Vitreous LabsEnergy transparency
Great Britain · the operating fleet

Berkeley BESS

52 MW, about 52 MWh (1 hour, from the capacity market de-rating class) in Cotswold. Everything on this page is read from published data for the 364 days to 16 October 2026, or is labelled as an estimate.

Part of Berkeley BESS, one of 2 balancing units at one site totalling 96 MW. This page is the E_BERKB-2 unit alone.

What it is

Registered power52 MW balancing mechanism registration
Storage duration1 hour capacity market de-rating class
Charging zoneCotswold
Connection siteStroud
PostcodeGL11 6BB
Balancing mechanism unitE_BERKB-2
Reserve auction codesBERK-1 until 17 March 2026; BERKB-2 from 18 March 2026 the same battery under a new code, usually a new company trading it; its money here is both codes together

Who owns it and who trades it

Traded byEDF Energy Customers Limitedruns several sitesconfirmed, Elexon's register
Owned byCARE POWER (BERKELEY) LIMITED
Owner established fromcapacity market registered holder
UltimatelyVoltwise Power (Sandbrook Capital) confirmed source

How we know. Companies House: Care Power (Barnsley) is controlled by Care Assets Ltd, whose controller changed from SMS Energy Services to Voltwise UK BESS Opco on 19 May 2025; the sibling SPVs share the same parent.

Market registers name the party that sells into the market, which for a battery is usually an optimiser under contract rather than the owner. Elexon's balancing mechanism unit register names the seller here and the name is checked against it on every build. How we tell them apart

Until 8 September 2025 this battery sold as E_BERKB-1 under Arenko Cleantech Limited. The handover shows in the register as a new code, not a renaming, and the old page keeps its record.

What it is built from

Battery systemTrina Storage, Elementa (contracted for SMS, 50 MW / 58 MWh, announced February 2023)
Engineering and constructionEthical Power, full wrap EPC; O&M and 24 hour monitoring from May 2025

From published documents, not from any register: supplier and contractor project pages, owner announcements and the trade press. Confidence: confirmed. Checked 2026-10-06. source 1 · source 2. Fields not shown are not published anywhere we have found, and we do not guess them.

What it earned

Line364 days to 16 October 2026
Balancing mechanism−£35k
Response and reserve auctions auction implied£1.2m
Capacity market£377k
Three lines together£1.5m

Balancing is offer revenue and does not net off the cost of the power. The response and reserve figure is the value implied by the published auction results, award quantity times clearing price times the length of the delivery window, and not a settled payment. Capacity market income is the cleared price raised for inflation where the auction set a base period, split by month on EMRS's weights. Method

Outside the balancing mechanism, derived from the meter

Elexon publishes what this unit's meter recorded every half hour. Take away the balancing volumes NESO accepted and what is left is the position the unit ran outside the balancing mechanism: its wholesale trading, its frequency response delivery, and its losses, together. This unit held a frequency response contract in 6,719 of those half hours. The energy the contract asked of it, contracted megawatts times NESO's published delivery curve at the measured grid frequency, is taken out of the position and valued at the imbalance price, because it sits outside the unit's declared position and that is the price Elexon settles it at. What remains is the traded position, valued at the market index. In 5 half hours a contract was held but the grid frequency is not yet held, so those are left in the traded position. The volumes are measured. The prices are public benchmarks, not this unit's trades. The product is derived, and is shown apart from the three measured lines above. 207 days to 11 October 2026, 45 of them still provisional in Elexon's settlement runs. Method and caveats

LineMWh or £
Metered export, what crossed the meter out6,122 MWh
Metered import, what crossed the meter in7,351 MWh
Equivalent full cycles, everything sent out over one full charge118 over 207 days, 208 a year at that rate
Apparent meter to meter efficiency83%, plausible: losses plus a standing load that is material against a modest throughput
Balancing offers accepted1,490 MWh
Balancing bids accepted3,050 MWh
Position outside balancing, export6,812 MWh
Position outside balancing, import6,481 MWh
Of which expected response delivery, net−559 MWh 2,010 out, 2,569 in
Traded position, net890 MWh 6,282 out, 5,392 in
Traded position at the market index, sold£765k
Traded position at the market index, bought£513k
Traded position, net, at the index£252k
Response delivery, net, at the imbalance price−£75k −£61k at the index
Balancing and outside balancing together£132k £4.49/kW/yr

When it moved, against when power was dear

Across every half hour this unit was metered the market index averaged £108.68. What it sent out was worth £121.81 a megawatt hour at that same index, 1.12 times the average. What it took in was worth £95.16, 0.88 times. Selling above one and buying below one is a unit positioned into the dear half hours and out of the cheap ones. It measures the half hours it chose, not the price anyone paid it, which is not published.

What it paid to buy energy back

When NESO accepts a bid, this unit delivers less than it had already sold, or takes more in. It pays for the energy it no longer delivers, and that payment is most of what makes the balancing figure above negative. Whether that is a cost or a margin depends on the price it paid. Across 3,050 MWh of accepted bids it paid an average of £85.34 a megawatt hour. The market index averaged £114.04 across those same half hours, so it bought back at £28.70 a megawatt hour below the going price.

Price it paidVolumeAverageCash
below zero276 MWh−£25.14£7k received
£0 to £2582 MWh£11.52£943
£25 to £5094 MWh£39.71£4k
£50 to £75425 MWh£65.01£28k
£75 to £1001,007 MWh£88.05£89k
above £1001,167 MWh£125.32£146k

On 276 MWh the price was below zero: NESO paid this unit an average of £25.14 a megawatt hour to take energy, £7k in all. That is a constrained network with more generation on it than it can move.

The other direction, offers, is much smaller here: 1,490 MWh where NESO asked for more, paid at an average of £144.82 against an index of £107.38.

Checks this unit did not pass cleanly. Published anyway, because a flagged figure with its flag is more use than a blank.

  • only 207 of 364 days metered

Where it stands

Balancing incomewhole fleet, £/kW/yr19th percentile100 units
Balancing incomeEngland and Wales peer group14th percentile72 units
Balancing income1.0 hour duration cohort24th percentile30 units
Balancing incomebatteries sold by EDF Energy Customers Limited1st percentile13 units
All three measured lineswhole fleet, £/kW/yr46th percentile230 units
Energy sent outhours at full power21st percentile98 units
Energy taken inhours at full power10th percentile98 units

Percentiles, so 90 means better than nine in ten of the cohort named beside it, on that measure alone, over the same 364 days. Rates are pounds per kilowatt per year, annualised over the days the unit has been on the system, the same figures the performance league ranks on. A high position in the taken-in table is not a fault: a constraint asset is paid to charge, and charging is its job.

The nearest comparables

The five nearest in size in England and Wales, and this battery among them, ranked by what each was paid for every kilowatt it holds over the 364 days to the same date. They run for about the same length of time. Same market, same rules, same weather.

BatteryMWHoursMeasured, per kW
Larks Green Battery Storage521h£47.6/kW/yr
Newton wood BESS521h£39.3/kW/yr
Brook Farm BESS521h£36.9/kW/yr
Burwell 1521h£34.8/kW/yr
Berkeley BESSthis battery521h£29.9/kW/yr
Brentwood BESS521h£26.8/kW/yr

See it on the map

Open the operating map here

Every figure on this page traces to a published file. If something here is wrong about your asset, the methods section says how to tell us.