Roberta Isermeyer is a lawyer specializing in energy and climate law and supports companies in the energy sector on regulatory questions around grid connections and the transformation of the energy system.

Translated and adapted from German into English (AI translation reviewed by Irina Chèvre)

When people hear “energy and climate protection law”, what do they often misunderstand about your job?

When people hear “energy law and climate protection,” most assume that my work as an energy lawyer mainly consists of large permitting procedures for wind and solar parks. That’s not wrong — but the field covers far more than that. Permitting is only the starting point.

It then becomes about connecting newly built power generation facilities to the grid and, ultimately, about managing the many conflicts that arise between the different actors in the energy sector — especially grid operators, energy suppliers, and consumers. This gives rise to a wide range of regulatory as well as private-law questions.

Who are your typical clients, and what specific issues do they bring to you?

In our energy law team at Raue, we advise a wide range of players from the energy sector. In my area of work, this includes municipal utilities and other publicly owned companies, as well as wind and solar park operators, energy suppliers, and grid operators.

Just as diverse as our clients are the issues we work on. On the one hand, there are regulatory questions about what our clients are allowed to do under the law or under the rules of the Federal Network Agency — and what they are not allowed to do. On the other hand, we also deal extensively with civil-law disputes between two or more actors in the energy sector.

One topic that currently occupies us a great deal is grid connection. The expansion of renewable energy installations has accelerated sharply in recent years. At the same time, grid operators often struggle to keep pace with connecting these installations to the grid, even though they are legally obliged to do so.

We are also frequently faced with the question of whether a particular line system even qualifies as an energy supply network under the law, and what obligations follow from operating such a network. In addition, many cases involve classic issues of contract interpretation: two companies have concluded a contract and then disagree about how it should be understood or whether individual clauses are valid.

Finally, we also work on heat supply issues. There are currently very interesting developments in this area — for example, the question of how waste heat from data centers can be integrated into heating supply systems.

How would you describe the regulatory world you operate in? What legal frameworks shape your daily work, and why are they so demanding in practice?

The most important German laws in energy law are the Energy Industry Act (Energiewirtschaftsgesetz, EnWG) and the Renewable Energy Sources Act (Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz, EEG). In addition, energy law is strongly influenced by EU law. There are European directives and regulations that shape German energy law and must always be taken into account.

On top of that, there are various national regulations, as well as the decisions of the Federal Network Agency and the case law of the courts. The sheer number of different legal sources makes practice demanding, because it is not always obvious how the rules relate to each other or which rule applies in a given situation.

Energy law is also a highly dynamic field. The legal framework is constantly being revised and amended. Some provisions expire, while new ones are introduced. Keeping an overview of all this is anything but easy.

What do you think is working better in today’s energy and regulatory environment than people often assume — and deserves more recognition?

I often get the impression that, both in public debate and in my private surroundings, few people truly believe that we will be able to base our future energy consumption entirely on renewable energy. There is a lot of doubt about whether the energy transition can really work. In my view, these doubts are unfounded.

The expansion of renewable energy is progressing faster than is often assumed. By now, more than 50% of the electricity coming out of German sockets is generated from renewable sources — and the share is still rising.

Of course, switching to renewables creates challenges for the energy sector. Wind and sun are not always available to the same extent: sometimes there is too much, sometimes too little. Unlike gas-fired power plants, wind and solar installations cannot simply be switched on and off as needed. But solutions already exist for this — in the form of battery storage systems. Here, too, expansion is already well underway.

Overall, I have the impression that within the energy sector itself there is broad confidence that the energy transition will succeed. This is true not only for wind and solar park operators, but also for conventional energy companies that are increasingly shifting their portfolios toward renewable energy.

One approach I consider particularly effective in increasing public acceptance of renewable energy is citizen participation models for wind farm projects. Experience shows that local acceptance is much higher when residents can share in the economic success of the installations.

The cliché statement “I support the energy transition — just not in my backyard” seems to be heard much less often today. This may also be due to the fact that, at the latest since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, many people have realized how important it is not to depend on other countries for energy supply

If you could change one thing in the current energy regulatory framework, what would it be — and why?

I would start with the complexity of energy law and advocate for a fundamental simplification and systematization of the regulatory framework.

Energy law can be compared to an old city map that has been expanded over decades. New streets were added, detours marked, shortcuts drawn in — but the entire map was rarely redrawn from scratch. Today, it is so densely covered with lines that, although each individual change can still be traced, it is very difficult to maintain an overall view.

Perhaps it is time to set the old map aside and redraw it: with clear main axes, a small number of well-designed rules, and based on what has proven effective. Not everything that was added at some point in the past is still necessary. Such a reorganization would not be a radical break, but rather a step toward greater clarity, reliability, and practicality.

In practice, legal provisions are becoming longer and more complex, and they are accompanied by a growing number of legal sources — from EU law to Federal Network Agency decisions and individual court rulings. Simplifying the system would save resources, speed up processes, and ultimately contribute to the success of the energy transition.

This is, of course, easier said than done, since the energy sector is inherently complex. Still, I believe there is room for improvement and that certain aspects of regulation could be simplified.

What is the most fulfilling part of your job?

I have now been working in this field for almost three years, and I can say that hardly any question has landed on my desk twice. The issues in energy law are extremely diverse — not least because we, too, as lawyers, are right in the middle of the energy transition.

It never gets boring. Every day brings a new puzzle to solve, and I learn a great deal.

I am also convinced that the energy transition is essential if we want to address climate change as a society. This is especially true at a time when our energy consumption is rising rapidly due to digitalization and the use of artificial intelligence. Supporting companies in implementing their energy transition projects can therefore be very fulfilling.

Together with our clients, we are working toward a climate-friendly future.

If your path had not led you into energy and climate law, where do you think you would have ended up?

For me, it has always been important to contribute to society in some way. I try to do that now by advising companies in the energy sector and, hopefully, by helping the energy transition succeed.

If I had not gone into energy law, I would probably have chosen another legal field where I could contribute in a similar way — either as a lawyer or in a ministry. Or I might have taken a different route altogether and become a judge, trying to contribute to justice and legal certainty in that role.

Original German interview: https://www.terraquota.com/de/post/die-zweifel-energiewende-sind-unbegründet-interview-mit-anwältin-für-energi

Conducted by Irina Chèvre (Terraquota)