CEFIA s Effort to Drive Down BoS Costs in Connecticut s Solar Market

Transcription

1 Agrion Solar Finance Task Force Working Group CEFIA s Effort to Drive Down BoS Costs in Connecticut s Solar Market June 24, 2013

2 Connecticut s Green Bank transitioning programs away from government-funded grants, rebates, and other subsidies, and towards deploying private capital CEFIA was established in 2011 to develop programs that will leverage private sector capital to create long-term, sustainable financing for energy efficiency and clean energy to support residential, commercial, and industrial sector implementation of energy efficiency and clean energy measures.

3 Household Solar PV Market What I m Going to Cover: - Residential sector - Driving down customer acquisition costs (two strategies) - Driving down financing costs (three strategies) - Commercial sector - The power of C-PACE - C-PACE in combination with traditional financing strategies

4 Resi Sector Customer Acquisition Costs: Strategy One Solarize Connecticut: - Campaign-style, deadline-driven - Community-based - Tiered discount approach based on aggregation and predetermined kw targets - Installers trade some margin for greatly enhanced volume

5 Resi Sector Customer Acquisition Costs: Strategy One $3.70 $3.61 $3.81 $3.62 Bid Range pricing w/o adders Actual Avg. Price final w/ adders

6 Resi Sector Customer Acquisition Costs: Strategy Two Use technology to drive down acquisition costs: - Think of it as lead generation (just accurate enough) - Integrated soft close with installer and financing - Pay-for-success model

7 Resi Sector Financing: Strategies 1 & 2 Solar Loan / Solar Lease CEFIA CEFIA Holding Company Tax Equity Senior Lender Blocker Corp Banks CT Solar Loan LLC CT Solar Lease 2 LLC Lease/PPA Payments Homeowners Loan Payments Homeowners Equipment Installs Solar PV Installers Solar PV & SHW Installers Equipment Installs Towns & schools A businesses

8 Resi Sector Financing: Strategies 1 & 2 Solar Loan / Solar Lease Solar Loan: - 15-year loan to homeowner, no home equity required, priced at 6.49% and requiring a reamortization of the loan via the ITC - Strategy: allow homeowners to benefit from the wealth creation of solar ownership; turn solar into a secured product from the point of view of an investor by carefully managing LTV (including both the value of the hardware and future cash flows) Solar Lease: - One key innovation is the syndicate of regional banks providing debt financing this both lowers the cost of capital now, and helps get them comfortable with the asset so as to encourage them to become tax equity providers next time

9 Resi Sector Financing: Strategy 3 Smart-E Loan Comprehensive list of eligible measures and eligible contractors Robust QA/QC Process Private Capital More Energy Savings Quick Simple Affordable Any measure (or combination) that qualifies for CEFIA, utility or CEEF incentive or rebate qualifies Any contractor already qualified by CEFIA, utilities, CEEF, CHIF or BPI is eligible 20% of total amount financed can be used for related, nonenergy measures like asbestos remediation or roof repair First 10 proposals by lead contractor inspected by CEFIA or utility After 10 inspections passed in a row, random inspections Not to exceed rates: 5-yr 4.49% 7-yr 4.99% 10-yr 5.99% 12-yr 6.99% No prepayment penalty Loans of $3,000-$25,000+

10 Resi Sector Financing: Strategy 3 Smart-E Loan

11 $ Commercial Sector Financing: The Power of C-PACE C-PACE Capital Provider Note: Mortgage holder must give consent for C-PACE benefit assessment to be applied to property Property Owner (to pay project developer / contractor) Lien CEFIA $ Municipality

12 Commercial Sector Financing: C-PACE + PPA

13 Tax $$ CEFIA: Provides conduit for repayment of principal and interest to capital provider. Closing and underwriting fees $$ Financing repayment $$ FOR PROFIT / NFP (Solar installed and owned by others): Cash flow, risks and benefits to a for-profit entity arising from Solar PACE installation by a solar developer and tax equity investor (PPA). True Up $$ Risks: For-profit / NFP default CAPITAL PROVIDER: Provides construction financing to PV developer/ tax investor and holds security interest in cash flows and PV equipment Benefits: Security of a tax lien; new product for current customers; profitable interest rate See note bottom of page True Up $$ Risks: Solar system underperforms and maintenance costs exceed budget Construction & installation $$ SOLAR PV DEVELOPER & TAX EQUITY INVESTOR: Installs & owns the solar panels & equipment. Also provides electricity, performance guarantee & the service/maintenance contract (PPA) Benefits: Grows business thru PACE financing; may receive: tax credits; income from sale of ZRECs kwh Service & Maintenance Tax $$ True Up $$ Risks: Energy savings do not exceed tax assessment FOR PROFIT / NFP BLDG OWNER: Agrees to a service and maintenance contract with solar developer and to a multi-year tax assessment to acquire benefits from a Solar PV system Benefits: $$ savings in energy minus the tax assessment is cash positive to for-profit Property Tax Bill Tax $$ Risks: For-profit / NFP fails to pay assessment MUNICIPALITY: Establishes tax assessment and collects semi-annual assessment payments Benefits: Carbon footprint is reduced; contributes to Clean Energy Community goals Tax $$ True up $$ represent payments made between the affected parties to reflect energy production changes that exceed or fall short of agreed upon targets

14 Key Insights - Financing alone is not enough innovative approaches to drive demand are critical to build this market, and lower costs - Public sector can play a significant role in stimulating demand private sector can deploy these same strategies - Credit enhancements can leverage lower cost capital experience with the asset class should keep financing costs down once credit enhancements disappear

15 New York follows Connecticut s lead The New York Green Bank would overcome a number of obstacles and uncertainties in the clean energy sector, including unstable federal funding and policy, uncoordinated action and disparate one-time subsidies at the state level, a lack of appropriate financial instruments, and apprehension in the investor community.