Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Competitive Renewable Energ

  1. #1
    Havakasha is offline

    Competitive Renewable Energ

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/02/op...tive.html?_r=1



    How to Make Renewable Energy Competitive
    By FELIX MORMANN and DAN REICHER
    Published: June 1, 2012

    Renewable energy needs help. Technological innovation has significantly reduced the cost of solar panels, wind turbines and other equipment, but renewable energy still needs serious subsidies to compete with conventional energy. Today, help comes mostly in the form of federal tax breaks.

    These tax incentives, and the Congressional battle over extending them for wind projects beyond the end of this year, mean that other, more powerful policies to promote renewables are not getting the attention they deserve. If renewable energy is going to become fully competitive and a significant source of energy in the United States, then further technological innovation must be accompanied by financial innovation so that clean energy sources gain access to the same low-cost capital that traditional energy sources like coal and natural gas enjoy.

    Two financial mechanisms that have driven investment in traditional energy projects — real estate investment trusts and master limited partnerships — could, with some help from Washington, be extended to renewable energy projects to lower their cost and make America’s energy future cleaner, cheaper — and more democratic.

    Federal support for renewable energy today consists primarily of two tax breaks: tax credits and accelerated depreciation rates. But both tools have a very limited reach. Only investors with hefty tax bills, typically big banks or corporations, can exploit them to reduce their tax burden. Most potential investors, including tax-exempt pension funds and, importantly, retail investors trading stocks, don’t have big enough tax bills to exploit the break. As a result, the few remaining players whose considerable tax bills place them in the market for tax breaks are able to demand returns of up to 30 percent for investing in renewable energy projects — an investment known as “tax equity.”

    There are better options. They may sound wonky, but they could prove revolutionary.

    Real estate investment trusts, or REITs, which are traded publicly like stocks, could tap far broader pools of capital to vastly lower the cost of financing renewable energy. REITs have a market capitalization of over $440 billion while paying shareholders average dividends below 10 percent — roughly a third of the cost of tax equity investments for renewable energy.

    Master limited partnerships carry the fund-raising advantages of a corporation: ownership interests are publicly traded and offer investors the liquidity, limited liability and dividends of classic corporations. Their market capitalization exceeds $350 billion. With average dividends of just 6 percent, these investment vehicles could substantially reduce the cost of financing renewables.

    But current law makes using both of these investment vehicles for renewable energy difficult if not impossible. Washington could help in two ways. First, the Internal Revenue Service needs to clarify the eligibility of renewable power generation for REIT financing. Second, Congress needs to fix a bizarre distinction in the tax code that bars master limited partnerships from investing in “inexhaustible” natural resources like the sun and wind, while allowing investments in exhaustible resources like coal and natural gas. In 2008, as surging gasoline prices were infuriating American voters, Congress amended the tax code to enable master limited partnerships to invest in alternative transportation fuels like ethanol. We should treat power sources, like wind and solar farms, similarly.

    There is hope. Senator Chris Coons, Democrat of Delaware, plans to introduce a bill to allow master limited partnership investment in renewable energy. This approach is preferable to a recent proposal by Senator Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont, and Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota, to eliminate this investment option for fossil-fuel projects. Both moves would level the playing field between conventional and renewable energy, but the Coons bill does so by promoting, rather than limiting, economic growth across the energy industry.


    Keep reading by clicking on link

  2. #2
    Havakasha is offline
    Clean Energy Records SHATTERED in 2011

    http://www.treehugger.com/green-inve...last-year.html

    Business continues to boom in the global clean energy sector: Reuters reports that deals in the solar, wind, and energy efficiency industries netted a record $53.5 billion last year. That's a rather significant 40% from 2010, according to the analysis from PriceWaterHouse Coopers.

    And what's more, total investment in renewable energy broke the record, too: $260 billion was directed to the burgeoning business of clean power. Even more encouraging was the fact that hydro power, which is typically the primary driver in renewable energy portfolio growth, took a deep back seat to wind, solar, and energy efficiency.

    Here's Reuters:

    Historically, hydro power has dominated renewables deal flow, but deals worth $1 billion or more in wind, solar, biomass and energy efficiency have outnumbered hydro by seven to one, the PriceWaterHouse Coopers report said. The renewables market is maturing, fuelling more consolidation ...
    "Sustained high deal numbers and record total value reflect a maturing of the sector," said Paul Nillesen, PwC renewables partner. "The trend is all the more noteworthy given the uncertainty in the market and in government policies on renewables. We believe that deal flow will continue to be significant in the medium term."

    Deals in the solar and efficiency sectors accounted for 79% of the $15 billion spike from last year, due to cheaper PV and the fact that investing in efficiency is a good idea no matter the circumstance or political climate.
    But Nillesen is right: This is remarkable, given that the Eurozone, the biggest economy that generally has strong renewable-friendly policies (other than China), was racked with financial crises last year, and the investment climate was uncertain at best.

    And here in the United States, one of our two major political parties was united in its opposition to clean energy policy, and calling for an end to tax breaks and federal support for renewables. The GOP tried to paint cleantech as a failed liberal fairytale, and attempted to manufacture a scandal-tinged referendum out of Solyndra's bankruptcy. Even though they failed to do so—the public is still overwhelmingly gung-ho about cleantech—it didn't exactly make an encouraging backdrop for companies to cut deals in the clean energy sector.

    Which is why it is indeed "noteworthy" that clean energy investment continues to boom, and that ever-larger deals are being made—the technologies are improving, social demand for more clean power is rising, and, sure, sizable profits are imminent. And that's why investment continues to boom, despite economic turmoil and lagging policy guidance in big markets like the United States—the smart money knows the heyday of clean power is drawing nearer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •