MITECO define la evaluación de los candidatos a ayuda al almacenamiento: se da prioridad a la reducción del incentivo.

This Thursday, the Spanish government updated the draft regulations published Tuesday night that will govern the allocation of 699 million in energy storage aid, officially incorporating the scoring criteria used to evaluate projects. The new scheme distributes the scoring as follows:

70% for the economic criterion,
10% for project viability and administrative maturity,
17% for externalities and socioeconomic benefits,
and 3% for innovation.

Developers warn that this approach does not prioritize mature projects, those that already have administrative authorizations or are ready to begin construction. "Our requests only score 10%," says Andrés Pinilla Antón, Head of BESS Sales Iberia at Mars Renewablz. In an interview with Strategic Energy Europe, the specialist questions the idea that the design awards higher scores to those who request less aid compared to the maximum possible, without necessarily considering the project's actual execution capacity. The formula applied awards up to 70 points to those who reduce the required incentive, which, in Pinilla Antón's words, "opens the door to speculative proposals" that may not be technically ready. Furthermore, the criterion of "socioeconomic benefits and positive externalities," which represents 17% of the total, also raises concerns due to its high degree of subjectivity . Factors such as location in municipalities facing demographic challenges or just transition, gender equality, participation in the industrial value chain, and support for the integration of renewable energy are evaluated. "You can present a thousand and one documents justifying externalities, but then the evaluators are the ones who give you a score without a single criterion.

They're not 100% objective," the consultant maintains.

The fourth criterion, innovation, contributes only 3 points out of 100, and considers technological advances, demonstrative character, and participation of universities or technology centers. Additional requirements Along with Annex IV, MITECO also published Annex V, which details the documentary requirements to justify the use of public funds. A technical report, audit reports in certain cases, and evidence of compliance with the European DNSH principle (do no significant harm to the environment) will be required. However, the focus of the debate remains on the distribution of points. For the sector, the scheme favors financially attractive proposals for the administration, but with fewer guarantees of execution. "This contradicts what we're proposing," Pinilla concludes. The submission process will remain open until April 8, and multiple industry stakeholders are expected to submit proposals to revise the weights assigned to each criterion, particularly with regard to the administrative maturity of the projects. See new full document