🇩🇪Germany

Fehlende Datenvisibilität und unzureichende Kapazitätsplanung

3 verified sources

Definition

NC CAM requires TSOs to publish historical maximum/minimum monthly capacity utilization rates and annual average flows at all relevant points for the past 3 years on a rolling basis. TAG, GUD, GASCADE, and OGE do publish this data but in PDF/Excel format without API. Shippers cannot automate capacity forecasting, identify peak utilization periods, or optimize interruptible capacity bids. Incremental capacity process (5-phase NC CAM) provides no real-time feedback to shippers on approved vs. rejected capacity requests.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: €75,000–€250,000 annually per shipper; 10–20% excess firm capacity booking (unnecessary cost); 5–8% interruptible capacity deals missed due to lack of real-time availability data; 60–120 hours/year manual capacity planning
  • Frequency: Quarterly (capacity renewal cycles); annual (incremental capacity requests with 3–6 month approval lag)
  • Root Cause: Capacity data published in non-machine-readable formats (PDF, Excel); no standardized API for real-time capacity visibility; incremental capacity process lacks shipper-side feedback mechanism; PRISMA platform does not expose aggregate capacity utilization trends

Why This Matters

This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Pipeline Transportation.

Affected Stakeholders

Capacity Planner, Commercial Manager, CFO

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Rechnungsstellungsfehler und fehlende Zahlungsreferenzen in der Kapazitätsabrechnung

€50,000–€200,000 annually per shipper; 2–5% of total billing volume unreconciled; 30–60 days excess Days Sales Outstanding (DSO)

Fehlende XRechnung/ZUGFeRD Konformität und Betriebsprüfungsrisiken

€10,000–€50,000 per Betriebsprüfung; 40–100 hours/month manual invoice conversion; 2–3% additional compliance overhead

Manuelle Kapazitätsverwaltung und Engpässe durch PRISMA-Verzögerungen

€100,000–€500,000 annually per shipper; 5–15% spot margin loss due to allocation delays; 1–3 customers churn quarterly due to service SLA misses

Ungenaue Tarifkalkulation und versteckte Systemnutzungsentgelte

€50,000–€300,000 annually per shipper; 5–10% budget forecast error on transmission costs; 100–200 hours/year manual tariff reconciliation

Produktdiebstahl ohne SCADA-Erkennung

1-2% Volumenverlust; €50.000+ pro Vorfall

Stillstand durch verzögerte Leck- und Bruchdetektion

€100.000+ pro Tag Stillstand; 30s vs. Stunden Detektion

Request Deep Analysis

🇩🇪 Be first to access this market's intelligence