Lloyds Bank Poised to Make More than $500 Million in Clean Energy Investments

Posted on by
Print Friendly

 

UK-based Lloyds Banking Group is poised to invest one-third of a total £1 billion ($1.57 billion) in renewable energy projects, with offshore wind, solar power, and biomass projects the leading candidates. The £333 million ($519.5 million) is capital Lloyds’ allocated for additional infrastructure projects in support of the Cameron government’s UK Guarantees program, according to a BusinessGreen report.

Lloyds is the latest multinational money center banking group to announce it intends to ramp up its clean and renewable energy investments. Managing director and global head of project finance Chris Heathcote yesterday told Bloomberg Lloyds is looking at up to “nine social and infrastructure projects, three conventional power plants, and up to 12 clean energy projects.”
 


 

Offshore Wind, Solar Power and Biomass Plants

Lloyds has its eyes on offshore wind, solar power, and biomass plants in particular, he elaborated. “The areas that seem to be doing the most at the moment are offshore wind, including the off-take connections, and biomass is looking interesting, but I’m slightly cautious as it’s still early days for biomass.”

The UK has set a goal of renewable energy resources meeting 15% of national energy consumption by 2020. They accounted for 9.4% of power generation and 3.8% of overall energy consumption in 2011, Bloomberg noted in its report.

UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne on July 18 announced the Cameron government will provide loan guarantees for up to £40 billion in infrastructure projects as per its new UK Guarantees program. Low carbon infrastructure projects could be eligible for as much as £50 billion of the government assistance package, BusinessGreen reported.

The UK Guarantees program “could be a game-changer for infrastructure financing,” global business/accounting consultancy KPMG says. “Some commentators have rushed to say it won’t be a big deal but they need to step back and see what it might unlock,” KPMG’s UK head of infrastructure, building and construction Richard Threlfall stated in a press release.

“We are promised the creation of the Pension Infrastructure Platform in January, providing potentially significant amounts of institutional liquidity for infrastructure projects. Pension funds don’t like Greenfield construction risks, but UK Guarantees provides a basis to take that problem away. Put UK Guarantees and the Pension Infrastructure Platform together and you have the basis for a radically new financing model.”

Looking to boost economic activity by enhancing infrastructure, projects will need to meet the government’s criteria, which includes being able to start work within a year’s time. Those proposing projects will also have to show that they would not be able to raise the capital required without the government’s loan guarantee.

Renewable energy proponents have been critical of the Cameron government’s mixed messages regarding government support for the sector. “On the one hand the Treasury wants to bring about growth in energy infrastructure, with its new Guarantee scheme,” BusinessGreen quoted UK Renewable Energy Association CEO Gaynor Hartnell. “On the other hand it is directly hampering it, by preventing the planned publication of the financial incentives for renewable electricity projects from 2013.”

Andrew (405 Posts)

I've been reporting and writing on a wide range of topics at the nexus of economics, technology, ecology/environment and society for some five years now. Whether in Asia-Pacific, Europe, the Americas, Africa or the Middle East, issues related to these broad topical areas pose tremendous opportunities, as well as challenges, and define the quality of our lives, as well as our relationship to the natural environment.


  • Dave2020

    GREENWASH ALERT!!!!!!!!

    We should always treat what the government and the finance industry SAY with a healthy dose of cynicism. 

    “with offshore wind, solar power, and biomass projects the leading candidates.”

    That is almost certainly a bare-faced lie – mark my words.

    The BBC’s Stephanie Flanders hit the nail on the head:-

    “To qualify, a project has to be perfect in every possible respect, but somehow not quite perfect enough to get up and running entirely on its own”.

    The National Infrastructure Plan 2010 – “describes the specific policy and regulatory changes the Government will make in order to remove barriers to infrastructure investment.”

    In the Spending Review we committed to “invest” over £40 billion in “supporting” project investments including high-value road schemes, one of the world’s first carbon capture and storage projects, a high-speed rail network, Crossrail, two of the world’s leading medical and engineering research facilities and the Green Investment Bank.

    NB. The renewables industry/electricity infrastructure is notable for its absence.

    The GIB has specifically excluded “risky investment” in marine renewables from its remit:-

    http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2186529/green-investment-bank-avoid-risky-marine-power-chairman

    It looks suspiciously like a regurgitated policy promise. Nobody has actually gone on record to say that this £40bn is in addition to that £40bn. That means it isn’t.

    Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander said the scheme would not be a drain on the public purse: “This is not a direct call on the taxpayer. That would only happen if something went wrong with a project.”

    So £40bn has been downgraded from “investment” to loan guarantees.

    The Treasury and the DECC are at this very moment further manipulating the “barriers to infrastructure investment.” to incentivise nuclear and gas, at the expense of wind power.

    The battle lines are drawn – between discredited ‘market’ ideology and those people who try to use common sense and evidence in policy making:-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/14/george-osborne-green-energy-standoff

    “The Treasury has refused to send a minister to answer the concerns of the cross-party energy and climate change select committee – prompting a furious response from the committee’s Tory chair, Tim Yeo. Further riling the body, which has been asked by ministers to scrutinise the draft energy bill for parliament, the junior Treasury minister, Chloe Smith, has subsequently even refused to answer a series of written questions, which MPs believe must be addressed if the plans to reform the electricity market are to become workable.”

    This is what they DO. Pass judgement on that.

  • Dennis Baker

    UK Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne and Lloyds Bank should consider this investment
    The primary source of GHG is fossil fuel burning electrical generating facilities. http://dingo.care2.com/pictures/causes/uploads/2012/01/GHG-emitters-2010.jpg 7 Billion humans generate vast quantities of excrement. I believe this excrement is capable of providing all human electrical demands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiolysis Right now hydrogen is perceived as a negative by product, of Nuclear Energy, when it should be the product, as the Pentagon has considered. reference info Request for Information (RFI) on Deployable Reactor Technologies … DARPA-SN-10-37@darpa.milhttps://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=d0792af88a6a4484b3aa9d0dfeaaf553&…Large scale conversions sites are intended to replace fossil fuel powered electrical facilities the Primary Source of Carbon Emissions.http://www.populist.com/99.12.krebs.blob.htmlIn what officials now say was a mistaken strategy to reduce the waste’s volume, organic chemicals were added years ago which were being bombarded by radiation fields, resulting in unwanted hydrogen. The hydrogen was then emitted in huge releases that official studies call burps, causing “waste-bergs,” chunks of waste floating on the surface, to roll over.Dennis Baker 106-998 Creston AvenuePenticton BC V2A1P9cell phone 250-462-3796

    • http://ronaldbrak.blogspot.com.au/ Ronald Brak

      People eat about 8,000,000 or so joules a day.  A kilowatt-hour is 3,600,000 joules.  Food has considerably less chemical energy in it after it passes through someone’s digestive tract than before.