Battery rebates have done a lot of the heavy lifting in Australia’s home storage market. Prices are down, interest is high, and batteries are no longer a fringe update. Yet for many, the same problem keeps coming up. Even after rebates, the upfront cost still feels like a stretch.
The gap is driving a shift in how policymakers are thinking about batteries. Rather than asking how much more can be shaved off the sticker price, the focus is moving to how households pay in the first place. One proposal gaining attention is the Electrify Everything Loans Scheme, or EELS, which aims to remove the upfront cost barrier altogether.
EELS has been described as a HECS-style approach to home energy upgrades. Not because it mirrors student loans exactly, but because it employs the same concept of deferring payment rather than requiring upfront cash. The goal is to let households install batteries now and deal with the cost gradually over time.
What matters for homeowners is its impact. This article examines the potential impact of an EELS on a household’s power bill, how repayments may interact with savings, and why this approach could alter who has access to home storage.
Why upfront costs still hinder battery uptake
Battery prices have fallen quickly, especially since the introduction of federal rebates. On paper, home storage looks more affordable than it did just a few years ago. In reality, many households still hit the same wall once they start getting quotes.
Even after rebates, a typical home battery installation can run into several thousand dollars. That figure often lands on top of recent solar upgrades, rising mortgage costs, and higher everyday expenses. For households without spare cash or access to cheap finance, the decision is less about long-term savings and more about whether the timing makes sense right now.
Unlike solar panels, which can start offsetting bills quickly with relatively predictable returns, batteries ask for a larger upfront commitment while delivering savings gradually. That mismatch between cost and payoff leads to hesitation, even among households keen on energy independence or blackout protection.
This is the gap EELS is trying to address. As long as batteries rely on upfront payment, rebates alone will struggle to reach households without spare capital. The barrier is less about belief in the technology and more about cash flow.
How the EELS battery loan would work in practice
The scheme is designed to change how batteries are paid for, not how much they cost on paper. Instead of paying up front, the cost of a battery would be financed and spread over time.
Under EELs, the loan would be attached to the property rather than the individual homeowner. Repayments would be deferred, with the cost recovered later, such as when the property is sold. The scheme has been compared to HECs because it removes immediate payment pressure and pushes repayment into the future, rather than relying on commercial loans or savings.
For households, the practical effect is simple. A battery could be installed without a large upfront expense. Solar self-consumption improves immediately, while repayment obligations remain in the background rather than appearing as a new monthly bill.
This approach does not promise instant bill reductions or rapid payback. The trade-off is time. EELs lowers the barrier to entry by spreading costs across years, allowing households to think in terms of long-term energy outcomes rather than short-term affordability.
EELS vs battery rebates: price cuts or payment timing?
Battery rebates and EELS are often discussed together, but they solve different parts of the affordability problem. One lowers the price. The other changes how that price is paid. Seeing them side by side makes it easier to understand why financing is becoming part of the battery conversation.
| Feature | Battery rebates | EELS (Electrify Everything Loans Scheme) |
| What it does | Reduces the upfront price of a battery | Removes the need to pay upfront |
| How households benefit | Lower purchase cost at installation | Cost spread over time |
| Upfront cash required | Yes, even after the rebate | No large upfront payment |
| Impact on power bills | Savings begin once installed | Savings begin while repayment is deferred |
| Who benefits most | Households with savings or access to finance | Households constrained by upfront cost |
| Policy role | Short-term affordability support | Long-term access and equity mechanism |
What this could mean for your power bill
A key point to understand with an EELS-style loan is that it doesn’t guarantee an immediate drop in power bills. The battery starts working straight away, but the financial effect unfolds more gradually.
Once installed, a battery allows a household to use more of its own solar instead of exporting it cheaply to the grid and buying it back at higher evening rates. That shift can reduce grid imports and smooth out daily energy costs. Over time, those savings help offset the cost of the battery itself.
Since EELS repayments are deferred, households are not hit with a new monthly loan repayment alongside their electricity bill. In the early years, the benefit is less about instant savings and more about bill stability. Households may still see reductions, but they are often modest at first, especially if energy use patterns do not change.
The longer-term value comes from rising electricity prices. As grid power becomes more expensive, the savings generated by storing and using solar at home increase. Under an EELS-style model, those growing savings can make the deferred cost feel more manageable over time, even if the battery never produces dramatic short-term bill drops.
For homeowners, this reframes the decision. The question is not whether a battery will pay for itself quickly, but whether it makes sense as a long-term household asset that reduces exposure to future energy costs.
Who benefits most, and who still might not
The scheme would open the door for households that are currently locked out of batteries purely because of the upfront cost. Owner-occupiers with existing solar are the most obvious beneficiaries, especially those with stable income but limited savings. For these homes, spreading the cost over time could turn a deferred upgrade into a practical one.
Apartments and strata buildings could also benefit, particularly where collective upgrades are possible. Financing ties to the property rather than an individual makes shared infrastructure easier to justify, even if individual residents change over time.
Landlords are another group EELS is designed to attract. By removing the upfront expense, it becomes easier to install batteries or electrification upgrades without relying on immediate rent increases or short payback periods. That said, whether savings are passed on to tenants remains a policy question rather than a technical one.
Some households would still sit outside the scheme’s reach. Renters without supportive landlords gain little direct control. Homes without solar may see fewer bill benefits unless batteries are paired with other upgrades. And for households planning to sell soon, the long-term nature of deferred repayment may be less appealing.
EELS expands access, but it does not eliminate all barriers. It changes who can participate, not the fundamental economics of home energy storage.
The trade-offs homeowners should understand
EELS lowers the barrier to getting a battery, but it also changes the way households think about value and risk. The most important trade-off is time. By deferring repayment, the cost does not disappear. It simply shifts into the future, often beyond the point where short-term savings are easy to measure.
Since the loan is tied to the property, homeowners need to be comfortable with how that obligation interacts with future plans. Selling the home may trigger repayment, and while that cost may be absorbed into the sale price, it still affects net returns. For households that move frequently, this can complicate decision-making.
There is also a difference in mindset compared to rebates. Rebates feel like a discount. EELS feels like a long-term commitment. Some households prefer the certainty of paying upfront and owning the system outright, even if it requires savings or finance.
Finally, a deferred loan works best when paired with realistic expectations. Batteries improve energy resilience and reduce exposure to future price rises, but they are not guaranteed bill eliminators. EELS makes batteries easier to access, but it does not remove the need for careful household planning.
For many, the decision becomes less about chasing fast payback and more about whether the upgrade fits their long-term living and energy goals.
Why loans may outlast rebates in energy policy
Rebates are effective at kick-starting markets, but they are hard to sustain indefinitely. They rely on fixed budgets, tend to open and close unpredictably, and often reward households that are already well-positioned to act quickly. As battery uptake grows, those limitations become more obvious.
Financing schemes like EELs appeal to governments for a different reason. They recycle capital rather than consume it. Money is lent, repaid over time, and potentially reused, which makes the policy easier to scale without constantly topping up funding. That stability matters as batteries shift from an early-adopter upgrade to mainstream infrastructure.
There is also a fairness argument at play. Rebates tend to flow faster to homeowners with cash on hand or easy access to finance. Loan schemes are better suited to households whose constraint is timing rather than willingness. From a policy perspective, this broadens participation without increasing headline subsidy costs.
This does not mean rebates disappear. More likely, they become smaller or more targeted, while finance takes on a bigger role in determining who can act. If that shift continues, the future of home batteries may be shaped less by one-off discounts and more by how comfortably households can spread the cost over time.
A different way to decide on a battery
EELS does not make batteries a no-brainer. It changes the question homeowners are asked to answer. Instead of deciding whether a battery is affordable right now, households are weighing whether it makes sense over the life of the home.
That shift matters. Deferred repayment lowers the upfront barrier, but it also asks homeowners to think longer-term about energy use, price exposure, and how long they plan to stay put. For some, that will unlock a decision that was previously off the table. For others, the trade-offs will still outweigh the benefits.
If schemes like EELS move ahead, they point to a future where battery uptake is shaped less by rebate timing and more by how comfortably households can spread cost over time.
Energy Matters has been in the solar industry since 2005 and has helped over 40,000 Australian households in their journey to energy independence.
Complete our quick Solar Quote Quiz to receive up to 3 FREE solar quotes from trusted local installers – it’ll only take you a few minutes and is completely obligation-free.
