Self-Consumption with Zero Feed-In: From a Forced Choice to a Strategic Investment
In the field of Renewable Energy Sources, self-consumption is constantly evolving, offering new possibilities and solutions for residential and professional consumers. Until recently, the option of connecting a photovoltaic system without injection into the grid (zero feed-in) was seen as a "forced" solution in cases of lack of available electrical space. Today, however, the reality is changing: zero feed-in is becoming a smart, autonomous strategic choice for those seeking maximum control, lower bureaucracy and increased savings.

Zero Feed-In: What It Is and How It Works
The basic principle of zero feed-in is simple: the photovoltaic system fully covers the owner's needs without feeding excess energy into the grid. This means that no netting agreement with a Cumulative Representation Body (FOSE) is required, nor is cooperation with the DAPEEP, significantly reducing the bureaucracy and twenty-year obligations that net-billing entails.

All that is required is cooperation with HEDNO to register the system and ensure that there will be no injection into the grid. In addition, the self-producer can install a photovoltaic system with a power equal to the agreed power of the supply (in kVA) — an advantage that opens up new possibilities.

Advantages of Zero Feed-In
Simpler procedures
Without a netting agreement, there are fewer entanglements with operators and changes of providers or FOSE.

Suitable for saturated networks
Zero feed-in offers a solution even in areas with a saturated network due to exceeding power or voltage limits, as long as there is no short-circuit problem. Even there, however, the legislation allows an additional margin of 10 MW per substation for self-consumers.

Ideal for Non-Interconnected Islands
In areas with constraints, such as islands, zero feed-in allows power equal to 100% of the supply, offering full utilization of the energy produced.

Efficiency with batteries
Simultaneity (i.e. the maximum matching of production and consumption) is significantly enhanced with the addition of a battery, making the investment even more advantageous.

Is it Economically Viable? The Data Answers
According to indicative studies, the payback period for zero feed-in systems is comparable — and in some cases almost identical — to that of net-billing systems:

Residential System (10 kW):

Net-Billing: Payback in 4.9 years (without battery), 4.8 years (with battery)

Zero Feed-In: Payback in 5.5 years (without battery), 5.1 years (with battery)

Commercial System (30 kW):

Net-Billing: Payback in 3.1 years (without battery), 3.7 years (with battery)

Zero Feed-In: Payback in 3.3 years (without battery), 3.8 years (with battery)

The differences are small and do not negate the main conclusion: zero feed-in is an economically viable option, especially when it provides solutions to networks with restrictions or in cases where greater simplicity and autonomy are desired.

Conclusion: The Future of Self-Production is Here
The era when zero feed-in was considered a "stop-gap solution" is over. Today, it is a mature, smart and practical option for any consumer who wishes to fully utilize their own green energy with minimal bureaucracy and increased control.

Whether it is a residence or a business, the option of zero feed-in, with or without storage, is worth serious consideration — not just as an alternative, but as a strategic investment with long-term benefit.

Source: Energypress – Data analysis from the Greek photovoltaic and energy self-consumption market.