In practice it is almost always worth assessing seriously: a BESS earns only while it is running, and after serious damage equipment deliveries can take many months. The critical point is that the BI calculation basis matches the real revenue model of a BESS (balancing and market services, not classic turnover) – otherwise the cover can turn out to be nominal. Lenders often require BI cover as a condition of the loan.

When this answer applies to your situation

  • The project is financed with a bank loan and the agreement contains insurance requirements.
  • The project's financial model relies on uninterrupted system availability.
  • A property programme is being structured and the BI part has to be decided.

What can change the answer

  • The revenue model: exactly how the project earns and how to define that in the policy.
  • Delivery times for critical components (cells, inverters, transformers) – they determine the indemnity period.
  • How manufacturer warranties and maintenance contracts interact with the insurance.
  • The lender's minimum requirements for cover and limits.

What to check in the policy or quote

  • The definition of the BI calculation basis against the project's revenue model
  • The indemnity period against component delivery times
  • Cover for additional costs (temporary solutions, expedited delivery)
  • The link with the insured events under the property section

The typical mistake

BI cover is bought "off the template" with a turnover basis and a 12-month period. For a BESS revenue structure such cover may fit only partly – and that only comes to light when a claim is made.

Example

A real anonymised case from Kristaps's practice

From my own practice (anonymised): when structuring a programme for a BESS project in Latvia, it was precisely the calculation basis for the interruption cover and the indemnity period that were among the points requiring individual agreement with the insurer – the standard wordings did not fit the project.

Related content

Sources and basis

This answer is based on Kristaps Račko's practice as a broker; it is not individual insurance advice. General regulatory context: Apdrošināšanas un pārapdrošināšanas izplatīšanas likums, the Latvian Insurance and Reinsurance Distribution Law (likumi.lv); supervision of brokers – the Bank of Latvia register.

Author: Kristaps Račko, insurance broker (partner at SIA EURORISK) Published: Last reviewed:

This is not individual insurance advice; actual cover always depends on the chosen insurer's wording and the special conditions of the policy.