The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search

What Happens When the Incentives Expire?

Bruce Hamilton, Director of Energy, Navigant Consulting, Inc.
May 17, 2011  |  16 Comments

Print

Wind projects, along with other renewable energy technologies, have benefitted in a variety of ways from federal incentive programs. The Section 1603 cash grant program, the Department of Energy Section 1705 Loan Guarantee program and the Bonus Depreciation schedule are among the federal programs that are scheduled to expire by the end of 2012. The Production Tax Credit (PTC) and Investment Tax Credit (ITC) are also scheduled to expire for wind projects at the end of 2012. In today's budget-cutting environment, it's possible that none of these incentives will be renewed.

The Section 1603 cash grant has been a popular and successful program and is generally credited for keeping the U.S. wind industry healthy during the 2009-2010 recession1. Since the program was initiated in 2009 through the first quarter of 2011, $5.6 billion in cash grants has been awarded for wind projects, representing more than 80 percent of all Section 1603 funding to date.

The DOE Section 1705 loan guarantee program has a current allocation of $2.5 billion that can support up to $30 billion of loan guarantees. As of April 2011, three wind plants have received commitments for loan guarantees totaling $1.5 billion, including $1.3 billion for Caithness's 845 MW Shepherd's Flat project.

Under the federal Modified Accelerated Cost-Recovery System (MACRS), wind and other renewable energy properties are classified as five-year property for depreciation purposes. Eligible property placed in service after Sept. 8, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2012 qualifies for 100 percent first-year bonus depreciation, meaning that 100 percent of the project cost can be expensed in the first year. For 2012, a 50 percent bonus depreciation is still available. After Dec. 31, 2012, the allowable deduction reverts to the original five-year MACRS recovery. The value of the 100 percent bonus is estimated to be 40 percent of the value of the Section 1603 cash grant.

To determine the impact of the pending expiration of these programs, Navigant calculated the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) for a 100 MW wind plant in various time frames with the following project finance structures:

  • Case 1. Circa 2008, using the PTC, equity from the project sponsor (20 percent), and a tax equity partnership flip (80 percent).2
  • Case 2. Circa 2011, using the cash grant (30 percent), equity from the project sponsor (20 percent), a DOE loan guarantee (40 percent) and a private loan (10 percent). 3
  • Case 3. Circa 2013, using the PTC, equity from the project sponsor (20 percent) and a tax equity partnership flip (80 percent), assuming that the PTC will be renewed.4
  • Case 4. Circa 2013, using the project sponsor's equity (70 percent) and a private loan (30 percent), assuming that the PTC is not renewed.5

Navigant also calculated the range of LCOE prices from natural gas fired power plants during these same time periods.6 The results of the four cases are shown in the graph.

The case studies show that wind plants are competitive with gas plants in Cases 1 and 2, which is consistent with the fact that many utilities have installed wind plants well in excess of their Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements. In comparing Cases 1 and 2, the combined effect of the cash grant and the DOE loan guarantee cuts the cost of a wind farm nearly in half. In comparing Cases 1 and 3, increased return requirements from tax equity investors are a significant factor in driving wind LCOEs higher. In comparing the wind plant LCOEs of Cases 3 and 4 with their corresponding gas plant LCOEs, wind will not be competitive with gas in 2013, either with or without the PTC. Plenty of wind plants will still be built, but with the current cost structures in place and unless federal incentives are renewed or replaced, post-2012 U.S. wind markets will be driven primarily by RPS requirements rather than competing head-to-head with gas projects.

Bruce Hamilton (left) is Director of Energy at Navigant Consulting, Inc.


Footnotes

1. According to the DOE's Preliminary Evaluation of the Impact of the Section 1603 Treasury Grant Program on Renewable Energy Deployment in 2009 (Bolinger, Wiser, and Darghouth, April 2010), the grant program may have helped directly motivate as much as 2,400 MW of wind capacity to be built that would not otherwise have come online in 2009.

2. Case 1 assumes a 6% annual return for tax equity investors, which was typical in 2008 when there were plenty of investors compared to the number of quality projects. The wind plant capital cost is assumed to be $2,000/kW for all cases.

3. Case 2 assumes a 2011 cost of debt of 4%/year plus a 2.5% up-front fee. The cost of tax equity is currently 9%/year, plus a 3% premium for projects with debt. Only Case 2 assumes bonus depreciation.

4. Case 3 assumes a 9% annual return for tax equity investors in 2013. If the number of tax equity investors does not significantly increase and new structures do not appear, the cost of tax equity will remain at the elevated 2011 levels.

5. Case 4 assumes that the cost of project debt in 2013 will follow inflation and return to 2008 levels of 6%/year plus a 2.5% up-front fee.

6. Natural gas prices are assumed to be $3.48 to $4.91/MMBtu in 2011 and $4.14 to $5.75/MMBtu in 2013.



16 Comments

Register To Comment
Wendell Ellison
Wendell Ellison
May 31, 2011
Arno,I fully agree with you - the facts are there, but the general public is not "there". Our leaders don't help when they provide superficial, unrealistic policy talking points that don't go deep enough.

There is a reason why the renewable metric is often in terms of "Barrels of oil equivalent". When that $5/gallon gasoline pays a visit and stays, it will probably be a different story. People listen, think and vote with their pocketbook.
Barry Stevens
Barry Stevens
May 30, 2011
Bruce,

Is it not true the real driver is a meaningful compliance penalty?

Barry
Steve Poppitz
Steve Poppitz
May 29, 2011
Great response to an OK article. Let's thank our European friends for being the early adaptors of PV and utility scale wind, and jump on board. Ask your state and local representatives why they haven't done more to enact legislation to ; A) Waive building permit fees for solar (and renewables) installations. B) Installation of solar and other renewables on municipally owned buildings. C) Hopefully enactment of Feed-In-Tariffs D)anything else that pushes the green agenda.
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 21, 2011
Dave, maybe you can get access here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=B0t-ode0he8C&dq=hydrogen+society&source=gbs_navlinks_s
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 21, 2011
Dave, that is true, more education on renewables in indeed need.
Many people have not the slightest idea, and they are discussing things they don`t really know.
Why not sart here, at our independend and unbisased information graphics on energy, which we have all reserched ourselves over years:
http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/energy-images.html
Also our fifty EnergyIdeas my be food for thought:
http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/background/arnos-energy-ideas.php
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 21, 2011
WEllison, the facts are already there:
Today`s efficiency in ALL productions of electricty is at 31%
Today`s efficiency in ALL transport services is at 25%.
What more do we want and need.
All figures from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
(DOE), related to the energy balance in the US in 2009, here:
https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/
Once, these facts and figures are understood, we all should know, wehere to start now:
Commit ourselves to a truly genuine, decentralized, dedicated and small-scale energy system.

With this, I mean that the energy is only to be converted where it is actually needed. Not even a single (old or new) nuclear, coal or gas power plant would be needed to supply the energy actually required globally. But all this is achievable only if the renewable sources are used "by their nature", depending on local existing renewable sources of energy.

They have to be used locally within a maximum radius of 15 kilometers. Requiring only small storage capacity, these autonomous units can therefore also be utilized to cover all transportation services, too. The necessary facilities should in each case be used and operated locally and above all, they have be owned by the consumers.

This structure would changes the consumer behavior in households, SME`s industry and transport automatically in the right direction. The savings will be based on the close relationship of converting and using power independently.

That`s what I also wrote to then German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and all members of the Ethics Comittee Secure Energy Supply, see here:
http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/aae/open-letter.html
Wendell Ellison
Wendell Ellison
May 20, 2011
There always seems to be a convenient reason why the U.S. can't agressively and methodically pursure fossil fuel independence (foreign at least); relative low cost of fossil fuels - excuse when times are good, and a loss of traditional fossil fuel jobs and/or the pursuit of more pressing priorities - when times are not so good. All the while, China's wind industry (one example of many) has uncermoniously overtaken ours. We need a real, effective and sustainable energy policy based on facts and not political jargon - ASAP.
Patrick O'Leary
Patrick O'Leary
May 19, 2011
Whenever the magic money for PV, CSP and Wind dry up the attention shifts back toward the more prosaic SWH, multiple benefit systems and daylighting. The hoopla is always about the magic money.

Meanwhile, SWH, multiple benefit systems and daylighting toil away in the vineyard, getting better and better with each passing day. PV/Thermal is one such system as is building integrated PV. Futura Solar has them both beat with 4.2 benefits for low profile buildings that have no siting issues, collector surface and a ready customer on the other side of the roof.
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 19, 2011
We have also be rather careful with goal setting. If you hear a percentage of 20% or 30% or 50%, you should immediate ask three questions:
Of what? What are the 100%? And in which timespan have the goals be reached? In the case of renewable energies you have also to ask: Which lobby is behind the goals, who are driving them?
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 19, 2011
To my understanding, everything must be designed and produced clever enough, that "it" will find it`s own market on it`s own. This applies also to the utilization of renewable energies of all kinds. There is in fact much more to come, however, it will look much different from what we see and know today! This is a global challenge, with a great perspective. I am thankful to everybody, who is taking up the lead here. Power to the People.
Yj Draiman
Yj Draiman
May 18, 2011
Renewable energy sources

What people fail to understand is. As renewable energy systems matures and progress, mass produced, it will become more competitive and more efficient.
Look at the advancement that has been accomplished the past 8 years.

Incentive must apply only to products totally manufactured in the United States.

This will also create more jobs and bring additional revenues.

We also must realize.

"It is cheaper to save energy than make energy".


ENERGY EFFICIENCY IMPLEMENTATION IS CRUCIAL TO OUR ECONOMY.

YJ Draiman, Energy/Utility Auditor
Anne McElroy
Anne McElroy
May 18, 2011
Who knows what will happen. Either necessity of current oil prices will incur private investment (slowly), or they will sputter and go into a hold pattern.

I agree with EnergySavers2. Why are we, in light of Gulf Oil spill and Japan crisis, still funding conventional technologies while cutting funds for renewables. Makes absolutely no common sense. It certainly is not as though Exxon Mobil is suffering from poor profits.

It burns me that so many people, without knowing facts, emphatically state numerous reasons why renewables are not feasible and that they "only" are around in their existing forms due to subsidies. Far from it. I am also disappointed that the homeowners and business incentive programs under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 are being scaled back.

Given, the federal budget and many state budgets are in a sorry shape. However, again: why are we cutting back on what I see to be sound investments in the future while still handing out cash to super-profitable oil companies. (Rhetorical answer, I know the answer, still aggravating.)

I wrote this article just before they announced cutbacks to homeowners program, and had to rewrite it. I just wish people would realize that if ALL people had the gumption to contact their senators and congressmen/women, that the total group of "regular folks" would be seen as a bloc to be dealt with on an equal footing with the special interests. Too many people blog and Beatch and Moan instead of shooting an email to their representatives.

http://www.solarflairlighting.com/concerned-about-rising-energy-costs/
Arno A. Evers
Arno A. Evers
May 18, 2011
A very good question. Please let me add another one here:
Have you ever heard of incentives for cellular phones?
Here you can see the sales figures from NOKIA
from 1984 through 2009:
http://www.hydrogenambassadors.com/background/nokia-mobile-phone-sales.php
Please compare them with the Implemenation of any Renewable Energie of your choice. Thank you
Yj Draiman
Yj Draiman
May 18, 2011
Take the tax benefits and incentives given to the Oil industry and give it to renewables

Obama called for cutting over $4 billion in yearly in tax breaks for big oil companies.

'We need to get behind this innovation,' Obama said during his speech. 'And to help pay for it, I'm asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don't know if you've noticed, but they're doing just fine on their own.'

It's true that the oil companies are doing quite well on their own. In 2010 Exxon Mobil (XOM, Fortune 500), Royal Dutch Shell (RDSA), BP (BP), Chevron (CVX, Fortune 500) and ConocoPhillips (COP, Fortune 500) made a combined profit of $76 billion.

And that was a so-so year. In 2007 they made $124 billion.

'It's a mature, extremely profitable industry,' said Seth Hanlon, director of fiscal reform at the Center for American Progress, the left-leaning think tank. Putting those tax breaks into renewables is 'a much smarter way of using the resources we dedicate to our energy future.'

There are nine tax breaks the administration is targeting, according to a Center paper, but four account for the lion's share of the money.

Domestic manufacturing tax deduction: This is the largest single tax break, and would save over $1.7 billion a year if eliminated.

The percentage depletion allowance: This lets oil companies deduct about 15% of the money generated from a well from its taxes. Eliminating it would save about $1 billion a year.

The foreign tax credit: This provision gives companies a credit for any taxes they pay to other countries. Altering this tax credit would save about $850 million a year.

Intangible drilling costs: This lets the industry write off about $780 million a year for things like wages, fuel, repairs and hauling costs.

A royalty would be deducted as a cost of doing business, and would likely shave about 30% off a company's tax bill. Categorized as income tax, it is 100% deductible.
V. Bruce Stenswick
V. Bruce Stenswick
May 18, 2011
We need to do what UK just did, set a goal of 50% reduction in GHG by 2025.
Glenn Doty
Glenn Doty
May 17, 2011
These prices are all significantly inflated.

There are VERY few wind projects that cost $2/W anymore, and none go up without significant state incentives. Modern costs are closer to installed $1.6/W, or 80% of your projections.

Furthermore, you didn't specify the projected capacity factor that was used here... but it's clearly pretty low. Capacity factors are increasing with hub height, so if you are using a 25% capacity factor then that is unsupportable. Capacity factors of 32-35% are more probable - at least before curtailment is considered.

Otherwise, this was a very informative discussion. Thank you.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create an Account!
  • Sign-In
Renewable Energy World (North America Edition) Magazine

This magazine is no longer being published as of May 1, 2012. To subscribe to similar renewable energy content click here. Or, subscribe to our worldwide Renewable Energy World magazine digital edition here. From May 2012, Renewable Energy...

  • Archives
  • About
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • Residential Demand Spurs US Solar Installations in 1Q13 Residential Demand Spurs US Solar Installations in 1Q13
  • Ocean Energy Development: Apply Common Sense to Common Problems Ocean Energy Development: Apply Common Sense to Common Problems
  • Severn Barrage “No Knight in Shining Armour for UK Renewables” Severn Barrage “No Knight in Shining Armour for UK Renewables”
  • Project Permit: Cutting Red Tape for Green Energy Project Permit: Cutting Red Tape for Green Energy
  • Solar CHP Innovations Offer Efficiency Kick, Future Energy Storage Options Solar CHP Innovations Offer Efficiency Kick, Future Energy Storage Options

Most Commented

  • 9
    Country-Based Action to Achieve Universal Access to Energy
  • 4
    California Energy Storage Plan May Require $3 Billion Investment
  • 2
    Is the IRS Considering Solar REITs?
  • 2
    Sir Richard Branson unleashes Plan B for the planet

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Black & Veatch Corporation
  • The Stella Group, Ltd.
  • ExxonMobil Lubricants & Specialties Europe
  • Associated Renewable
  • SolarEstimate.org
  • Active Communications International
  • Chaloux Environmental Communications, Inc. (CEC)
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hydro Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information