Case Study: 100kWh Energy Storage System Delivers 18% IRR in Italy

This detailed case study examines a real-world commercial energy storage installation completed by EMoreShare in Northern Italy. The project demonstrates how a properly sized and implemented battery system can deliver exceptional financial returns while providing operational benefits to a mid-sized manufacturing facility.

With an achieved IRR of 18% and a payback period under 6 years, this installation serves as a benchmark for similar facilities across Italy and Southern Europe considering energy storage investments.

18%

Project IRR

5.8 yrs

Payback Period

€68,400

Annual Savings

€397k

20-Year NPV

Client Background

Company Profile

Attribute	Details
Industry	Precision metal fabrication
Location	Modena, Emilia-Romagna, Italy
Facility Size	8,500 m² manufacturing + 2,000 m² warehouse
Employees	85 (2 shifts)
Annual Revenue	€12 million

The client, a family-owned business operating since 1987, produces precision-machined components for the automotive and aerospace industries. Their customer base includes major Tier-1 suppliers to Ferrari, Lamborghini, and Maserati, requiring consistent quality and on-time delivery.

Energy Profile (Pre-Installation)

Parameter	Value
Annual Electricity Consumption	1,450 MWh
Contracted Power	600 kW
Peak Demand (12-month average)	485 kW
Maximum Recorded Peak	542 kW
Annual Electricity Cost	€198,000
Average Cost per kWh	€0.137

The facility operated on a medium-voltage industrial tariff with time-of-use pricing. Demand charges represented 38% of the total electricity bill—a significant pain point for the operations team.

Needs Analysis and Project Objectives

Initial Consultation

EMoreShare's engineering team conducted a comprehensive site assessment in March 2025, including:

Review of 24 months of electricity bills
Analysis of 15-minute interval load data
Site survey for equipment placement
Discussion of operational requirements and constraints
Evaluation of existing solar PV potential

Key Challenges Identified

High demand charges: €19.50/kW/month creating €113,000 annual cost burden
Peak demand volatility: CNC machines and welding equipment creating unpredictable 50-100 kW demand spikes
Power quality issues: Voltage sags during machine startup affecting sensitive equipment
Limited grid capacity: Constrained ability to add new equipment without expensive grid upgrades
Sustainability goals: Customer pressure to reduce carbon footprint

Project Objectives

The client established the following priorities:

Priority	Objective	Target
1	Reduce peak demand charges	30% reduction minimum
2	Improve power quality	Eliminate voltage sags
3	Enable future expansion	Defer grid upgrade
4	Achieve positive ROI	Payback under 7 years
5	Minimize operational disruption	Installation during planned shutdown

System Design and Specification

Sizing Analysis

Based on detailed load analysis, EMoreShare engineers determined optimal system sizing:

Peak Shaving Analysis:
Current peak: 542 kW
Target peak: 380 kW (30% reduction)
Required peak reduction: 162 kW
Average peak duration: 2.8 hours
Required energy capacity: 162 kW × 2.8 h × 1.2 (safety) = 544 kWh
With 90% DoD: 605 kWh nominal → Specified 600 kWh

However, the client had budget constraints that made a 600 kWh system challenging. EMoreShare proposed a phased approach:

Phase 1: 100 kW / 200 kWh system (current project)
Phase 2: Expand to 200 kW / 400 kWh (planned 2027)
Phase 3: Final 300 kW / 600 kWh configuration (planned 2028)

Final System Specification

Component	Specification
Battery Technology	Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP)
Nominal Capacity	215 kWh (usable: 194 kWh at 90% DoD)
Power Rating	100 kW continuous / 120 kW peak (10 min)
AC-DC Efficiency	94% round-trip
Enclosure	IP54 outdoor-rated container
Dimensions	2.4m × 1.2m × 2.1m (H)
Weight	2,800 kg
Fire Suppression	Aerosol-based with gas detection
Thermal Management	Active cooling, -10°C to +45°C operation
Expected Cycle Life	8,000 cycles (80% capacity retention)
Warranty	10 years / 70% capacity

Control System

The EMoreShare EMS (Energy Management System) provides:

Real-time demand monitoring and forecasting
Automated peak shaving with configurable target levels
Time-of-use optimization for energy arbitrage
Power quality monitoring and voltage regulation
Remote monitoring and diagnostics
Integration with existing building management system

Installation Process

Project Timeline

Phase	Duration	Activities
Contract Signing	Week 0	Deposit payment, final design approval
Permitting	Weeks 1-4	Grid connection application, fire authority notification
Manufacturing	Weeks 2-8	System build and factory testing
Site Preparation	Weeks 6-9	Foundation, electrical infrastructure
Delivery & Installation	Week 10	System delivery, mechanical installation
Commissioning	Weeks 10-11	Electrical connection, testing, grid approval
Training & Handover	Week 12	Operator training, documentation, go-live

Installation Details

Site Preparation:

Concrete pad: 3m × 2m × 0.3m with integrated cable trench
Electrical room modifications for inverter and switchgear
Communication cabling to main electrical panel

Grid Connection:

New 125A circuit breaker in main switchboard
Protection relay configuration for anti-islanding
Smart meter installation for settlement purposes
Grid operator inspection and approval

Challenges Encountered:

Unexpected cable route obstruction required 15m additional trenching
Grid operator inspection delayed by 1 week due to scheduling
Minor software integration issue with existing BMS (resolved within 48 hours)

First-Year Operation Data

Performance Metrics

The system entered commercial operation on July 15, 2025. Twelve-month performance data:

Metric	Value
System Availability	99.2%
Total Cycles Completed	312
Average Daily Cycles	0.85
Average Discharge Depth	73%
Round-trip Efficiency (measured)	92.8%
Capacity Retention (Year 1)	99.1%
Unplanned Downtime	18 hours (software update)

Peak Shaving Results

Month	Pre-System Peak (kW)	Post-System Peak (kW)	Reduction (kW)	Reduction %
Jul 2025	538	442	96	17.8%
Aug 2025	545	438	107	19.6%
Sep 2025	521	425	96	18.4%
Oct 2025	512	418	94	18.4%
Nov 2025	528	431	97	18.4%
Dec 2025	518	421	97	18.7%
Jan 2026	535	436	99	18.5%
Feb 2026	522	428	94	18.0%
Mar 2026	541	445	96	17.7%
Apr 2026	519	423	96	18.5%
May 2026	532	438	94	17.7%
Jun 2026	548	451	97	17.7%
Average	530	433	97	18.3%

Financial Performance

Revenue/Savings Category	Annual Amount (€)	% of Total
Demand charge reduction	22,698	33.2%
Energy arbitrage (TOU optimization)	18,450	27.0%
Power factor correction	4,200	6.1%
Deferred grid upgrade	15,000	21.9%
Power quality improvement (avoided downtime)	8,052	11.8%
Total Annual Benefit	68,400	100%

IRR Calculation and Financial Analysis

Project Costs

Cost Category	Amount (€)
Battery system (215 kWh)	280,000
Inverter and BOS	42,000
Installation labor	28,000
Grid connection and permits	15,000
Engineering and project management	18,000
Site preparation (foundation, electrical)	22,000
Total Project Cost	405,000

Financial Model Assumptions

Parameter	Value
Analysis Period	20 years
Discount Rate	7%
Electricity Price Escalation	3% annually
Battery Degradation	2% annually (years 1-5), 1.5% (years 6-10), 1% (years 11-20)
Operating Costs	€3,500/year (maintenance, insurance, monitoring)
Inverter Replacement	Year 12 (€35,000)
Tax Rate	24% (Italy corporate tax)
Tax Depreciation	9% annually (Italian industrial equipment)

Key Financial Metrics

Metric	Value
Simple Payback	5.8 years
Discounted Payback	7.2 years
Internal Rate of Return (IRR)	18.0%
Net Present Value (NPV)	€397,000
Benefit-Cost Ratio	2.84
Levelized Cost of Storage (LCOS)	€0.089/kWh

Sensitivity Analysis

Scenario	IRR	Payback
Base Case	18.0%	5.8 years
Electricity prices +20%	22.4%	4.6 years
Electricity prices -20%	13.2%	7.8 years
System cost +15%	14.8%	6.9 years
System cost -15%	22.1%	4.7 years
Degradation 50% faster	16.2%	6.4 years

Lessons Learned and Best Practices

What Worked Well

Thorough pre-installation monitoring: The 6-month monitoring period allowed precise sizing and accurate savings projections
Phased approach: Starting with a smaller system reduced upfront risk and demonstrated value before larger commitment
Integration with existing systems: BMS integration provided operational insights beyond energy savings
Operator training: Well-trained facility staff resolved minor issues without service calls
Remote monitoring: EMoreShare's 24/7 monitoring caught and resolved one potential issue before it affected operations

Challenges and Solutions

Challenge	Impact	Solution
Summer heat wave (Aug 2025)	Reduced battery efficiency by 3%	Adjusted thermal management setpoints; efficiency recovered
Grid voltage fluctuations	3 brief disconnections	Adjusted protection settings; no issues since
Unexpected production surge	Peak exceeded target twice	Adjusted prediction algorithm; improved forecasting accuracy

Recommendations for Similar Projects

Invest in monitoring: At least 6 months of interval data significantly improves sizing accuracy
Plan for expansion: Even if starting small, design infrastructure for future growth
Consider power quality: The voltage regulation benefits, while hard to quantify, provide real operational value
Engage operators early: Facility staff who understand the system become advocates for expansion
Document everything: Detailed records of performance support financing for Phase 2

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why did you choose 200 kWh instead of the calculated 600 kWh?

A: The client had budget constraints and wanted to validate the technology before a larger investment. The 200 kWh system delivers meaningful savings (18% peak reduction) while demonstrating operational benefits. Phase 2 expansion to 400 kWh is planned for 2027, with final 600 kWh configuration by 2028.

Q: How much maintenance does the system require?

A: Very little. The system receives quarterly preventive maintenance visits (4 hours each) and continuous remote monitoring. The client performs monthly visual inspections. Total annual maintenance cost is approximately €3,500 including service contract.

Q: Has the system experienced any safety issues?

A: No safety incidents have occurred. The LFP battery chemistry is inherently safer than other lithium-ion types, and the multi-layer protection system (cell, module, system) has operated flawlessly. One thermal alarm triggered during the August heat wave, but the cooling system responded appropriately.

Q: How has this affected the client's operations?

A: The impact has been entirely positive. The system operates automatically without any operator intervention. Power quality improvements have reduced nuisance trips on sensitive CNC equipment. The client reports improved confidence in adding new equipment without grid concerns.

Q: Would you recommend this approach to other manufacturers?

A: Absolutely, with caveats. Facilities with high demand charges, volatile loads, and limited grid capacity are ideal candidates. The phased approach reduces risk but requires discipline to follow through with expansions. For this client, the 18% IRR significantly exceeds their hurdle rate for capital investments.

Achieve Similar Results for Your Facility

This Italian manufacturing facility achieved an 18% IRR with their EMoreShare energy storage system. Your facility could see similar or better returns depending on your specific energy profile and tariff structure.

Contact EMoreShare today for a free site assessment and customized financial projection. Our team has delivered successful installations across Italy, the UK, and Spain.

Email: eason.yang@emoreshare.com | Phone: +86-XXX-XXXX-XXXX

Published: April 2026 | Last Updated: April 2026 | EMoreShare—Commercial Energy Storage Solutions for Europe