Photo Credit: NYC.gov
article tools
Increase Text Size Increase Text Size Decreate Text Size Decrease Text Size
Share Email This Story Share Share This Story Reader comments Reader Comments (9) View image gallery Image Gallery (1) Add to favorites Add to Bookmarks Printer friendly version Printer Friendly Version
Article Tool Sponsor:

Advertise with us

More Jobs
0 ratings - Sign-in to rate this article
June 23, 2008

Renewable Energy a 'Finance-driven' Industry

New York, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

Although the renewable energy industry saw over US $100 billion in global market activity, 14 percent of global venture capital investment and accounted for roughly one-third of new U.S. electrical generation capacity last year, the industry is still very far from maturation. But America's financial leaders are helping change that.

"It is clear that we are now a finance driven industry...as we move forward there will be big successes and failures and only the strong will survive."

-- Michael Eckhart, President of the American Council on Renewable Energy

One thing was clear at last week's Renewable Energy Finance Forum (REFF) in New York City: This budding industry is still a very risky one for investment. That reality has been illustrated by Congress' failure to extend the Investment (ITC) and Production Tax Credits (PTC); a situation that has spooked some investors and is starting to cause a shift of capital to other countries and other industries.

“If you don't like policy risk, you don't belong in this market,” said Rhone Resch, President of the Solar Energy Industries Association, in a speech to attendees. “But if you are willing to get into that risk, you belong in this business.”

All risks considered, the world's leading investors are recognizing that a transition to a clean energy economy is the single biggest economic opportunity of the 21st century — and possibly the biggest economic opportunity ever. The U.S. represents one of the largest renewable energy markets, so merchant bankers, private equity firms and venture capitalists are all educating themselves about how to navigate this immature yet promising marketplace and make the right decisions to drive the industry forward. REFF is an event designed to give financiers the tools to invest in this increasingly complicated space.

“It is clear that we are now a finance-driven industry. All of you here are in the right place at the right time,” said Michael Eckhart, President of the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE). “However, as we move forward there will be big successes and failures and only the strong will survive.”

Along with understanding policy risk, many investors want to know if the “clean energy revolution” is another bubble or just a replay of the short-lived enthusiasm for renewables during the oil shock of the 1970's. That's not the case, said conference speakers. The political and economic landscape is now perfect for strong, sustainable industry growth: The scientific debate over climate change is over; the price of oil will probably not fall dramatically, if it falls at all; developing countries like China and India are emerging as major energy consumers, increasing the demand for all types of energy; and despite the short-term political stalemate in Washington, there is bipartisan recognition that renewable energy is an economic driver and a necessary part of national security strategy.

“There are so many factors converging at once. It really is a perfect storm,” said David Sandalow, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. “I just don't see this as another repeat of what happened in the 70's. This is the real thing.”

Although the expectations for growth are very high, the industry is still in its infancy. Renewables account for only 3.4 percent of total global power generation. The International Energy Agency recently issued a report estimating that in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 50% by 2050, global investment in renewable energy, energy efficiency and carbon sequestration will need to reach roughly US $45 trillion dollars by that date. That's the conservative estimate. Some analysts have said the figure could be much higher.

As the renewable energy industry works to put meaningful amounts of capacity online, the market remains very volatile for investors, especially in the U.S. However, the industry is finally approaching the form that it will eventually take on a larger scale, making the market a bit more clear for investors, said Michael Liebreich, CEO of New Energy Finance.

“We went through a number of years where people were waking up to renewable energy and energy efficiency, but they didn't know quite what that meant in terms of how they would integrate into the energy infrastructure,” Liebreich said. “We're now starting to get more clarity on how that will work.”

Liebreich and others point to the growing size of installations, increased consolidation of the industry and refined promotion policies as the factors creating this clarity. As a result of this continued “shake out,” the ability of firms to see how and where to invest their capital is continually improving.

All of this bodes well for the long-term picture. But in the short-term, there is a lot of concern about the U.S. market and what will happen over the next year if the ITC and PTC are not extended or are extended late in the year. By many estimates, if something is not passed in the next 30 days, there will be a significant derailment of investment with the U.S. wind and solar markets.

To raise more awareness about the issue, GE Energy Financial Services and ACORE released a report at the event weighing the long-term economic impact of wind development with the up-front cost of the production tax credit. The report found that the net present value of 2007 U.S. wind development is worth US $250 million more than the price tag for the tax credits, which was about US $9 billion last year. According to the report, the tax credit pays for itself because of federal tax revenue received from wind projects, worker wages and property taxes.

“This study needs to be combined with the other area we've been discussing, which is the dire impact it will have on the industry if we don't extend the tax credits and lose jobs and squander the opportunity to create a domestic, clean power source,” said Kevin Walsh, Managing Director of Renewable Energy at GE Energy Financial Services.

According to another widely cited report from Navigant Consulting, the wind industry could see the loss of 76,800 jobs and US $11.5 billion dollars in economic activity. Many in the industry estimate that up to 6 gigawatts (GW) worth of projects could be derailed at the end of 2008 and throughout 2009. In addition, the solar industry could see a 465-megawatt (MW) reduction in demand for PV modules if they do not get an ITC extension. Navigant estimates that around 39,400 jobs and US $8 billion in economic activity would be lost.

Almost everyone at REFF was hopeful that the credits would be extended by December. But even if that happens, there could still be a significant slowdown in the market as tax equity investors hesitate to make new deals in the second half of the year.

Due to the precarious situation in Congress, the talk at REFF was centered around policy as much as investment strategy and development figures. Due to the industry's infancy, it's very difficult to talk about renewable energy without talking about policy. Once the PTC and ITC issues are behind the industry, the next big battle on Capitol Hill will be over a carbon-weighted policy like cap and trade, according to presenters.

Most of the speakers had the same thing to say: Renewables can and will thrive without subsidies once the social and environmental costs of fossil energies are properly valued by a carbon-weighted policy. However, that will be a difficult piece of legislation to craft and one that could take years to become law. For the time being, many businesses in the industry are pushing ahead in spite of the politicking in Washington over incentives.

“We simply need more energy. We're not waiting around for governments to craft the perfect policies,” said Vivienne Cox, Executive Vice President of BP's alternative energy business. “This is an important market, and we're going to build a business around it.”
Image Gallery (1)
 
Reader Comments (9)
 
No image available
June 23, 2008
Upon further review, I probably overstated the decommission costs of nuclear reactors. From: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf19.html

"In USA, utilities are collecting 0.1 to 0.2 cents/kWh to fund decommissioning. They must then report regularly to the NRC on the status of their decommissioning funds. As of 2001, $23.7 billion of the total estimated cost of decommissioning all US nuclear power plants had been collected, leaving a liability of about $11.6 billion to be covered over the operating lives of 104 reactors (on basis of average $320 million per unit)."

Costs have been from around $200 million to about $1 billion. Nevertheless, the decom needs to be considered as a part of the life cycle cost.
Comment 1 of 9
No image available
June 23, 2008
A non subsidized, full life cycle cost for each form of energy will go a long way to help the market sort out the winners and the losers. For example, nuclear energy needs to include costs for decomissioning of plants (which might cost 10 to 100 times the cost to build them), costs for managing hazardous by products for thousands of years and contingency for accidents/disasters. For oil costs of armies in foreign countries and for all fossil fuels costs for remediation of environmental impacts are appropriate to include in the consumer end cost. In this sense the government should be leveling the playing field and allowing the market to work with all factors considered.
Comment 2 of 9
No image available
June 25, 2008
If oil stays at current prices or rises, and natural gas continues to get more expensive as in currently the case in Europe, then Renewables will look more and more attractive with or without tax and other fiscal incentives. If environmental and security costs are factored into the cost of fossil fuels, then they can't come close to competing with the more mature among the renewables on favourable sites.
Comment 3 of 9
No image available
June 25, 2008
'Renewable Energy a 'Finance-driven' Industry' is unexpected candor. Many think that renewable energy is a climate driven industry.

"Business should treat the environmental movement as it treats other forms of religious belief. Business leaders do not themselves have to believe its doctrines. Indeed we should be wary if they do: business linked to faiths and ideologies is a sinister and unaccountable power. But companies must respect the belief systems of the countries in which they operate, and acknowledge both the constraints these structures impose and the commercial opportunities that arise. Most environmental initiatives that have been implemented – phasing out fluorocarbons, renewable energy and emissions trading – have significant commercial lobbies behind them.

Still, myths play a valuable social role and the intentions of their proponents are generally benign. The social impact of religions and ideologies, for good and ill, does not depend much on the factual accuracy of their stories. The injunction to be careful of the impact of our actions on the air, the earth and the water is well taken. The danger of environmental evangelism is that ritual, gesture and rhetoric take the place of substance."

http://www.johnkay.com/political/479
Comment 4 of 9
sir
The whole world must realise and do research on Non-edible oil producing trees like Pongamia and Paradise tree and of course Jatropha etc which would have life span of atleast 5 decades.
we are planning to plant Pongamia trees 100 million trees in a span of 5 years to 10 years time millions of Pongamia oil will flow from such trees like Pongamia.....such kind of trees are eco-friendly.

Renewable Energy Reserve Fund must be created on global scale and support all movements to aughment non-edible oil sources.
S.A.Alagarsamy
www.mgrbiodiesel.com
India
Comment 5 of 9
No image available
Any finance/economics experts out there? What puzzles me is how does one estimate the capital value of a renewable enery resource? For finite resources it is a simple matter of using the total reserves as depicted in a supply bell curve and taking the NPV. However for renewables the supply curve is a realitivly flat line to infinity?
What methods are currently being used to estimate this all important investment number?
Comment 6 of 9
No image available
June 26, 2008
Would anybody please provide any possible reasons that ITC and PTC were not passed in the Congress?
Comment 7 of 9
No image available
June 26, 2008
greg- have any Nuclear power stations actually finished decommissioning - ie the land recycled for other use? To put it another way are they guesstimates, or based on actual completed experience.

Also does it include the costs of managing the nuclear waste in perpetutity which I believe in the US is assume to be an ongoing public cost?
Comment 8 of 9
No image available
July 2, 2008
Ian,
The Connecticut Yankee plant was decommissioned and part of the site is awaiting redevelopment (http://www.connyankee.com/).
Comment 9 of 9
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In
Featured Total Access Partners
Click company logos to learn more
Solar Energy International National Hydropower Association ORMAZABAL UL University Thompson Technology Industries, Inc. (TTI) Latin American Wind Energy Association
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo