You just changed the subject. Nothing you said there has any bearing on whether or not it’s a good idea to move subsidies from day-to-day batteries towards week-scale battery storage. In fact, you complaining that they have to compete with gas plants is more of a reason to subsidize them, not less. Gas plants can’t outcompete batteries on day-to-day trading anyways, with or without subsidies. It’s only at the week-scale that things get competitive.

But they are competing with each other. The longest dunkelflaute in Germany in the last decade lasted for 1610. We are talking about 10GW of gas power plants being added(and they are being added to the current fleet and do not replace old gas power plants) That means 1610GWh of batter storage could also do the same job. Today in summer Germany is producing about 350GWh of fossil fuel electricity on a sunny day. You roughly need that to make summer nights work. That is a significant part of what is needed to survive a dunkelflaute.

So this is at the very least gifting fossil fuel companies 2GW worth of gas power plants. Probably more since long duneklfaute is pretty rare.

We should absolutely not be burning coal instead of gas. Coal should be phased out.

LNG is 33% worse then coal and Germany imports a lot of that. Also building a new power plant also produces emissions. We really should do neither and pay no subsidy for any infrastructure that forces that.

These gas plants do burn biomass. Germany harvests and purifies methane from biomass, and mixes it into the fossil derived gas that powerplants burn. that’s one of the primary ways that biomass contributes to the grid.

Most biogas is burned at a constant rate though and it is a huge wasted potential. It is easily enough to replace a good bit of gas and it would make perfect sense to force companies to not use fossil gas, when they receive subsidies.