Blog Layout

Article 1: Getting Ready for a Future Where Distributed Energy is Securitized

October 31, 2024

Originally posted on LinkedIn on 30 October 2024

As we rapidly shift towards clean energy, distributed energy resources (DERs) like rooftop solar, energy storage, and EV infrastructure are becoming key players in the energy world. Many of these projects depend on third-party financing, and as they grow, the big question is: how can DER portfolios offer the flexibility and liquidity that institutional investors are looking for?

One solution comes from a method used in other industries—securitization. In this article, we’ll dive into how securitization has helped other asset classes thrive and why it’s set to become a crucial strategy for distributed energy as the market evolves. We’ll also discuss steps investors can take now to prepare their portfolios for future value.


What is Securitization, and Why is it Important?

Securitization involves pooling together assets that generate steady cash flows—like loans or leases—and turning them into securities that investors can buy and sell. This method was first widely used with mortgages, allowing banks to create liquidity and spread risk by selling mortgage-backed securities. Since then, securitization has expanded to include auto loans, student loans, and even renewable energy portfolios.

Securitization does more than just provide liquidity; it gives investors access to alternative asset classes with more predictable returns. For example, solar projects have greatly benefited from securitization by attracting a broader range of capital and speeding up project growth.


Why Securitization is Coming to Distributed Energy?

Distributed energy assets have all the traits of securitizable assets: depending on the commercial structure DER can generate predictable cash flows, involve various end users, and align with the long-term sustainability goals that institutional investors seek. Here’s why DER portfolios will move toward securitization as they grow:

  • Increasing Volume and Market Maturity: The number of DER installations is rising, and as they increase, there will be enough assets to bundle into larger, more liquid portfolios. The industry is also moving towards more standardized contracts, making it easier to securitize these assets.



  • Demand for Liquidity and Flexibility: Early investors in DER projects might find themselves tied to long-term assets in a rapidly changing energy market. Securitization offers a way to package and sell parts of these portfolios, allowing investors to realize returns sooner, manage risk, or redeploy capital.



  • Investor Appetite for Sustainable Investments: Institutional investors are increasingly drawn to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) assets. Securitized DER portfolios offer access to clean energy investments with the added benefit of being structured, relatively lower-risk investments due to the broad distribution of the underlying assets.




The Benefits of Securitization for Distributed Energy Investors

Securitization can offer several compelling benefits for investors in distributed energy portfolios:

  • Liquidity: DER assets typically require long-term commitments, making it hard to adjust or exit positions as market conditions change. Securitization creates liquidity in portfolios, enabling greater flexibility in when and how investors exit or reinvest.



  • Risk Diversification: Securitized portfolios bundle together assets across different locations, customer types, and geographies. This spread helps protect against specific risks, such as regional regulatory shifts or isolated performance issues, offering more stability and reliability.



  • Broader Investor Appeal: Institutional investors often look for structured investment vehicles that reduce complexity. By securitizing DER portfolios, you can tap into a much larger pool of capital and attract institutional investors that might not otherwise consider DER investments.



  • Lower Cost of Capital: Securitized assets that are standardized, rated, and structured as predictable investments often come with a lower cost of capital. Lower financing costs benefit end users by making DER projects more competitive and affordable.




How to Design DER Portfolios for Future Securitization

Setting up a portfolio for securitization requires thoughtful planning from the start. Here are a few essentials for building DER portfolios that are securitization-ready:

  • Standardized Contracts and Agreements: The predictability of cash flows is a foundation of securitization. By using consistent, standardized customer agreements and asset warranties, you make it easier to package these assets into a single, uniform financial product.



  • Data Transparency and Reporting: Investors in securitized assets expect high-quality, consistent data. Adopting robust data management practices will help attract investors and reduce due diligence costs by ensuring transparency about portfolio performance.



  • Diverse Asset Mix: A well-constructed DER portfolio will include a variety of assets across different regions, customer demographics, and asset types. This diversity provides resilience, which is critical for attracting risk-conscious investors.



  • Regulatory Compliance: The energy sector is subject to rapid regulatory changes. Structuring your portfolio with compliance in mind from the beginning can make the securitization process smoother and more attractive to investors looking to avoid regulatory surprises.



  • Forward-Looking Financial Models: To attract investors, portfolios need clear projections for cash flows. Using robust financial models that account for variables like energy price fluctuations or technology improvements can increase investor confidence.




Looking Ahead: Why Early Securitization Matters for DER Portfolios

While some in the industry may argue that distributed energy isn’t quite ready for securitization, the rapid deployment of DER assets suggests otherwise. Early adopters who recognize the value of securitizing DER portfolios stand to gain increased liquidity, flexibility, and access to larger pools of capital.

Designing portfolios with securitization in mind is a forward-thinking approach that can position investors to make the most of future opportunities as the market matures. By preparing portfolios for securitization now, investors can better respond to changes in the market and enhance the value of their assets over time.

Securitizing DER assets won’t just open up new funding options—it will play a critical role in scaling the energy transition, making financing for renewable, distributed assets more liquid, flexible, and resilient.

 

Contact us today at hello@vpppartners.com


Share on...

October 4, 2024
Introducing Malaysia’s Corporate Renewable Energy Supply Scheme (CRESS) Malaysia is taking a significant step towards a greener future with the planned launch of the Corporate Renewable Energy Supply Scheme (CRESS) this September. This initiative, part of the GREENS MADANI Initiative, aims to enhance corporate access to green electricity and support the country’s energy transition goals. What is CRESS? CRESS is a framework designed to allow renewable energy producers and corporate consumers to arrange green electricity supplies through an open grid access model. This means third parties can supply or acquire electricity via the grid network system with a predetermined system access charge. Framework and Parties Involved Under CRESS, renewable energy producers and eligible corporate entities can negotiate and agree on terms for green electricity supply. The Energy Commission will regulate the program, while the Single Buyer (SB) and Grid System Operator (GSO) will manage market and system operations. Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) will continue as the electricity utility supplier, ensuring consistent delivery of electricity.
October 4, 2024
To unlock the full potential of the growing Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) market, it's crucial to correctly assess returns to attract more investment in sustainable energy projects. With the rapid evolution of energy technologies and market dynamics, investors and developers alike face challenges in evaluating risk-adjusted returns, which are essential for securing funding and ensuring the financial success of these ventures. Without accurate and comprehensive assessments, projects risk being underfunded or failing to achieve their intended outcomes, stalling progress in the clean energy transition. Risk-adjusted returns for Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) projects measure the profitability of the investment while accounting for the risks involved. This is crucial because BESS projects can have significant financial and operational risks, such as technology failures, regulatory changes, and market volatility. Key Factors in Risk-Adjusted Returns for BESS Projects Revenue Streams : BESS projects can generate revenue through various means, including energy arbitrage, frequency regulation, and capacity payments. Each revenue stream has its own risk profile. Cost Considerations : Initial capital costs, operational and maintenance costs, and potential costs related to technology failures or safety incidents must be factored in. Market Risks : Fluctuations in energy prices, changes in regulatory policies, and competition from other energy sources can impact returns. Technological Risks : The reliability and lifespan of the battery technology used can affect the project’s financial performance. Incidents like thermal runaways or other failures can lead to significant losses. Financial Metrics : Common metrics used to assess risk-adjusted returns include the Sharpe ratio, which measures the excess return per unit of risk, and the Sortino ratio, which focuses on downside risk. A thorough project-level analysis is essential to accurately assess the financial viability of a BESS project. This includes evaluating technical merits, market conditions, and potential risks to optimise returns and ensure long-term success. How We Can Help At VPP Partners, we specialise in helping companies identify and quantify the risks associated with BESS projects. Our structured approach ensures that all potential risks are thoroughly assessed and managed. Here’s how we can assist: Risk Mapping : Mapping your opportunity against your risk appetite and risk tolerances. Initial Assessment : We conduct preliminary meetings to understand your project’s scope, goals, and context. Risk Identification : Using techniques like brainstorming sessions and expert interviews, we identify risks related to technology, market, finance, and operations. Risk Analysis : We perform qualitative and quantitative risk analysis using tools like Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and decision tree analysis. Risk Quantification : We use statistical models and financial metrics to estimate the cost implications of risks. Risk Mitigation Planning : We develop strategies to mitigate identified risks, including preventive measures, contingency plans, and insurance options. Risk Tracking & Governance : Develop value at risk tracking and controls to ensure operations can be adapted as markets and technology changes. Implementation and Monitoring : We help implement risk mitigation strategies and monitor their effectiveness, ensuring your project stays on track. Reporting and Communication : We prepare regular reports and conduct meetings to keep stakeholders informed about risk management activities and outcomes. By partnering with us, you can ensure that your BESS projects are not only profitable but also resilient to the various risks they may face. Contact us today to learn more about how we can support your energy storage initiatives.
October 4, 2024
In a previous article , we had covered the what the ‘DRAFT National Electricity Amendment (Unlocking CER benefits through flexible trading) Rule 2024’ was proposing, as the final determination was made on the 15th of August, we have decided to revisit the topic and point out any differences to the draft and the proposed timeline of implementation. The proposed live date for what the new rule is proposing is the 2nd November 2026. What are the differences between the final determination and the draft? A few changes and clarifications have been made between the two documents, some of which are from stakeholder feedback, these include: NMI Service Provider Role : Initially, DNSPs were proposed to establish and maintain NMIs. The final determination assigns this role to a new accredited NMI service provider, reducing costs and implementation time. This role is equivalent to an embedded network manager role and would be provided to a contestable party. Large Customer Eligibility: The final rules clarify that large customers can aggregate loads across multiple sites to meet the threshold for flexible trading, which was not explicitly detailed in the draft. De-energisation Rules: The final determination prohibits separate de-energisation of secondary settlement points (SSPs – Secondary Settlement Points) to protect vulnerable consumers, a change from the draft rules. Technical Requirements: Stakeholders provided feedback on metering requirements, such as the need for meters to have alternative data access methods (e.g., smartphone apps) and concerns about flow limits and accuracy. The final determination retains the draft position but incorporates stakeholder feedback to ensure practical implementation this includes ensuring that meters are accurate and capable of handling the required flow limits without compromising performance.  Market Participant Roles : Stakeholders expressed concerns about the complexities of compliance with dynamic operating envelopes and the allocation of tariffs. The final determination addresses these concerns by outlining clear roles and responsibilities for market participants. Timeline of Implementation As this is a fairly big change, there will be different stages of implementation, as such, we have provided a timeline of events below. Please note that the timeline in the ‘Final Determination’ is still a draft and will have to be finalised by the 30th September 2025. Please note that the ‘Final determination’ was a month late, so it is likely the below will be delayed. 15th August 2024 : Final determination made. 29th August 2024 : removal of the requirement for meters to have a visible display (to accommodate in-built meters with displays on an app). 30th September 2025: AEMO guideline and procedure changes. 31st May 2026: arrangements related to type 9 metering. 1st November 2026: arrangements related to meter types 8A and 8B, SSPs, and changes to the NERR and retail contracts (the live date).
Share by: