CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world.


Clean Power solar-securities-cost

Published on July 24th, 2012 | by John Farrell

6

Could Securitization Democratize Solar Power?



 
After Wall Street popularized the term “mortgage-backed securities” in its destruction of the economy in 2008, you could be forgiven for thinking “solar securities” are a pyramid scheme. But, in truth, they may hold the key to democratizing the financing and the ownership of distributed renewable energy.

Right now, financing solar typically means looking for a “tax equity” partner who will provide some upfront cash to build a solar array in exchange for helping to use the federal tax incentives for solar. These are business deals, and the tax equity folks may demand a 30% return on their equity (or more). This means a higher price for solar power that has nothing to do with the cost of producing electricity and everything to do with poor policy design.

But what if a solar developer could borrow money at 6% interest instead, and the savings would be so significant that they could even forgo the federal tax incentives and still produce cheaper electricity?

Enter solar securities (hat tip to Jesse Morris at RMI for this idea).

The basic idea is that a solar project (or any distributed renewable energy project) is a highly reliable source of revenue for a long period of time, e.g. 10,000 kilowatt-hours per year for 25 years, worth 15 cents per kWh. If you had a certificate for the value of this electricity (a security) and bundled hundreds of them together, you’d have an investment-quality product backed by a diverse number of solar energy projects, all with high likelihood of paying out.

Millions of institutional investors and even ordinary Americans put their money in mutual funds every year, comprised of stocks and bonds and many other financial instruments. And many are looking for a low-risk, low-reward instrument, like a solar security.  Instead of Goldman Sachs, think TIAA-CREF.

Here’s why it could help the solar market, a lot.

  1. Many renewable energy project owners are unable to use tax incentives (e.g. cities, schools, nonprofits) or limited in their capacity to do so.
  2. The renewable energy market is constrained by the number of tax equity players and the depth of their pockets.
  3. Tax equity is expensive compared to the rates of return for mutual funds or bank debt.

By offering much cheaper financing that is not reliant on tax incentives, solar securities could exponentially increase the available capital for solar financing while simultaneously blowing up the single biggest roadblock to community-based solar energy.

Here’s a chart illustrating the difference in the cost of solar when developed with tax equity financing (40% of project equity with a 30% rate of return) compared to one developed with solar securities financing (60% debt with a 6% rate of return):

Solar security financing can lower the cost of solar by nearly 25% even when giving up the 30% federal tax credit.  This could be an enormous boon for public entities like schools and city buildings that would like to go solar but often can’t make projects pencil out without federal tax incentives.

If, as Morris mentions in his original post, financiers can combine the tax credits with solar security financing, it could nearly halve the cost of solar power. (Note: my figures differ from his because I calculate the levelized cost (no profit) rather than the cost of solar with a return on investment for the solar project developer).

The financing model doesn’t just lower costs, but could pour billions of additional dollars into the renewable energy financing market and, particularly, could lower financing costs for small projects by bundling their value.

There’s some evidence that simplifying financing could have big returns. Germany provides very simple, low-cost financing with its feed-in tariff and pays significantly less for solar power (when adjusting for the solar resource quality) than we do in the U.S. A well-regulated solar securities market could put a big dent in the cost of U.S. solar while simultaneously expanding the opportunity for local ownership.

Note: I just came across this analysis that suggests securitization for solar is not yet an easy sell.

This post originally appeared on ILSR’s Energy Self-Reliant States blog.

 

 

Print Friendly

Tags: , , , , , , ,


About the Author

directs the Energy Self-Reliant States and Communities program at ILSR and he focuses on energy policy developments that best expand the benefits of local ownership and dispersed generation of renewable energy. His latest paper, Democratizing the Electricity System, describes how to blast the roadblocks to distributed renewable energy generation, and how such small-scale renewable energy projects are the key to the biggest strides in renewable energy development.   Farrell also authored the landmark report Energy Self-Reliant States, which serves as the definitive energy atlas for the United States, detailing the state-by-state renewable electricity generation potential. Farrell regularly provides discussion and analysis of distributed renewable energy policy on his blog, Energy Self-Reliant States (energyselfreliantstates.org), and articles are regularly syndicated on Grist and Renewable Energy World.   John Farrell can also be found on Twitter @johnffarrell, or at jfarrell@ilsr.org.



  • http://twitter.com/tedkidd Ted Kidd

    “This means a higher price for solar power that has nothing to do with the cost of producing electricity and everything to do with poor policy design.” spot on. People coming up with these programs are completely disconnected.

    I bought a TDI Jetta, then did not qualify for the “tax credit”. What a fraud these programs are.

    If the idea is to encourage alternative energy production, pay incentive for production.

  • thomas

    Right now, my business will sell you a solar system and make the financed payments, for you.
    Here is the answer!
    Thomas
    thomasadair@live.com
    bluediamondprocurentervices.com

  • David Fuchs

    The falling price of PV will destroy these investments. Just look at the per watt price by year. If we hadn’t had the silicon shortage in ~2005 PV would be at 20-25 cents a watt. Over the next ~five years we will be around or below this price. If there are no solid 25 year purchase contracts for this energy you will have a market crash. Just MHO

  • JMin2020

    Thanks for the truth regarding the financingsub culture behind the Energy Tax Credits John. I have been long dismayed at seeing the RFIs in the EERE notices for this scheme to perpetuate the shady area of emmissions reduction compliance by the dirtier energy producers. The program has resulted in environmentally disasterous consequences I believe. In particular with respect to climate change and the uncomfortable possibility of reaching a Climate Change Tipping Point. I have never favored the Clean Energy Tax Credit sales scheme for this precise reason. It does not lend itself to timely emmissions reduction. It would be far better to reward the CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCERS with the tax benefit DOUBLED if they apply it to more CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCTION CONSTRUCTION; rather than make a quick buck on a SHADY SALE DEAL. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/jeff.king.14224 Jeff King

    If they create a solar bond, mutual fund, or other form of simple investment for us low end investors please make sure to let us know cause i would feel very good investing in projects like these 

    • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

      definitely will! :D think that will be a hard policy to land, but is so logical at the same time.

Back to Top ↑