Nominate Your Favorite Renewable Energy Project for The 2009 Excellence in Renewable Energy Awards
click here for more information
Close
 
Photo Credit: Applied Materials
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 (5) 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
December 19, 2008

Show Us the Money: Financing Thin-film PV Projects

by Debra Vogler, Senior Technical Editor, Solid State Technology
California, United States [RenewableEnergyWorld.com]

A panel discussion at the Thin Film Solar Summit that took place in San Francisco earlier this month gave attendees a dose of reality: financing in the world of thin-film PV isn't a short-term play.

"People always assumed that if the technology worked and the team was good, that the rest was just engineering...and so far, that has never proven to be the case."

-- Neal Dikeman, Partner, Jane Capital Partners

The reality, according to Neal Dikeman, partner with VC firm Jane Capital Partners, is that only one or two thin-film projects have brought product to market in 30 years, and it's a US $100M-$200M dollar up-front investment "just to play the game and see if your product really works."

Silicon Valley investors have mistakenly bet on "really great teams" while the technology is still at a science experiment stage, he argues — investors are beginning to realize this, he thinks, and that the industry is sitting on the back end of about 5-10 years of US $100M bets. "We're going to see a bunch of write-offs coming up," he warns.

The challenge that has caught startups in this sector time and time again, Dikeman explained, is underestimating the engineering scale-up and production on a tens-of-megawatts (MW) scale.

"People always assumed that if the technology worked and the team was good, that the rest was just engineering...and so far, that has never proven to be the case," he observed, noting that there have been several hundred (thin film) companies that have tried and only two succeeded.

"The challenge has been that the engineering scale-up has been much harder than the science experiment." Citing the "black art" aspect to thin-film projects, he observed that for factories in the 30-40 MW range, what matters is getting the same yields, distributions and performance out of the second plant as was achieved in the first.

"You can take the same people, same technology, same equipment, same materials, and you'll get something different between the two plants," he said. "I don't think that's changed."

Lest he dash the hopes of conference attendees, Dikeman acknowledged that while thin-film PV technology has to come down the cost curve, it is the only hope for making solar more than a niche subsidized business. "We have to deliver US $1/Watt at the module level, not the cell level, in order for anyone downstream to have a serious business," he urged. "Otherwise, we'll be living off the investment tax credits and rebates over the next few years."

But don't hold out hope for a disruptive technology to solve the cost-curve challenge. "There is no disruptive technology in energy, only disruptive policies that make certain technologies look disruptive after the fact," Dikeman told the audience. He believes that the big cost-changing improvements that will come in the next few years will be manufacturing process improvements, and he's excited by the entrance of companies such as Oerlikon and Applied Materials, as well as some of the large semiconductor manufacturers. "We need [that] manufacturing scale," he said.

At the End of the Line What Model Works?

Analysts at the summit also tackled the question of how utilities will drive the PV industry, and how some clear trends will benefit the industry. "The one technology that the American consumer wants to buy is solar; it's a ready market," said Bill Roth, green business coach for Entrepreneur.com and president of NCCT, "but the one thing standing in their way is sticker shock."

So it's crucial to help move the transaction to the point where these consumers who wants to say "yes" can close, and Roth noted that an integrated model will enable the purchase to take place. He offered up as an example other commodity providers of energy, such as the oil companies, that are vertically integrated. "While the technology and science are critically important and they have to work, integration enables the purchase," he explained.

Dikeman countered that the PV industry hasn't been able to figure out exactly the overhead and operating cost of a distributed utility over a wide range of contracts. "It is very unclear to me what the fully loaded cost of solar is at any kind of scale being distributed," he said. "There are no very large fleets out there from which you can get data, and a lot of costs are hidden due to subsidies and tax equity."

However, Dikeman noted that Japan was always reasonably vertically integrated, and he's waiting for vertical integration to come to the U.S. and Europe. For a hundred years in the energy business, the money has been made upstream from owning the asset/the resource -- so, solar on a serious scale means owning a piece of very sunny land next to water and right next to a transmission line and a load, he observed.

"The guy who owns the land with the best resource is the one that makes the money," said Dikeman. "Everything else will be commoditized. The person owning the land with the best resources will make the most money."

Debra Vogler is a senior technical editor at Solid State Technology. This article was originally published in Solid State Technology's WaferNews and was reprinted with permission.

Image Gallery (1)
 
Reader Comments (5)
 
No image available
December 21, 2008
Natural Gas is at less than 1/4 of what it was a few months ago, when Solar PV was still more expensive than it's competitors.

With the rapid fall of fuel prices, the future of Alternative Energy is fairly bleak. Outside of Gov't sponsored programs, their won't be a market for these products.

Also, those Gov't mandates in places like California are going to be under serious consideration for budgetary reduction and elimination. California has a $50 billion budget gap on $100 billion of yearly income.

How long can they pay 4x the going rate for power to subsidies green projects based upon how many billions of dollars per year? It would be easy to knock off 10% of that budget gap by a small cut here or there.

Same thing happened in the early 80s. We all just forgot about it.
Comment 1 of 5
No image available
December 22, 2008
The unemployment rate will come to the rescue of the RE industry. Yes, traditional energy sources are dramatically cheaper. But people need work and the US gov't is poised to intervene with an infrastructure stimulus plan that includes RE.

Also, in the 1980's, we didn't fully appreciate the national security risk of being dependent on foreign oil. And the average Joe had never heard of global warming and would have scoffed at the idea had he known.

It's a different world today, and no short term fluctuation in traditional energy costs is going to derail RE.
Comment 2 of 5
No image available
December 24, 2008
The value and cost associated with energy are complex; green energy has value far beyond the direct cost per KW of replacement of carbon fuel based sources. For example business and manufacturing must forecast long term costs of operations and resources when investment is made in facilities.

We need to challenge our banking and finance originations to be more creative with long term capital and investment as it impacts job and product creation.
Comment 3 of 5
No image available
December 24, 2008
These guys with their negative outlook are pretty good at analyzing the past, but I suspect they are going to be steamrolled by the future. The market will in the long run determine the costs of petroleum production and these costs will rise, and that is undeniable. PV costs will fall, and I suspect that fall is in the rapid stage right now. No one knows where the crossover point will be, but it doesn't take a genious to realize there will be one. All things being equall people will choose PV, because it frees them from the tyranny of taxation, the oil companies, and the power companies, and it is cleaner.
Comment 4 of 5
No image available
December 24, 2008
A shame that a billion or so of this rescue package money that is going into propping up the banks that caused the problem couldn't be used to crack the $1.00US/watt problem. That plus no patents allowed on the developments so that every factory that wanted to could set up production. We would have a paragdime change that would make the shift from hunter-gathering to agriculture look small in comparison.
Comment 5 of 5
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
Magnum Energy Inc. OutBack Power Systems Teledyne RD Instruments ABS Energy Research San Luis Valley Energy Fair Energy Storage Summit
WORLD'S #1 RENEWABLE ENERGY NETWORK
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network Logo