The Polish capacity charge cannot be assessed solely from a single line item on an electricity bill. For metering points billed according to the amount of energy drawn during designated hours, the charge depends both on the volume of electricity imported from the grid and on the shape of the daily load profile. Effective reduction of the capacity charge therefore starts with metering data and the plant operating schedule, not with selecting a particular device.
This article focuses on volume-based billing, which is typical for larger consumers in Poland. However, not every business metering point is billed in this way: until the end of 2027, some consumers supplied from networks with a rated voltage not exceeding 1 kV and with contracted capacity not exceeding 16 kW may be subject to a fixed monthly rate based on annual consumption. The first step is therefore always to confirm how the specific electricity metering point is billed.
In practice, the analysis should answer three questions: which days and hours generate the cost, which loads or processes are responsible for it, and what the plant would cost to operate after changing its operating pattern. Only after such a simulation can we determine whether an organisational change is sufficient or whether load control, photovoltaics, battery storage or another technical solution is justified.
Capacity charge in a company: what really drives the cost?
For Polish end users other than those billed at a fixed monthly rate, the capacity charge is calculated on electricity imported from the grid during hours designated by the President of the Polish Energy Regulatory Office (URE) as system peak-demand hours. In 2026, the rate for this group is 0,2194 zł/kWh net, or 219,40 zł/MWh. For all four quarters of 2026, the designated hours cover 15 consecutive hours on each working day, from 7:00 to 21:59; the fifteenth hour starts at 21:00. Statutory public holidays in Poland are excluded.
As a rule, the K1–K4 classification is determined separately for each electricity metering point. Polish law allows the consumption pattern to be determined jointly for more than one metering point of the same consumer, provided the statutory conditions are met and the consumer submits an application. In a plant with multiple PPEs, profiles should therefore not be added together automatically before the billing method has been checked.
This does not mean that every kilowatt-hour drawn within this time window is always billed using the full multiplier. The Polish Capacity Market Act divides consumers into K1–K4 groups according to the difference between average consumption during the designated hours and average consumption during the remaining hours of a working day. In 2026, the qualification period is one day, so the profile can be assessed separately for each successive day.
| Group | Difference in average consumption | Coefficient A | Practical meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| K1 | less than 5% | 0,17 | flattest profile; 17% of the base multiplier |
| K2 | from 5% to less than 10% | 0,50 | moderately variable profile |
| K3 | from 10% to less than 15% | 0,83 | clearly higher consumption during the designated hours |
| K4 | 15% or more | 1,00 | full multiplier; also applies where consumption outside the designated hours is zero |
The K1–K4 group is what can make the capacity charge completely different for two companies with similar annual consumption. What matters is not only the amount of electricity drawn between 7:00 and 22:00, but also how that consumption compares with the remaining hours of the same working day.
How is the capacity charge calculated?
For a consumer billed on a volume basis, the mechanism can be written in a simplified form consistent with the statutory formula:
Capacity charge = A × ZK × SOM
- A – coefficient assigned to group K1, K2, K3 or K4;
- ZK – electricity imported from the grid and consumed during the designated hours of the qualification period;
- SOM – capacity charge rate. In 2026, for consumers billed on a volume basis, it is 0,2194 zł/kWh net.
In the Polish Capacity Market Act, ZK is expressed in MWh, while URE publishes the rate in zł/kWh. Units must therefore be consistent in practical calculations: either use kWh and 0,2194 zł/kWh, or MWh and the equivalent rate of 219,40 zł/MWh.
The K group for a given day must therefore be determined first, after which consumption during the designated hours is multiplied by the applicable coefficient and rate. In monthly billing, the result is the sum of the charges arising from the load profile in successive qualification periods.
Why is maximum demand alone not enough for the analysis?
The capacity charge is not a conventional charge for the highest recorded demand peak. A single 15-minute spike may be very important for contracted capacity or other bill components, but for the capacity charge the key factors are the energy volume within the specified time window and the relationship between average consumption values. A peak-shaving project should therefore be assessed not only by how much it reduces the maximum kW, but by how it changes electricity imported during 7:00–21:59 and which K group the day falls into.
How has the capacity charge rate changed?
The capacity charge first appeared on Polish electricity bills in 2021 as a component used to finance the capacity market, whose primary purpose is to support security of electricity supply. Compared with the start of the system, the rate for consumers billed on a volume basis has increased significantly, although it did not rise every year — in 2023 it was slightly lower than in 2022. The values below are net rates published by URE.
| Period | Rate for other consumer groups |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 0,0762 zł/kWh |
| 2022 | 0,1026 zł/kWh |
| 2023 | 0,1024 zł/kWh |
| 2024 | 0,1267 zł/kWh |
| 2025 | 0,1412 zł/kWh |
| 2026 | 0,2194 zł/kWh |
The rate itself is not sufficient justification for an investment. First, determine what share of the bill the capacity charge represents for the specific PPE and how much of that cost can realistically be changed without disrupting the production process.
What data are needed to analyse the capacity charge?
The best starting point is data that make it possible to reproduce the bill and link the cost to actual plant operation. For larger consumers, at least a full year should be analysed; where production is seasonal or there have been significant organisational changes, 18–24 months is often more appropriate.
| Data | Why they are needed |
|---|---|
| Distribution invoices | to verify how each PPE is billed, the capacity-charge line item and whether the model reconciles with the invoice |
| 15-minute or hourly load profile | to reconstruct the profile, identify high-cost days and simulate alternatives |
| Plant operating calendar | to distinguish working days, weekends, public holidays, shutdowns and non-standard shifts |
| Shift and process schedule | to link the profile with operation of production lines, compressors, refrigeration, furnaces, pumps, charging and other processes |
| List of major loads and control logic | to determine which loads can be shifted, curtailed or sequenced |
| PV, cogeneration or battery-storage data | to assess actual grid imports after accounting for on-site generation and storage |
| Planned production changes | to avoid optimising against a profile that will no longer be representative in a few months |
15-minute data are particularly useful for identifying specific events and loads. To reproduce the statutory K1–K4 mechanism, they must then be aggregated in a manner consistent with the hourly periods used in Polish regulations and billing. Conclusions should not be drawn from a single maximum quarter-hour interval or from one month alone.
How can the periods responsible for capacity-charge costs be identified?
The analysis should begin by reconstructing the cost day by day. Only then should the focus move to equipment and investment options.
- Establish the billing method for each metering point. First confirm whether the point is billed at a fixed monthly rate or on a volume basis. The methodology below primarily concerns the second group.
- Mark the days and hours covered by the charge. In 2026, these are working days excluding Polish public holidays and the hours from 7:00 to 21:59.
- Calculate the daily profile. For each day, calculate average consumption during the designated hours and during the remaining hours.
- Assign K1–K4. Based on the difference between the averages, assign a coefficient of 0,17, 0,50, 0,83 or 1,00.
- Reconstruct the baseline cost. Calculate electricity consumption during the designated hours and check whether the total reconciles with the DSO billing, within the limits imposed by data availability and accuracy.
- Rank days by cost. Analyse the days with the highest capacity-charge cost first rather than treating the whole year as a single average.
- Overlay the plant schedule. Check what was happening during those hours: line start-up, heating, defrosting, compressor operation, charging, peak production, washing, CIP, cooling, pumping or other processes.
- Calculate alternative scenarios. Each option should be simulated on the same load profile and calendar, with the K group recalculated.
This turns a general conclusion such as “we use a lot of electricity during the day” into a list of specific days, hours and processes responsible for the largest share of the cost.
Auditor’s comment: in practice, ranking the dozen or so most expensive days and discussing with production what was operating at those times is more useful than a chart of the annual load profile alone. Only by combining energy data with the process can flexible consumption be distinguished from technologically inflexible demand.
Example: how can a schedule change affect the capacity charge?
The example below is a technical simulation, not the result of an actual Energy Trend client. Its purpose is to demonstrate the calculation method. We assume one working day in 2026, a net rate of 0,2194 zł/kWh and no other changes to the electricity bill.
| Parameter | Baseline case | After shifting part of the operation |
|---|---|---|
| Energy 7:00–21:59 | 1 800 kWh | 1 620 kWh |
| Average during the designated hours | 120 kWh/h | 108 kWh/h |
| Energy outside the designated hours | 900 kWh | 1 080 kWh |
| Average outside the designated hours | 100 kWh/h | 120 kWh/h |
| Difference between averages | 20% | -10% |
| Group | K4 | K1 |
| Coefficient A | 1,00 | 0,17 |
| Capacity charge on the simulated day | 394,92 zł | 60,42 zł |
The scenario assumes that 180 kWh is shifted from the hours covered by the charge to the remaining hours. This reduces both the ZK volume and coefficient A. The cost difference on this single model day is 334,50 zł net, or 84,7%.
This result must not simply be multiplied by the number of working days in the year. In a real plant, every day has a different profile and the ability to shift processes is constrained by technology, staffing, production buffers, start-up times, quality requirements and other energy-cost components. A correct annual analysis should recalculate each day using actual data.
How can a company reduce the capacity charge? Practical options
1. Change the operating schedule
This is usually the first option to assess because it may require little or no capital expenditure. The objective is not to move all production to night-time operation. It may be sufficient to shift auxiliary processes such as charging forklifts and vehicles, heating, utility preparation, washing, regeneration, defrosting, pumping into buffer tanks or some maintenance activities.
The effect must be calculated on the load profile. Shifting electricity consumption makes sense only if it does not create a greater cost elsewhere — for example through overtime, a tariff change, contracted-capacity exceedances, deterioration in process quality or the need to keep equipment operating for longer.
2. Reduce simultaneous operation of loads
If several large loads start or operate at the same time, sequencing can be analysed: changing the start-up order, applying logical interlocks, setting load priorities or using process buffers. For the capacity charge, however, the objective is not merely to eliminate a short demand peak. What matters most is whether the change reduces grid electricity consumption during the designated hours or improves the daily consumption relationship and K-group classification.
3. Load control and an energy management system
Where processes are automated, some actions can be transferred from operator instructions to control logic. The system can monitor current demand, the schedule and equipment status, then suspend or limit lower-priority loads. In a more advanced arrangement, energy data should be linked with production data so that cost reduction is not achieved at the expense of throughput.
For such a project, an energy monitoring and management analysis is useful, but it should be preceded by a model showing the expected cost reduction and the hours during which the system should respond.
4. Peak shaving
Peak shaving can be delivered through load control, on-site generation, battery storage or a combination of these solutions. In the context of the Polish capacity charge, it is best defined as shaping grid imports during the hours covered by the charge, rather than simply cutting one highest point on the load profile.
A peak-shaving scenario should therefore recalculate two things at the same time: the new energy volume during 7:00–21:59 and the new K1–K4 classification for each day. Otherwise the benefit may be overstated, or an option that delivers much greater savings than indicated by the reduction in maximum demand alone may be overlooked.
5. Photovoltaics
Photovoltaics can reduce the capacity charge if they reduce grid imports at the same time. It is therefore not sufficient to compare annual electricity consumption with annual PV generation. The profiles need to be compared at the same time resolution to determine how much PV output coincides with the hours covered by the charge and how it changes the daily K group.
In plants with high daytime consumption, the temporal match can be favourable, but the seasonal effect varies. PV for industry should therefore be sized against the company’s overall energy model, with capacity-charge reduction treated as one component of the investment value.
6. Battery energy storage
A battery energy storage system can charge outside the hours covered by the charge or from surplus on-site generation, then reduce grid imports during 7:00–21:59. This is a technically flexible solution, but its economic viability should not be assessed solely on the capacity-charge rate.
Preliminary sizing requires at least the required reduction power in kW, the duration for which it must be maintained, the usable energy required in kWh, the number of cycles and the profile over the full year. If, for example, grid imports need to be reduced by 200 kW for two hours, the energy requirement alone is 400 kWh of usable energy before losses and reserve are taken into account. At the 2026 rate, removing 400 kWh from the hours covered by the charge on a K4 day corresponds to 87,76 zł net in capacity-charge savings alone, before any change in K group is considered.
If this situation occurs on 60 days per year, the simple volume-based effect would be 5 265,60 zł net. This illustrates why a battery should generally not be sized solely for one line item on an electricity bill. The analysis should combine possible benefits from the capacity charge, demand-related charges, self-consumption, electricity prices, operation of on-site generation and other functions, and then compare them with the full investment and operating cost.
7. Energy efficiency and on-site generation
Any measure that permanently reduces grid electricity consumption during the hours covered by the charge can reduce ZK. This applies both to load modernisation and to on-site generation. It does not mean, however, that every energy-efficiency investment is automatically a good investment “for the capacity charge”. The effect must be assigned to specific hours and calculated on the post-modernisation load profile.
When is an organisational change better than an investment?
From an energy auditor’s perspective, the safest approach is to start with scenarios requiring no CAPEX or only limited CAPEX. If a significant share of the cost is caused by a schedule that can be shifted, immediately investing in battery storage or sophisticated automation may be premature.
| Situation | First option to assess |
|---|---|
| Auxiliary processes can be shifted in time | scheduling, sequencing, operator procedures |
| Loads are flexible, but manual control is difficult | simple automation or EMS |
| High demand is necessary during the day and cannot be shifted | peak shaving, on-site generation, storage — after simulation |
| The plant has high PV generation and surplus energy during part of the day | load control and/or storage that increases on-site use of energy |
| The profile will change in the coming months | model the future profile first, then make the investment decision |
An organisational option is better when it delivers a comparable effect at lower cost and lower risk, without adversely affecting production. An investment becomes justified when process flexibility is insufficient or when the equipment can solve several cost and technical issues at the same time.
How should the economic effect of a measure be assessed?
The reference point should be the baseline cost reconstructed from the actual load profile. The same set of days is then recalculated after applying the scenario. For each day, electricity during the designated hours, average consumption, K group and coefficient A should be determined again. The annual effect is the difference between the sum of the baseline-scenario costs and the sum of the costs after the change.
- for an organisational change, include any labour costs, shutdowns, impact on productivity and other tariff components;
- for automation, include implementation, integration and maintenance costs and the risk of constraining the process;
- for PV, use the hourly generation and self-consumption profile, not only annual generation;
- for battery storage, include efficiency, degradation, power and usable energy, charging strategy and the system’s other functions;
- before implementation, check whether the scenario increases other distribution charges or production costs.
Good practice is to prepare at least three scenarios: baseline, no-investment/organisational and technical. Only a comparison of these options shows the unit cost of reducing the capacity charge and makes it possible to prioritise actions.
Most common mistakes when reducing the capacity charge
- Analysing the invoice only. The invoice shows the result, but not which equipment and hours created it.
- Looking only at maximum demand. The capacity charge depends on energy during the designated hours and the K group, not on one maximum value.
- Ignoring K1–K4. Reducing the energy volume without recalculating the coefficient can understate or overstate the potential.
- Sizing a battery from annual consumption. Storage should be sized to the power, duration and recurrence of specific events.
- Assessing PV only on an annual basis. For the capacity charge, the temporal match between PV generation and grid imports matters.
- Shifting a process without calculating side effects. A lower capacity charge makes no sense if it creates higher labour, demand-related or production costs.
- Analysing one month only. Seasonality, holidays, shutdowns and production changes can completely alter the result.
- Not reconciling the model with the DSO invoice. The model should reproduce the actual billing method before it is used to forecast savings.
What should the result of a capacity-charge analysis for a company include?
A good analysis should not end with the statement that the capacity charge is high. It should lead to a specific decision. At a minimum, the result should include:
- confirmation of the billing method for each PPE;
- the baseline capacity-charge cost reconstructed from the data;
- a map of the days and hours generating the highest cost;
- K1–K4 classification and identification of the days most amenable to change;
- linking loads with the production schedule and major electricity consumers;
- at least several scenarios: organisational, control/peak shaving and — where appropriate — an investment option;
- the annual effect of each scenario, with the assumptions described;
- technical, organisational and cost risks;
- an implementation sequence and a method for subsequently monitoring the effect.
If the capacity charge is only one of several significant distribution-cost components, it is worth combining its assessment with a broader analysis and optimisation of electricity costs.
FAQ – capacity charge for businesses in Poland
During which hours is the capacity charge applied in 2026?
For consumers billed on a volume basis in Poland in 2026, the designated hours cover 15 consecutive hours on each working day, from 7:00 to 21:59. The first hour starts at 7:00 and the fifteenth at 21:00. Statutory public holidays are excluded.
What is the capacity charge rate for companies in 2026?
For Polish end users other than those billed at a fixed monthly rate, the net rate from 1 January to 31 December 2026 is 0,2194 zł/kWh. The actual cost also depends on the volume consumed during the designated hours and the coefficient for group K1–K4.
Is every company billed on a volume basis?
No. Until the end of 2027, the Polish Capacity Market Act also provides fixed monthly capacity-charge rates for some consumers other than households if they are supplied from a network with a rated voltage not exceeding 1 kV and their contracted capacity does not exceed 16 kW. For larger metering points, billing based on electricity consumption during the designated hours and K1–K4 classification is typical.
Can every company reduce the capacity charge by changing its operating hours?
No. The potential depends on the load profile and process flexibility. In some plants, shifting loads is straightforward; in others it would require overtime, additional shifts or buffers, or would reduce productivity. The scenario should therefore be calculated first.
Do photovoltaics reduce the capacity charge?
They can, if PV generation at a given time reduces grid electricity imports during the hours covered by the charge. The effect should be calculated on a time-series profile because annual PV generation alone does not show when the electricity was generated.
Is battery storage cost-effective solely for reducing the capacity charge?
This should not be assumed in advance. The possible reduction in the charge should first be calculated using the actual load profile. In many cases, a battery becomes economically justified only when it combines several functions, such as peak shaving, increasing self-consumption, operation against tariffs or electricity prices, and other technical objectives.
Is a 15-minute load profile sufficient for the analysis?
A 15-minute load profile is excellent diagnostic material, but by itself it does not explain the causes. Invoices, the operating calendar and knowledge of major loads are also required. To reproduce the statutory classification under Polish rules, the data must be aggregated in accordance with the hours used in the capacity-charge mechanism.
Sources and legal basis
- URE – capacity market and security of supply in Poland
- Information of the President of URE No. 58/2025 – capacity charge rates for 2026
- Information of the President of URE No. 57/2025 – designated hours of the day for 2026
- URE – capacity charge rates table
- Polish Capacity Market Act – consolidated text, Journal of Laws 2025, item 610
- Regulation of the Polish Minister of Climate and Environment of 5 September 2024 on the capacity charge
