortcoming, where I say: the regulatory requirement took years, and now it's supposed to be done overnight. It's a bit like energy itself – the last things still have to be written because at the end of the chain we still have to uncap things.

only in quotation marks, to then always drill the thick board. Yes. And what do you actually think – you also have a company, E-Born. Maybe we can give a brief overview of that company, which I think is quite unique in Germany – as a distribution grid operator you've also built an important role in e-mobility with this backend for various other corporate customers in Germany, not just for yourselves.

And let me ask two questions in one: can you give some background on how that came about and what you're still planning to do with it? And the second is: how could those who don't have their own home benefit from it – namely from more intelligent charging processes with their electric vehicle, which they then have to park on the street and charge at public charging points? So for example now a Hamburg resident who doesn't have their own home – that they can at E-Born –

The Netherlands, I think, is already doing that: that when there are bottlenecks, you leave the vehicle there a bit longer and then charge at the moment when there's no bottleneck – at 17:00, 18:00 for example. Yes, so first of all to E-Born. That's a product currently that consists of three components.

It's not a separate company, but it's a product that the predecessor company basically built with Strom Hamburg in your time on behalf of – somewhat on behalf of the city, you could say – because at that time of course the charging infrastructure, the backend system for the city's charging infrastructure was built. That was also still with Stromnetz a few years ago. Historically grown, the city or Stromnetz Hamburg so to speak operated the charging infrastructure. That was then moved from a regulatory or bundling technology perspective. You had to hand it over, and you did.

But the backend system then developed into something that is exactly what we want to do with §14a as well. An incredible amount of data. So I think last year we controlled 1.8 million charging processes with this backend system, so it's practically a data platform or a system that we can use not only for mobility but also for our grid. And there are three facets: EG Lytics is one – Grid – where we practically want to do our network planning and network forecasts, also network calculations.

The second is Urban, where we practically collect data with Loren applications and want to push a bit of Industry 4.0 forecasts, so where we practically want to act as a data hub for the city of Hamburg for infrastructure companies. And the other is Mobility. We continue to be the one who provides the backend for the city of Hamburg and makes it available to others. They can either use our backend or have to build something themselves, which many also do. And of course we also have that at one point or another in the market.

It's used at airports et cetera. Of course, that's always – as an actual grid operator, we look at how we can further develop that. But it's an exciting story. And you can see how the innovation topic, which actually had a completely different purpose, has to work market-based, then becomes something that we as a grid operator can also use very well internally. That's one point. And the second part of the question: How did it come about in the first place?

Well, basically you could – I've already experienced it in Denmark – if you charge your car in the evening at 10 p.m. So the electricity price at the charging points where you charge is displayed there. And there are different time windows on the electricity cost side. And ultimately, of course, it's easier if you have a wallbox at home, but also a fast charger. Nowadays they also have the performance for that.

Of course, it could also be a possibility – a bit like today: whoever charges just after noon is also out of luck. And so at some point there will also be people who charge their cars fully at certain times.

That's just one variant. And of course there's tenant electricity and so on, where there's currently a discussion with the EU about how to handle other sub-networks, property networks, networks in the house – which then want to be considered as distribution networks according to EU – I think you have to find solutions so that pragmatic approaches are found, so that tenants in the house can also participate in progress and the solar situation, so to speak. And how do you see the topic of bidirectional charging? Is that also linked to that?

Do you know a bit about how the current status is, how the sub-network operators are now prepared for this topic, how long you think it will still take? There are certainly one or two Hamburg residents who would like to have it already, at least at home, if not right away in the public charging area. Well, publicly – I think – is a bit more difficult, especially to determine the price at which you then feed it back.

Well, the regional plan is of course a huge opportunity, because essentially – if you will – I don't even know how many cars we have in Hamburg by now. But I think we have a rapidly growing market when it comes to mobility. And that's of course a battery storage, if you will. And a big asset.

So if I no longer need my car – and more and more Hamburg residents are also driving with bicycles et cetera or with public transport, maybe still have a small car – and if I can V2G charge during the day, earn money, then that's of course something that naturally affects many others too. And if I don't have to store the electricity as a battery at home in a system, but can use it again, then that would certainly be great. That's also a direction that I think is very important.

And if we as a grid operator can then at some point also deliberately – so from experience values, those are always the experience values you need, so simultaneity – what can I calculate if I can make them usable: that's of course great. Currently it's the case that there aren't many charging boxes that can do that yet, and not that many cars that can do that either. That's always a bit market-limiting. So the supply has to be there. And of course there's.

Right now many people are perhaps buying their first car, but it can't charge bidirectionally. You go from one investment cycle to the next. It would be nice if that was actually already at the technology level. I think that level is actually already there, but it's just not that widespread in application yet. But asking again: if BMW or E.ON now have such an offering on the market, if everything fits – you have such a BMW

a vehicle with a BMW wallbox and this E.ON tariff in Hamburg – would that now be feasible as a Hamburg resident, to also bill that bidirectionally with your distribution network, with the metering and billing concepts? I actually can't answer that concretely. We already have bidirectional chargers in the network. That's more of a customer-side system modification that needs to be approved. But this E.ON product, in my view, is still in preparation. I don't think it's already on the market. I've heard of it.

They're at least marketing it. But I'll take that with me. I can't answer that off the cuff right now. Rather than say something wrong, I'd prefer to say nothing. Yes, all good. Then maybe we can put it in the show notes too, if we have better answers by then. We're definitely taking this topic with us. It's a big one. I agree with you on that – which, to my knowledge, is still the current status:

The federal government has at least exempted grid charges and taxes that would have applied. But there's still something missing in the metering concept from the Federal Network Agency. But I'm looking forward with great interest to this topic. And then there's the software issue: you described it well just now. To what extent do you think the smaller distribution network operators are prepared for the transformation we just described? And how can one

support them so they can manage it too? The smart meters aren't all there yet, but this digitalization of distribution networks and the ability to respond to it – also in all distribution networks, 860, if I'm not mistaken, in Germany. Yes. Well, I can of course find that hard to judge, because I've never worked at a smaller municipal utility. In terms of size, we're such that we have a certain relevance and many things – not everything, but many things – we can do ourselves.

Basically, network operators are less competitors with each other. And for that, of course, the associations – the BDEW, the VDN, the VKU, the DVGW for gas – are predestined to make shared industry intelligence usable. That's happening too. I think nobody gets left alone in the country, even if there are many companies and everyone has to deal with it themselves.

And that's what I always tell my people: the best innovation is the one you don't necessarily always have to invent yourself, but that you can also look at from left and right over the horizon and adapt. That's certainly even more difficult for larger companies, and not quite easy for us either. But that's something we need to learn: that we advance these things together efficiently and through industry intelligence. That's something where we can all learn a little more from each other.

There are also plenty of small companies that are substantially faster and more agile in certain specific areas and have ideas that large companies can then pick up on. And how do you see AI in that regard, which is on everyone's lips right now and has a strong influence on me these days? Well, AI is going to completely change our lives overall.

Many companies are already working with their own proprietary chatbots or AIs that help them answer certain questions, write texts, and so on. I think we have no idea yet what else will happen. I don't want to focus on individual professions right now. But basically, of course: if I have any question at the customer site – my daughter, she's 11, when she has a question, she asks some AI.

And she gets an answer that I myself wouldn't have known. Of course, you have to be careful – not all answers are correct. I had a nice example recently: I asked when the school holidays were in Hamburg in 2027. And ChatGPT answered me – depending on which platform you're using – that the summer holidays in Hamburg would be shortened by two weeks starting next year. And then I read the source and discovered:

that was an April Fools' joke from the school authority in 2026, which the AI took as truth. You just have to be careful. But yes, AI – we as network operators are of course trying to increasingly use it, always with the human review function behind it, who takes another look and doesn't blindly adopt it. But of course, that will play an important role in many places.

Are there concrete use cases you're already using or want to use, for example in e-round product development or in the EAP you probably have for distribution network management? Well, in my view, we're not there yet. We're using it essentially for chatbots, for forecast data, for all sorts of things that – we have – it's also always a difficulty. It has to remain traceable.

So if, for example, you want to determine a calibration value, which can also be determined more accurately via AI – we have that in that at the end of the day, that the calibration authorities can recalculate it. But you can't do that inside the AI. You have to make the steps so small that you can understand each one individually. That's a bit – and I think that's also an issue in network calculation. That will certainly come.

As far as network planning is concerned, but also network calculation, that you of course find very quick solutions from the data we have available. But then the question: What's the difference between machine learning and AI? Machine learning is sort of interpolation, and AI for me is also a bit of thinking for itself. Yes, the traditional machine learning – you've probably been dealing with methods in a certain way for a while.

All the LLMs and the new AI methods – that probably needs a bit more time, or you also have to watch out for the hallucination that particularly characterizes this type of model. Yes, and because this podcast is a lot about fleets, I wanted to look at your fleet again, or rather the two aspects. You have the technicians who are always out in the field and then service vehicles at their locations. What's actually the status in terms of electric mobility, or do you see hurdles to getting to 100 percent electric?

I wouldn't call them hurdles. It's certainly a change, a shift in perception. And I think that probably resonates with many distribution network operators or fleet operators who are ultimately out in the field a lot – not all models deliver on the promise, or do what they promise.

And the experiences we've had of course also mean: with the electric car I have to charge constantly every two days if people are out and about in Hamburg, because the range in winter is so poor that they basically have to stay overnight at a charging box if they have one or two service calls. And if we have service calls in the field, we naturally don't want to wait for the electric car that's just charging. But that's something that's model-specific. You have to make a good selection somehow

in terms of battery capacity as things develop. Of course we're also looking at how we can support our employees by providing charging facilities in certain places – for the external sites, but also possibly at home. These are all things we're examining. What I feel is a bit neglected is climate resilience. So if we have no power supply in part of a blackout

then it's important for network development that we can operate our vehicles. And that's something that still concerns us a bit – that we still have a core or pool of vehicles that's set up resiliently – so not dependent on electricity on the one hand, and on the other hand, that we might also create locations where we can reliably generate electricity for these vehicles.

I think these are all considerations that also need to be discussed to some extent in Berlin – where it only affects a small part and you could go somewhere else and charge. Yes, and to clarify: you mean the problems you had were the range in winter, which is typically about 30 percent less than in summer, and that wasn't enough for the day's service calls. Or was it just that employees didn't want to take their vehicle home and then had to charge at the site?

I didn't quite understand that – what were the problems? It was basically the range. Of course in on-call duty we have colleagues who take their vehicles home because they're on duty and need to start from there. But those are also models we're looking at now to optimize. But if I only have 80 kilometers of range in winter with a fully electric car, that's difficult. And I don't think we need to talk about hybrids.

That's a driver: either I go with a pure fossil combustion engine, or I drive electric. Hybrid vehicles might be a variant for this use case, but they're of course significantly less efficient. So it's a mix of everything. You have to find the right vehicle.

You need concepts for how employees can charge the car and don't have to stand around for two hours at a charging box during their work time if no fast charger is free, or have to drive far, and so on. That's – we've just set up an internal project on this where we're looking at these questions in a very concrete and strategic way.

But let's put it this way: if the employee could charge at home and had a range of 150 kilometers, none of that's a problem. But then for cases where that's not the case, where there's lower range and the employee can't charge at home – then you have to develop concepts, either at the site or publicly. And for employees who aren't technicians but use their own vehicles: at the Hamburg energy network site – can you also charge as an employee? Yes, you can. We have –

we've just built a new car park here at our largest site in Bramfeld with many charging points provided. We enable that. And of course we want – we support and promote traveling by public transport or by bike.

But there are of course still many who come from all over, and they also have the option to charge the car, which is an important point and removes a major hurdle – if you can also charge at a place where you are one to five times a week. And then the topic of hydrogen, which you also touched on at the start – that concerns you. It was in the discussion much more a few years ago, it felt. Now the topic has faded a bit from the media, I find. Or what's your perspective on it?

How do you view this hydrogen development, which I think will be particularly important for dark calms in Germany, but also for certain industries – there's probably no way around it – where do things stand currently, and how do you view the entire hydrogen topic? You could also argue with a change curve: first big euphoria, then disillusionment, and now we're just coming out of the valley of tears.

Some projects are being implemented, and the capacity survey in the market also ran relatively positively in terms of sentiment when you ask people or the industry. And that's the perspective on it. I think it's going a bit uphill right now. And we definitely have our sights set in the right direction – customers and generation facilities will come too. The more important point was: infrastructure is being created first.

That has always been our position: infrastructure must come first. Without infrastructure – so first the highway before I drive the car. Of course I could drive from Hamburg to Munich beforehand, but with the highway it's much easier. And it's the same with infrastructure: if I don't have to ship it by truck but can transport it through pipelines, it's much simpler. Hamburg is of course – we've always said this too – actually predestined for hydrogen.

I can do this here with an industrial network in the Hamburg port, because I have a very high industrial density here – around 89 TWh of gas energy density – and if I can cover something like that in such a confined space with a network of 40 to 60 km and thereby give many customers the opportunity to switch from natural gas to hydrogen, then that's a huge lever.

And of course many customers depend on the molecule. Second, at the beginning we had the topic of power grid expansion – that means the capacities I don't have to shift in the power grid ultimately also help me with grid expansion, especially during peaks. And now we've built infrastructure for that. We're hoping of course that it will take off and we'll get the corresponding customers in the Hamburg port. We were one of the first in that.

I think next year, when we go into operation, we'll be the first distribution network operator to inject hydrogen. Respect. And the construction times – back then when we started the IPCEI process, we always said: we waited four years for the permit, and now we're supposed to build in four years. I'm curious to see, but it looks like everything is working out. We're confident about it and we're going into operation this year. And then hopefully we'll have achieved a –

major milestone in decarbonizing industry in the Hamburg port, or rather we've done our homework. And then of course the market and the customers have to do what's necessary to make it work. Politics also has a role to play here of course. And you mentioned the dark doldrums topic too. That's of course a huge issue when we no longer have natural gas power plants and coal is also phased out by 2030.

Then we'll need hydrogen power plants, even if we'll only need them for a few hours a year. There's no way around it currently. Maybe there will be a new technology at some point. Who knows? Currently there isn't. Yes. And do you also think that the first hydrogen power plants will then be built? Or will those be these gas power plants that have now been approved or are in planning, which will then use hydrogen – this hydrogen that you're also enabling?

Well, I can't really say how power plants are currently being planned. "Hydrogen-ready" always sounds so simple, with a turbine power plant or with engines. Maybe that's a bit simpler, but of course it's highly complex. The combustion properties of hydrogen are quite different from natural gas. That's why it's not so easy to swap. I can't deliver hydrogen tomorrow in the same network where I've transported natural gas. That doesn't work. You have to state that plainly.

But if I build power plants today, I would of course try to provide for them to eventually switch to hydrogen too, when we eventually move away from fossil fuels. And it's really cool that you're leading the way there. I've observed that too as a non-Hamburg resident. I'm multicultural, but at least I have a friend from Hamburg. And Hamburg always seems to be ahead in many things. How do you see that? Why is Hamburg always one step ahead in Germany? Do you have a theory about that?

Well, that's difficult. I don't want to push myself so far forward now. There are plenty of other companies that are also ahead in many areas. We're doing well in certain areas. With hydrogen for example, I once said that someone put the ball on the penalty spot for us – we just had to kick it in, so to speak – because of course the conditions in Hamburg for hydrogen are really good.

So if it doesn't work in Hamburg – that's my statement – then it basically doesn't work anywhere, because the market here is so dense and tight. And it just has to work, otherwise we have a real problem. Otherwise you have to say: Hamburg has – you can look at it from different angles – the networks were also in private hands for a long time: E.ON, Vattenfall and so on.

And there were lots of different impulses into these company structures, which two years ago became Hamburg Energy Networks from the power and gas networks. And I think that's something that many municipal utilities, which have grown historically and never received different impulses, didn't have. I think that's something that drives us a bit and maybe also makes us better in one or another respect, in that we've had an incredible –

– we've brought different cultures together that challenge each other. You can still see that now. I don't want to call it culture war, but rather cultural development with us. Lots of ideas from the different companies collide with each other, and we always say: the best should be a gain for the company. Yes, that sounds good. And otherwise: you're a distribution network for Hamburg. But like many other distribution networks, you have to coordinate with the distribution networks around you –

– somehow regarding your plans or bottlenecks. How does that work in practice? It works quite simply through people talking to each other. Ultimately, I would claim for us that we have a good relationship with the surrounding distribution network operators, be it the cities, but also Hansewerk or BM and so on. We have exchange formats with EWE where we discuss these topics regularly.

And as already indicated, we also use swarm intelligence in other places, where one person or another might have an idea that we can then use for ourselves. And that's something that wouldn't necessarily have to be – people would say we can exist on our own. But I always think it's good to look beyond the horizons. And in gas transformation at the end of the day, because we're naturally dependent on it, we will inevitably have to work together with our neighbours. And we do that too.

Then we're reaching the home stretch. I had one last question for you: what's your outlook? Where is the journey heading – for you, for your company – in the coming years? And what are the biggest misconceptions that you think people still have about network operators, where you think: hey, we shouldn't be put in the spotlight like that, but rather: we're doing our best here right now. Yes, so we have a very exciting and challenging task ahead of us – the Hamburg energy networks.

You can state that about what we need to build and develop. The demographic issue, training staff, procuring land, building, building, building, as you would say as an asset manager. And on the other hand, of course, also managing all of that so that everyone is satisfied. We don't exist for our own sake, but rather we're there for many citizens of the city of Hamburg. That's our task, and we certainly want to fulfil it as best we can. I find this task very exciting.

So for me, I really have no option to do anything else. But you should never say never. I feel good, I have a great team, a great company, and it's a lot of fun. What are the biggest misconceptions? I'd say this: people often don't understand – and I may have wanted to hint at this in between – that things just need to be implemented or built now. But the time for preparation and network development takes time. We understand that.

But we also need time to implement it afterwards. And we notice that when we paint such a nice picture and talk about acceleration: we have a protection law here in Hamburg that says we have a primary public interest in expanding the energy infrastructure. At the same time, though, we have quite different interests – building substance, traffic flow and so on. And it's a bit like when you're driving up to a junction with four traffic lights and they're all green at the same time, then you might think – or that's my feeling – that everything runs faster.

But that's not the case. It all runs slower because I have to set clear priorities. And that's something we need to do more of overall in Germany. We need to focus more strongly and need to recognize that in many places we also need the time to implement it. A nice example is also moving up from 2045 to 2040. In municipal heat planning, that naturally also means we have five years less time to implement everything. At the same time, of course, that also means less time for building renovation.

That means we'll need much larger heat pumps if this is to be implemented than if we had more time until 2055, also for the buildings and thus for energy reduction. These are small examples. And I think this systemic aspect – how everything is connected – you mentioned that too, following the motto: market of networks. How is that actually connected, and what perspective do you have on it? That's something complex and difficult. And I can speak easily because I like to engage with it both professionally and privately.

Professionally I act and work with it. But that's something we also need to bring to the population and to people, because we naturally need to create understanding for the energy transition – what's necessary, what isn't necessary and so on. I think that's something we need to make a priority. The coordination between energy policy – politics in general – and the players in the energy industry needs to be significantly better, I would say.

I don't want to say that's bad, but there's always room for improvement, as we've already established. So my wish would be: not to underestimate the infrastructure, not to underestimate our tasks, to step in and tackle things together as a team. Yes, very cool. That reminds me of something: all these physical projects and construction projects – that's really not trivial. You can write code relatively quickly with AI, but the biggest challenge is still

to accelerate the world around us as well. And that came through clearly. Robots are still very far away, and many things we need for that. Keyword: systemic thinking and prioritization – I find that outstanding, and developing awareness for everyone and then prioritizing the right things, I'm taking that with me. Thanks to you as well for that thought. Thanks for taking the time to give us an insight into your world, and I wish you all the best – let's stay in touch. Thank you very much, Claudio. All the best. Goodbye.

Three things stick with me. First: Hamburg is planning for a tripling of grid load. This is not an abstract number, but concretely means new substations, new transmission lines, more staff, more space – and all of this in a city where every building permit means a ring of approvals. Second: The Fairgrid process shows how a distribution network operator no longer allocates capacity on a first-come, first-served basis, but based on planning maturity and system usefulness. A model that could catch on, because it directs battery storage to where it relieves the grid, instead of burdening it.

Third: the climate resilience of their own fleet. If the power goes out, the technicians still need to be able to drive. Hamburger Energienetze therefore maintains a pool of non-electric vehicles and builds sites that can generate electricity even in a blackout. Systemic thinking instead of isolated optimization – that is the real task for network operators in the coming years. With that in mind, until next time.

Episode notes

Rund 1.800 Megawatt liegen heute gleichzeitig im Hamburger Netz an, und bis 2045 rechnet man mit fast dem Dreifachen. Michael Dammann, Geschäftsführer der Hamburger Energienetze, erklärt, warum die verfügbare Netzkapazität damit nicht mehr für alle Anschlussanfragen reicht und wie ein neues, faires Vergabeverfahren das bisherige Windhundprinzip ablöst. Aktuell liegt die gleichzeitige Last im Hamburger Netz bei 1.800 Megawatt, und mit den Zielszenarien aus kommunaler Wärmeplanung und industrieller Dekarbonisierung rechnet Michael mit einer knappen Verdreifachung. Statt die verbleibende Kapazität einfach nach Anfrage zu vergeben, setzt die Hamburger Energienetze mit dem Fair Grid Projekt auf ein programmatisches Repartierungsverfahren, das Kapazität fair und transparent verteilt, ein Ansatz, den auch Berlin bereits verfolgt. Für Batteriespeicher fordert Michael klare Regeln statt reiner Marktsteuerung: Wer eine Ausnahme von den Netzentgelten erhält, sollte auch bereit sein, sich netzdienlich einbinden zu lassen, inklusive einer Vergütung für den dadurch vermiedenen Netzausbau. Ein zweiter Schwerpunkt ist Wasserstoff. Nach einer Phase der Euphorie und anschließenden Ernüchterung sieht Michael die Branche aktuell wieder im Aufwind. Die Hamburger Energienetze bauen ein bis zu 60 Kilometer langes Wasserstoffnetz für den Hamburger Hafen, dessen hohe Industriedichte und ein Gasdurchsatz von 8 bis 9 Terawattstunden den Umstieg vieler Industriekunden von Erdgas auf Wasserstoff ermöglichen und das Stromnetz entlasten sollen. Außerdem geht es um E.Round, die Backend Plattform der Hamburger Energienetze für Ladeinfrastruktur, die im vergangenen Jahr 1,8 Millionen Ladevorgänge gesteuert hat und heute auch anderen Unternehmen und Flughäfen zur Verfügung steht, um bidirektionales Laden, das Michael als große, aber noch frühe Chance einordnet, und um die eigene Flotte der Hamburger Energienetze, wo Winterreichweite und Ladelogistik für Techniker im Außendienst die größte Herausforderung sind. Eine Folge über die Grenzen der verfügbaren Netzkapazität, und darüber, warum eine Energiewende ohne klare Prioritäten und ausreichend Vorbereitungszeit nicht schneller, sondern langsamer wird.