How to Deliver BESS Projects in Ukraine: News from Vitalii Nykolaienko, VOLTAGE Group

Ukraine’s battery energy storage market is moving out of the theory phase and into real implementation. For years, BESS was discussed as an important part of the future energy system. Today, that future is no longer hypothetical. Battery energy storage systems are already being designed, financed, connected, commissioned, and operated across the Ukrainian energy sector.

Vitalii Nykolaienko, CEO and Managing Partner at VOLTAGE Group. Picture - courtesy of VOLTAGE Group

That shift matters. It means the conversation is changing from “why storage matters” to “how to make storage projects work in practice.”

During an industry discussion organised by the Solar Energy Association of Ukraine, Vitalii Nykolaienko, Managing Partner of VOLTAGE Group, shared practical insights from real BESS projects already delivered or under development in Ukraine. His remarks focused not on abstract market optimism, but on real engineering decisions, grid connection realities, procurement pitfalls, project delivery strategy, and the economics behind successful storage projects.

This article turns those insights into a practical how-to guide for investors, developers, EPC contractors, industrial energy users, and anyone following the growth of battery energy storage in Ukraine.

How to understand why BESS is growing in Ukraine

The first step is to understand that Ukraine’s BESS market is not growing because storage suddenly became fashionable. It is growing because the economics, regulation, and system needs have started to align.

According to Vitalii Nykolaienko, 2025 can already be seen as a breakthrough year for battery storage in Ukraine. During that period, the country integrated a meaningful number of storage projects into the energy system. These projects were not all built for the same purpose. Some were developed for ancillary services. Some were designed for energy arbitrage. Others were integrated into solar generation projects or installed for industrial self-consumption.

That is a very important signal. A real market does not emerge when everyone talks about one perfect model. A real market emerges when multiple use cases begin to work at the same time.

Several things helped unlock this shift. Battery component prices declined enough to make financial models more realistic. The regulatory framework started adapting to storage. Banks became more willing to review storage-backed energy projects. And the pressure on the wider energy system made flexibility, dispatchability, and energy resilience much more valuable.

That is the real story. BESS in Ukraine is not just a technology trend. It is becoming a practical infrastructure tool.

How to look at BESS as a real project, not just a battery box

One of the strongest messages from the presentation was that a battery energy storage system should never be treated as just equipment.

That sounds obvious, but the market keeps proving otherwise in slightly tragicomic ways. People still act as if they can buy batteries, put them on-site, and let profitability magically emerge from the mist. Energy projects are rarely that polite.

A BESS project is a full infrastructure system. It includes technical concept development, grid connection strategy, project design, electrical integration, control systems, operating logic, protection systems, commissioning, and long-term performance assumptions. The commercial value of the project depends not only on the battery itself, but on how the whole system is configured and connected.

This is why practical experience matters. A storage project can look excellent on paper and still fail economically if the engineering logic is weak, the grid conditions were misunderstood, or the delivery model was fragmented.

How to assess real BESS experience in Ukraine: the VOLTAGE Group example

Vitalii Nykolaienko outlined several examples from VOLTAGE Group’s work in the Ukrainian market. These included both standalone battery storage projects and BESS integrated with solar generation.

According to the figures shared during the discussion, the company has around 80 MW of standalone battery storage projects in progress, mostly configured with four-hour storage duration, as well as around 60 MW of projects integrated with solar installations. In practice, this means hundreds of megawatt-hours of storage capacity are already part of the active pipeline.

That scale is significant. It shows that Ukraine’s storage market is not limited to pilot ideas or demonstration units. It is developing as a serious commercial segment.

Two examples were especially useful.

The first was a 20 MW / 40 MWh BESS project built for ancillary services. The project was delivered for DTEK under a very compressed schedule. Construction began in May, and by September the project had already reached the final stage of commissioning. For a utility-scale energy infrastructure project, that is a highly demanding timeline.

The second was a 2 MW / 4 MWh storage project delivered for MHP. This project was built for industrial self-consumption rather than ancillary market participation. It was integrated into an existing energy infrastructure environment that also included solar generation and internal electrical networks. That is exactly where project logic starts to matter: by using the customer’s existing substations, internal networks, and power architecture, the project could reduce capital expenditure and improve overall economics.

That is a recurring lesson in storage delivery. The battery may be new, but the smartest project often begins with the infrastructure you already have.

How to avoid the biggest BESS mistakes in Ukraine

One of the central themes of the talk was the idea that “small mistakes” often have very large consequences in storage projects.

Most of those mistakes do not happen because the battery chemistry is wrong or because someone forgot a line in the datasheet. They happen earlier, at the concept stage.

The first major mistake is underestimating the importance of grid connection and external network infrastructure. Many investors focus most of their attention on the main equipment, because that is where the largest share of visible project cost sits. The battery system, converters, and major components can account for most of the budget, while grid connection infrastructure may appear to represent only a smaller share.

That creates a dangerous illusion. Developers start treating network connection as a secondary item, something that will somehow “get sorted out later.” In reality, this is often where projects lose months, burn extra capital, or stop completely.

A BESS installed without a workable connection route is like a Ferrari without a road. Beautiful engineering, zero mobility.

Another common mistake is buying equipment before the concept is properly defined. Vitalii Nykolaienko mentioned real examples where investors purchased inverters or large volumes of solar modules first, then tried to figure out later how the system should actually be integrated. In some cases, the selected equipment turned out to be unsuitable for the intended project configuration.

The lesson is blunt but useful: concept first, integration logic second, procurement third.

That sequence matters because storage projects are system projects. If you reverse the order, you are not speeding things up. You are just moving the confusion to a more expensive stage.

How to treat grid connection as a separate project

If there is one issue that repeatedly shapes the success or failure of BESS projects in Ukraine, it is grid connection.

The practical advice shared by VOLTAGE Group is to treat grid connection as a full project in its own right, not as a technical annex to the main scope.

Why is that so important? Because a battery storage system has to be understood in two operating modes. When it discharges, it behaves like a generating asset. When it charges, it behaves like a consumer. That means the connection strategy, technical conditions, and capacity assumptions must reflect both modes.

This is where weak planning can quietly wreck a business model.

A connection point may look acceptable at first glance in generation mode, but prove far more complicated in charging mode. The project may require network reinforcement, transformer upgrades, or other changes that materially alter economics and delivery timing. If those issues are discovered too late, the financial model no longer reflects reality.

That is why reviewing technical conditions properly is so important. On paper, a connection opportunity can look attractive. In engineering terms, it may already contain warning signs that signal high-cost reconstruction, difficult operating limits, or long delays.

In practice, this means that investors should not just ask whether a project can be connected. They should ask how it can be connected, under what network assumptions, in which operating modes, and with what downstream costs.

That is where experienced grid and EPC teams become decisive.

How to decide whether 10 kV, 35 kV or 110 kV connection is better

Storage developers often ask whether a BESS project should connect at 10 kV, 35 kV, or 110 kV. The answer, as usual in real infrastructure, is: it depends, but not in a lazy way.

According to the practical view presented by VOLTAGE Group, connection at 35 kV often provides a strong balance between project cost and long-term operating logic. It is generally more expensive than 10 kV at the equipment level, but the difference is not always dramatic when viewed against total project value. At the same time, it may offer strategic advantages, especially if future tariff structures or network charging rules become less favourable.

That matters because energy regulation has a habit of behaving like weather in the mountains: stable until it suddenly is not.

If tariff treatment evolves in a way that increases the burden on charged energy volumes, projects connected at higher voltage levels may hold a stronger long-term position. In that sense, a slightly more expensive connection architecture up front may protect project economics later.

A 110 kV connection can also be appropriate, especially for larger projects, but it usually implies more complex equipment, longer lead times, higher capital cost, and a longer implementation horizon.

So the practical answer is not just about which voltage level is technically possible. It is about balancing capex, timelines, operational flexibility, and regulatory exposure.

How to size a BESS project for energy arbitrage or ancillary services

Storage sizing is one of the most commercially important design decisions in any BESS project.

The experience shared by Vitalii Nykolaienko suggests that for energy arbitrage in today’s market environment, a four-hour storage duration often appears to be the most rational configuration. In other words, a 1:4 ratio between power and energy currently performs well in financial models.

According to that logic, three hours may be too limited, while five hours may become excessive under current revenue assumptions. This is not a universal truth for all markets and all future years, but it is a grounded conclusion based on practical modelling of real Ukrainian market conditions.

For ancillary services, the picture is different. The payment model and system use case may justify a shorter duration configuration, including a 1:2 ratio between power and energy. That reflects the fact that the project is being paid for a different kind of value.

This is a crucial point for developers and investors. There is no single “best” BESS configuration in absolute terms. There is only the best configuration for a specific use case.

A storage project should be sized based on revenue model, charging and discharging logic, market participation strategy, grid limits, and operating assumptions. Anything else is guesswork wearing a hard hat.

How to integrate BESS with solar generation in Ukraine

The combination of solar generation and battery storage is becoming increasingly important in Ukraine.

The reason is straightforward. When solar generation peaks, market prices often weaken. This reduces the value of electricity exported directly during the sunniest hours. By adding storage, a project can shift energy into higher-value periods and improve revenue performance.

According to VOLTAGE Group’s market view, most serious new solar investment projects are now being assessed together with storage. Developers increasingly understand that standalone solar economics are different from solar-plus-storage economics, especially in volatile market conditions.

That does not mean every solar project automatically needs a battery at any cost. It means that storage is becoming part of the baseline commercial conversation.

This shift is strategically important because it changes how projects are developed. Instead of treating storage as a late-stage add-on, investors are now more likely to assess it from the concept phase, where it belongs.

How to improve BESS project economics through existing infrastructure

One of the most practical insights in the discussion came from the industrial self-consumption project delivered for MHP.

The concept worked because it used existing infrastructure well. Existing substations, existing medium-voltage networks, and existing internal consumption patterns made it possible to integrate solar generation and storage in a way that reduced capex and avoided unnecessary duplication.

This is worth highlighting because too many project concepts start with a blank sheet mentality even when the client already has an electrical environment that can be used intelligently.

If an industrial site already has substations, internal distribution, connected load, and room for operating flexibility, that existing architecture may be one of the project’s greatest commercial advantages.

In practical terms, this means one of the smartest ways to improve BESS economics is not always to optimise the battery. Sometimes it is to optimise the context around the battery.

How to choose the right BESS delivery model: why EPC strategy matters

Another major topic raised during the presentation was project fragmentation.

When one company designs the project, another supplies equipment, a third performs construction, and a fourth handles commissioning, technical responsibility becomes blurred. That is where practical problems multiply. Equipment interfaces become unclear. Control systems are mismatched. Protection schemes contain errors. Civil works do not align with final equipment dimensions. And suddenly the project team is holding a meeting to figure out whose mistake is currently the most expensive.

That sort of theatre is bad for delivery and worse for bankability.

The argument presented by VOLTAGE Group was not that every part of a project must always sit under one direct commercial contract. In some cases, major equipment may still be purchased directly by the investor. But technical integration, engineering logic, and scope coordination should remain unified under an experienced EPC or technical delivery structure.

In other words, if the contracts are split, the accountability must not be.

That distinction matters a great deal in battery storage because BESS is not just a procurement package. It is an integration challenge.

How to choose BESS suppliers and technology partners

According to the approach described by Vitalii Nykolaienko, VOLTAGE Group works with Tier One manufacturers and evaluates both product quality and technical support capability.

Among the suppliers mentioned were Huawei, Kstar, and Cubenergy. The reasoning was pragmatic. Strong technical support, proven performance, bankability, and reliable integration capacity matter as much as hardware pricing.

That is especially important in Ukraine, where the market is moving fast and project environments can be demanding. A supplier that looks good only in a quotation table may become a liability if local support, commissioning competence, or integration responsiveness is weak.

This is one of those areas where the cheapest option can become the most expensive option rather quickly.

How to estimate BESS project timelines in Ukraine

Implementation timelines depend heavily on project type.

If a BESS project is built for self-consumption within an existing customer infrastructure and does not require complex grid connection works with the DSO or TSO, it may move relatively quickly. In some cases, implementation can take only a few months, especially if equipment is available and the project concept is already mature.

But where a project requires new external network works, formal grid connection development, substation equipment, or higher-voltage integration, the schedule becomes much longer. Projects connected through 35 kV or 110 kV infrastructure may take close to a year or more.

Equipment lead times also matter. Medium-voltage and high-voltage components now often have significantly longer delivery timelines than in previous years. Add workforce shortages, procedural delays, and pressure across the wider energy sector, and project delivery becomes a serious coordination challenge.

So the correct way to think about schedule is not “How fast can a BESS be installed?” but rather “How fast can this specific BESS project be fully developed, connected, equipped, commissioned, and brought into operation?”

Those are not the same question.

How to understand the future of the BESS market in Ukraine

The medium-term outlook shared by Vitalii Nykolaienko was strong. In his view, Ukraine could realistically see around 2 GW of battery storage development over 2026 and 2027.

That estimate reflects active investor interest, real project pipelines, and growing system demand for flexible assets. It also reflects something important about the current market: Ukrainian investors themselves are playing a major role in moving the segment forward.

That said, long-term scaling still depends on broader structural factors. Regulatory predictability matters. Financing access matters. Investor trust matters. The wider business and legal environment matters.

Storage can solve a great many energy problems, but it cannot by itself solve governance inconsistency or investment uncertainty. No battery has yet been certified to store legal stability.

How to think about BESS investment risk and opportunity in Ukraine

One of the more strategic parts of the discussion touched on institutional confidence and investment climate.

The practical view was balanced. On one hand, Ukrainian banks are increasingly open to financing energy projects, including storage-related projects. On the other hand, larger international investment appetite still depends on broader confidence in stable rules, enforceability, and predictability.

That is not unique to BESS. It is a wider market reality. But storage projects feel it sharply because they rely heavily on long-term economic assumptions.

The more stable the rules, the easier it becomes to finance and scale storage. The less stable the rules, the more investors demand buffers, discounts, or shorter horizons.

This is why practical execution experience matters so much. In uncertain markets, proven delivery capability becomes a strategic asset in itself.

Conclusion: how to deliver a successful BESS project in Ukraine

The key lesson from VOLTAGE Group’s experience is simple, though not simplistic.

To deliver a successful BESS project in Ukraine, start with concept logic, not equipment shopping. Treat grid connection as a core part of the project, not a side note. Size the system around the business model, not generic market enthusiasm. Use existing infrastructure intelligently where possible. Keep technical accountability unified. Choose suppliers for support and integration quality, not only for headline price. And model the project around real operating conditions rather than wishful assumptions.

Battery energy storage in Ukraine is no longer just an idea for the future. It is already a practical market segment shaped by engineering, economics, and execution discipline.

That is what makes the experience shared by Vitalii Nykolaienko and VOLTAGE Group so valuable. It shows not only that BESS projects can be delivered in Ukraine, but also how to approach them with the seriousness that real infrastructure demands.

_______

FAQ

What is the main challenge in developing a BESS project in Ukraine?

The main challenge is often not the battery itself, but grid connection, operating logic, and project integration. External network constraints, technical conditions, and delivery coordination can strongly affect economics and timelines.

What is the best BESS configuration for energy arbitrage in Ukraine?

Based on the practical view shared by VOLTAGE Group, a four-hour storage duration often looks like the most balanced option for energy arbitrage under current market conditions.

Why is EPC coordination important in battery storage projects?

Because BESS projects depend on correct integration between equipment, controls, protection systems, civil works, and network design. Fragmented delivery often creates interface risks and technical errors.

Why is BESS increasingly combined with solar generation?

Because storage helps shift solar output into higher-value hours, improving project economics and making solar generation more flexible.

How long does it take to build a BESS project in Ukraine?

It depends on project complexity. Self-consumption projects within existing infrastructure may move relatively quickly, while projects requiring external grid connection and higher-voltage infrastructure can take around a year or more. Editor’s note:

This partner news article is based on an industry presentation and discussion featuring Vitalii Nykolaienko, Managing Partner of VOLTAGE Group, during a professional event focused on the practical implementation of battery energy storage systems in Ukraine. The article has been adapted and structured editorially for publication on the nech in a search-optimised how-to format.