The main conclusions can be divided into energetic and economic conclusions.

At the energetic level, the main conclusion is that overinvestment in PV installations provides very little additional self-sufficiency. The preference is for smaller installations supplemented with demand control or batteries. The more demand control or storage, the more solar panels can be recommended. A southern orientation of these panels still appears to be the best.

Smart control of heat pumps can ensure that between 30 and 50% of consumption can be obtained from these solar panels. For electric vehicles, this maximum is also around 50%, depending on the presence of the vehicle during the day. Moreover, peak control for electric vehicles can be achieved without much loss of comfort.

Economically, the cards are different. Larger PV installations often turn out to be very profitable, even at relatively low injection fees. Storage systems became unprofitable with the introduction of the capacity tariff and abolition of the reverse counter. Even when used additionally to reduce the average monthly peak, these systems rarely pay for themselves within their lifetime. Demand-side management of wholesale customers is much more interesting and available, although it appears that major steps still need to be taken to get these systems working together correctly.

The impact of the capacity tariff is almost always small for low-voltage customers. For many, it is interesting to still reduce monthly peaks. For the other customer groups, the capacity tariff almost always entails an increase in network tariffs. The main cause of this is the elimination of the very favorable maximum rate on transmission network tariffs. This group is thus even more strongly encouraged to spread consumption.