In Germany, the energy and transport transitions are too often treated as separate issues. However, electric vehicles could connect the two; as flexible electricity consumers, mobile storage units, and even active participants in the energy market. The technical prerequisites for intelligent and bidirectional charging are advancing – but regulation, grid infrastructure, and energy industry processes continue to lag behind. The current debate about new feed-in limitations for PV systems highlights this contradiction particularly well.

For energy expert and author Dr. Tim Meyer, this issue remains one of the key challenges of the coming years. Meyer has spent more than 25 years examining the interplay of technology, economics, and politics within the energy transition. At the CharIN Testival & Conference Europe 2026, he will deliver a keynote titled “Bridging the gap: why supply and demand are out of sync – and how to fix it”, exploring the increasingly complex interplay of electricity supply, demand, and infrastructure.

In an exclusive interview with electrive, Meyer explains why he considers the electric car a “sleeping giant” within the energy system, why bidirectional charging today fails less due to vehicle technology and more due to the structures of the energy industry. Beyond that, he outlines the bridges he believes Germany must now build in order to ensure the energy and transport transitions mutually support one another.

Dr. Meyer, your keynote at the CharIN Testival is titled “Bridging the Gap.” Where exactly is this gap in Germany’s energy system?

I would actually speak of three gaps. For too long, we have primarily pursued a power generation transition and expanded renewable energies. That was correct, but in doing so, we neglected three things.

The first is electrification: if the power supply grows, we also need more electric consumption – such as in mobility. The second is flexibilisation. We must enable the system to handle volatile power generation.

And the third, currently perhaps the most critical gap, is infrastructure. In particular, distribution grids are massively lagging behind developments.

The German government itself now speaks of the next phase of the energy transition as being “system integration.” Is this more than a political buzzword?

That remains to be seen. So far, “system integration” seems more like an empty phrase because the necessary measures to accelerate filling the mentioned gaps are not being consistently implemented.

Nevertheless, we are in a new phase – less because of politics and more due to growing pressure from the market and grids. Customers and companies want to electrify, whether in mobility, logistics, or heating. But infrastructure and regulation often cannot keep up. That is precisely where the pressure to act arises.

This situation coincides with the planned EEG amendment. New smaller PV systems are to have their feed-in capacity at the grid connection point blanket-limited to 50 per cent (link in German). What’s positive about this – and what’s wrong?

The basic objective is understandable. Limiting solar peaks can make sense and free up scarce grid capacity for more systems.

The problem is the blanket approach behind the design. It applies regardless of whether smart meters and control boxes are present, for example. Moreover, there are grid areas where solar peaks are not a problem at all.

There are also open questions: Are battery storage systems also affected? It would make little sense to limit a storage system’s feed-in if there is no bottleneck at the time.

So the objective is understandable, but the concrete implementation is flawed and too blanket.

What would a more intelligent approach look like?

We should work as little as possible with blanket bans and static limits, and instead set economic incentives.

A grid bottleneck does not exist permanently. Why should a connection be fundamentally limited if the bottleneck only occurs a few hours a year? These are precisely the situations that need to be actively managed.

For this, we need dynamic price signals that reflect the respective situation in a grid section. However, many grid operators still lack the digital processes and systems for this today. And this is changing far too slowly.

What role can electric vehicles play in a more flexible electricity system?

The electric car is a sleeping giant. A vehicle with 40 or 60 kilowatt-hours of battery capacity already has significantly more storage capacity than a typical home battery.

Add to that the sheer number of vehicles. We are talking about nearly 50 million passenger cars, plus electric trucks and buses.

Even if only 10 or 15 per cent of the passenger car fleet were regularly connected, storage capacities of several hundred gigawatt-hours would emerge – a multiple of today’s pumped storage.

That is why I like to call it a gift from the powertrain transition to the energy system. If we utilise this potential, many of today’s problems could be significantly alleviated.

What can intelligent charging already achieve – and what additional benefits does bidirectional charging bring?

Flexibility can already be utilised before vehicles feed electricity back into the grid. With smart meters and intelligent tariffs, electric cars can be charged specifically during low-cost periods.

However, the exchange price of electricity alone is not enough. If millions of vehicles charge simultaneously because electricity is currently cheap, local grids could still become overloaded. That is why we also need price signals from the grid.

Bidirectional charging goes a step further: the vehicle can supply energy again. A frequently cited Fraunhofer study, to my knowledge, puts the relief for the energy system at well over eight billion euros per year.

And from a macroeconomic perspective, the issue is even bigger. If our vehicles do not master such functions in the future, this could also become a competitive problem for our automotive industry.

If its potential is so great, why is V2G still in its infancy?

I see the biggest problem as being less to do with vehicle technology and more on the energy system side.

We must be able to measure in a time-resolved manner how much energy comes from the vehicle, PV system, or grid and where it flows. In addition, there are different grid fees and levies. All of this must be cleanly accounted for.

For this, we need standards, clear processes, and corresponding software. Many grid operators cannot yet deliver this on a large scale today.

If, in addition, every distribution grid operator defines processes slightly differently, it does not scale. We therefore need much stronger standardisation, particularly in energy industry processes and software systems.

What needs to change regulatorily so that storage and bidirectional vehicles can actually be used in a system-supporting way?

First and foremost, there must be economic incentives. For grid operators, it must be attractive to connect batteries and vehicles to the grid and enable grid-supporting behaviour.

Today, the economic logic of regulation tends to reward classic grid infrastructure. Put simply, there is more money to be made by laying more copper in the ground than by enabling a particularly intelligent energy transition. This is a significant perverse incentive.

The second issue is the patchwork. If every grid operator designs processes differently, the system becomes expensive and complicated.

With the right incentives and consistent standardisation, a great deal would already be achieved.

Does Germany also need its own strategy for bidirectional charging?

I consider that very sensible. The necessary transformation goes far beyond bidirectional charging. It is about grid operation, digitalisation, regulation, and investment.

A strategy could bridge the gap between politics, the energy industry, grid operation, and the automotive industry: we jointly decide to tackle this issue systematically.

At the same time, we would create a home market for technologies that are needed worldwide. That, for me, would be strategic action.

Can the electric car become the bridging factor between the energy and transport transitions?

I am convinced of that. In addition to the technical and energy economic benefits, there is a second level: many people have an emotional connection to the car.

Bidirectional charging suddenly turns it into something else. My vehicle may stand idle for 23 hours a day – and suddenly becomes a rolling battery with which I can even earn money.

This can change mindsets. The energy transition becomes tangible and acquires a personal benefit. In Germany, in particular, the car’s strong symbolic character can help with this.

So far, we have mainly talked about passenger cars. With electric trucks and large depots, the dimensions become entirely different. Will electromobility thus become part of the energy infrastructure in the future?

I absolutely anticipate that. In logistics, in particular, the pressure to electrify is high because companies recognise the economic benefits.

At the same time, many locations lack the necessary grid connection capacities. Then the question arises: relocate the site – or invest more in energy management and additional battery storage?

This is already creating relevant new energy infrastructure today. That will be a very exciting part of the development.

If “Bridging the Gap” is to be more than a conference motto: Which bridge does Germany need to build most urgently?

The most urgent bridge, in my view, is a political one. We must stop politicising and polarising modernisation and the energy transition to such an extent.

The electric car is not a left-wing or green invention. It is a technological modernisation that is asserting itself worldwide. Conversely, the internal combustion engine is not “of the devil” either. It is gradually being phased out technologically and will continue to exist in certain applications for some time.

We should shape this modernisation process rationally and from a techno-economic perspective.

Denmark shows that this can work. There, across different governments, there has been a largely common course on the energy transition for decades. The instruments differ, but the fundamental goal is shared.

A shared description of reality would also be a very good starting point for us.

Does the current electric car boom give you hope that at least consumers and companies are further ahead in this transformation?

Absolutely. Many people now simply understand: it works and it is cheaper.

We see something similar with heat pumps. I believe that many people and companies are already further along in this transformation than politicians with their struggle for interpretive sovereignty.

I like to describe the energy transition as an industrial revolution coming from the bottom up. It is putting pressure on politics and infrastructure to respond. It is all taking too long, of course. But no one will stop this development.

Thank you very much for the conversation, Dr. Meyer!

The CharIN Testival & Conference Europe 2026 will take place from 22 to 25 September at Phoenix Contact in Blomberg. While the preceding CharIN Conference focuses on the connection between mobility and the energy system, the subsequent Testival is all about the interoperability of charging technologies: vehicles, charging infrastructure, and systems will be tested together under real-world conditions. electrive is accompanying the event as a media partner.