Fabricación y cadena de suministro, Normativa y políticas, Perspectivas

Parte 1: Errores que deben evitar los prestamistas y aseguradores de energía solar fotovoltaica

Written by

A man and a women sitting next to each other

A lo largo de los más de 30 años que ARRAY lleva trabajando en el sector fotovoltaico a gran escala, hemos sido testigos de importantes cambios en el mercado de la energía solar. A medida que el mercado se expande con activos fotovoltaicos, cada vez más prestamistas e inversores ven el potencial de financiación de estos proyectos.

Teniendo en cuenta que se trata de proyectos multimillonarios, es sorprendente la cantidad de suposiciones que todavía pueden introducirse en la planificación de muchos proyectos solares. Garantizar un rendimiento rentable requiere una evaluación cuidadosa de los riesgos y evitar las dificultades más comunes.

En esta serie de blogs de tres partes, analizaremos estos riesgos para los prestamistas. También hablaremos con las aseguradoras sobre cómo mitigar el riesgo al suscribir proyectos.

Para ello:

  1. Abordaremos los escollos más comunes y las soluciones para mitigarlos de forma realista.
  2. Examinaremos la evolución del mercado solar a lo largo del tiempo en relación con estos riesgos y lo que está ocurriendo en el mercado actual, y
  3. Discutiremos por qué los seguidores son críticos para el perfil de riesgo y dando una visión práctica sobre el diseño y la adquisición de un terreno solar óptimo.

 

Riesgos para los activos fotovoltaicos y en la gestión de los activos a largo plazo

Algunos riesgos se solapan entre categorías para prestamistas y aseguradoras. Entre los seis principales escollos de la inversión en proyectos solares se encuentran:

  1. Riesgos técnicos,
  2. riesgos de construcción,
  3. el cambio climático,
  4. la responsabilidad de la garantía,
  5. los precios de los PPA y la presión de los costes, y
  6. la innovación tecnológica.

 

Riesgos técnicos

Para obtener un buen rendimiento de la inversión, el coste nivelado de la energía (LCOE) es una preocupación primordial. Las consideraciones para el LCOE implican muchos aspectos técnicos del proyecto, incluidos los costes asociados a los gastos de capital (CAPEX) y los gastos operativos (OPEX), la vida útil del proyecto, la degradación de la producción de energía a lo largo del tiempo y la estimación del rendimiento.

La viabilidad de cada proyecto está ligada a la evaluación precisa de cada uno de estos elementos técnicos teniendo en cuenta el impacto financiero.

TÜV publicó un informe en Science Direct el año pasado en el que revelaba que el 30% de las plantas fotovoltaicas que investigaron presentaban defectos, y que el 50% de ellos se debían a errores de instalación. El aumento del uso de materiales de baja calidad y las malas prácticas de instalación significan que es fundamental realizar la debida diligencia en cuanto a la fiabilidad de los equipos, la selección de los proveedores, la elección de los componentes del proyecto y la correcta instalación.

Hablaremos más sobre la evaluación de las pruebas y el rendimiento de los componentes en la siguiente parte de esta serie de blogs, “Evaluación de los riesgos históricos y actuales del mercado para los prestamistas y aseguradores de energía solar fotovoltaica“.

 

Riesgos de construcción

Los intereses del prestamista y del asegurador se solapan aquí. Los plazos, los costes y el rendimiento del proyecto confluyen en la fase de construcción. Hay que controlar los costes, evitar los retrasos y las interrupciones y garantizar la calidad.

Durante la construcción, hay más posibilidades de que se produzcan daños en los equipos o lesiones en las personas. Tanto los inversores como las aseguradoras quieren evitar estos problemas de responsabilidad.

Los prestamistas pueden proteger su inversión añadiendo a los contratos los seguros de responsabilidad civil adecuados. Las aseguradoras confían más en el proyecto que suscriben cuando está impulsado por inversores y promotores que cumplen las normas de calidad y seguridad.

 

Cambio climático

Los fenómenos meteorológicos globales, cada vez más frecuentes y extremos, afectan a ambas partes de la dinámica entre financiador y asegurador. Estas catástrofes repercuten en la construcción y el funcionamiento de las plantas fotovoltaicas, perjudicando o deteniendo la rentabilidad de los inversores y provocando potencialmente importantes desembolsos de los seguros. Ya hemos visto documentación de numerosas instalaciones fotovoltaicas muy dañadas e incluso completamente destruidas por huracanes.

Un clima más intenso y dañino también supone un riesgo de imprevisibilidad, lo que hace que los emplazamientos fotovoltaicos sean más difíciles de evaluar para los aseguradores. Las aseguradoras se inclinan por la precaución en el caso de los proyectos más propensos al riesgo, lo que a su vez conlleva unos costes de seguro más elevados.

Algunas compañías ofrecen ahora seguros a gran escala que cubren los fenómenos meteorológicos y otros riesgos operativos estándar.

Aunque ningún equipo es a prueba de fallos, los proyectos de éxito a largo plazo se construyen con componentes resistentes a condiciones meteorológicas extremas, construidos para soportar condiciones intensas. Esta es la mejor protección contra los daños, el tiempo de inactividad y los pagos. Más información sobre este tema en la entrada nº 3 de esta serie de blogs para prestamistas y aseguradoras: “Por qué los seguidores fotovoltaicos son un componente crítico de un perfil de riesgo para los prestamistas y aseguradores de energía solar fotovoltaica”.

 

Garantías financieras

Los fabricantes de productos ofrecen garantías que cubren el mal funcionamiento de los equipos o su rendimiento por debajo de un determinado nivel. Sin embargo, es importante verificar (antes de que surja cualquier problema) que el seguro de la propiedad cubre los problemas fuera de la cobertura o el plazo de la garantía.

Otro posible escollo es contar con la garantía de un fabricante de componentes, que queda inutilizada en caso de que la empresa garante se declare en quiebra o abandone el mercado. Por desgracia, esto ya es algo habitual en el sector de la energía solar fotovoltaica, ya que hay muchas garantías que ya no están en vigor.

Verificar que el fabricante tiene un seguro de respaldo o adquirir un seguro de garantía adicional corresponde a los financiadores. También las aseguradoras harían bien en cerciorarse de que esta posible brecha de cobertura está cerrada.

 

Precios de los PPA y presión de los costes

La reducción de los precios del mercado mayorista y la evolución del entorno normativo están aumentando la presión para que los promotores sigan siendo competitivos. La correspondiente disminución de los precios de los PPA erosiona los rendimientos para los inversores.

El informe del índice de precios de los PPA del primer trimestre de 2020 de LevelTen marcó una caída del 0,9% en los precios de los PPA solares del primer trimestre de 2019 al primer trimestre de 2020. El informe del segundo trimestre de 2020 informó de que el 8% de los desarrolladores de proyectos preveían una nueva caída de los precios de los PPA en respuesta al Fondo de la UE Next Generation.

Los inversores pueden cubrir estos riesgos aumentando la tasa de rendimiento mínima esperada y optimizando la producción de energía. Dado que la reducción de los precios de los PPA ha reducido esencialmente el valor de cada unidad de energía producida, hay menos espacio para los déficits de rendimiento. La necesidad de producir niveles máximos de energía será más importante que nunca.

Otro paso sería solicitar un seguro de producción solar (SPI). Este seguro especializado calcula la producción de kWh de los proyectos solares (incluidos los PPA) y aborda el riesgo de bajo rendimiento tanto para los compradores de energía como para los inversores.

 

Innovación tecnológica

El desarrollo de instalaciones y componentes con menos piezas móviles e interconexiones complejas está en auge. Esto ayuda a reducir los puntos de fallo en el sistema. Las nuevas tecnologías, como los módulos bifaciales, también resultan atractivas para los desarrolladores.

Aunque esto es bueno, está aumentando el número de solicitudes de repotenciación o readaptación de emplazamientos solares relativamente jóvenes. Lo mejor es sopesar el valor de la reconversión frente a su coste y conocer a fondo las necesidades de desgravación fiscal antes de repotenciar.

 

Análisis de los riesgos

Los prestamistas y las aseguradoras del sector se sienten presionados para perfeccionar y mejorar el análisis de riesgos, a fin de evitar pagos inesperados de primas de seguros o la falta de producción de energía. Estos problemas provocan el impago de las cuotas a los prestamistas y financiadores.

Para saber más sobre cómo el cambiante mercado de la energía solar está haciendo que la evaluación de riesgos sea más complicada y valiosa, véase la parte 2, Evaluación de riesgos del mercado histórico y actual.

Click here for other articles by this author
Fabricação e Cadeia de Suprimentos, Perspectivas, Regulamentação e Política

Part 1: Pitfalls to Avoid for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers

Written by

A man and a women sitting next to each other

Throughout ARRAY’s 30-plus years in utility-scale PV, we’ve seen major shifts in the solar energy market. As the market currently expands with utility-scale PV assets, more and more lenders and investors are seeing the potential in funding these projects.

Considering that these are multi-million-dollar endeavors, it’s remarkable the amount of guesswork that can still sneak into the planning of many solar projects. Ensuring a profitable return requires a careful assessment of risks and avoiding common pitfalls.

In this three-part blog series, we’ll look at these risks for lenders. We’ll also speak to insurers about mitigating risk when underwriting projects.

We’ll do this by :

  1. Addressing common pitfalls and solutions on how to realistically mitigate them
  2. Examining the solar market evolution over time relating to these risks and what’s happening in the current market, and
  3. Discussing why trackers are critical to risk profile and giving practical insight into design and procurement for an optimal solar site

 

Risks to PV assets and in long-term asset management

Some risks overlap across categories for lenders and insurers. Six major solar project investment pitfalls include: 

  1. technical risks,
  2. construction risks,
  3. climate change,
  4. warranty liability,
  5. PPA prices and cost pressures, and
  6. utility-scale technology innovation.

 

Technical risks

For a good return on investment, the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) is a primary concern. Considerations for LCOE involve many technical aspects of the project, including costs associated with capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX), the project’s lifespan, energy production degradation over time, and yield estimation.

The bankability of each project is tied to accurately assessing each of these technical inputs with financial impact in mind.

TÜV released a report in Science Direct last year revealing that 30% of the PV power plants they investigated showed defects, and 50% of those defects were caused by installation errors. An increase in the use of low-quality materials and poor installation practices mean that performing due diligence into reliable equipment, vendor selection, project component choices, and proper installation is critical.

We’ll talk more about assessing component testing and performance in the next part of this blog series, “Historic and Current Market Risk Assessment for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers.”

 

Construction risks

Lender and insurer interests overlap here. Project timelines, costs, and performance all coalesce under the construction phase. Costs must be kept in check, delays and incompletion must be avoided, and quality assurance is everything.

During construction, there’s a higher potential chance of damage to equipment or injury to people. Both investors and insurers want to avoid these liability issues.

Lenders can protect their investment by adding the appropriate liability insurances into contracts. Insurers are more confident in the project they’re underwriting when it’s driven by investors and developers who are concordant with quality and safety standards.

 

Climate change 

More frequent and extreme global weather events affect both sides of the financier/insurer dynamic. These disasters impact the construction and operation of PV plants, hurting or halting investor returns and potentially causing sizeable insurance payouts. We have already seen documentation of numerous PV power plants heavily damaged and even completely destroyed by hurricanes.

More intense and damaging weather also poses an unpredictability risk, making PV sites more difficult for underwriters to assess. Insurers lean on the side of caution for more risk-prone projects, which in turn leads to higher insurance costs.

Some companies now offer utility-scale insurance covering weather events and other standard operational risks.

While no equipment is fail-safe, successful long-term projects are built with extreme weather resilient components built to withstand intense conditions. This is the best hedge against damage, downtime, and payouts. More on this in post #3 of this blog series for lenders and insurers: “Why PV Trackers Are a Critical Component of a Risk Profile for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers.” 

 

Warranty bankability

Product manufacturers offer warranties that cover equipment malfunction or performance drops below a certain level. However, it’s important to verify (before any issues arise) that the property insurance covers problems outside the warranty coverage or timeframe.

Another potential pitfall is counting on a component manufacturer’s warranty made useless should the guaranteeing company claim bankruptcy or exit the market. This is unfortunately already a common occurrence in the solar PV industry, as there are many warranties that are no longer in effect.

Verifying that the manufacturer has an insurance backup or acquiring additional warranty insurance is incumbent upon financiers. Insurers too, would be wise to make sure this potential coverage gap is closed.

 

PPA prices and cost pressures

Wholesale market price reductions and regulatory environment evolution is increasing pressure for developers to stay competitive. The corresponding decrease in PPA prices erodes returns for investors.

The Q1 2020 LevelTen PPA price index report marked a 0.9% drop in solar PPA prices from Q1 2019 to Q1 2020. The Q2 2020 report reported that 8% of project developers anticipated a further drop in PPA prices in response to the Next Generation EU Fund.

Investors can hedge these risks by increasing the minimum expected rate of return and optimizing energy production. Since the reduction in PPA prices has essentially reduced the value of each unit of energy produced, there is less room for performance shortfalls. The need to produce maximum energy levels will matter more than ever.

Another step would be to ask for solar production insurance (SPI). This specialized insurance calculates the kWh output of solar projects (including PPAs) and addresses underperformance risk for both energy buyers and investors.

 

Utility-scale technology innovation

Developing plants and components with fewer moving parts and complex interconnections is on the rise. This helps reduce failure points in the system. New technology, such as bifacial modules, is also alluring for developers.

While this is a good thing, it’s increasing the number of requests for repowering or retrofitting relatively young solar sites. The best course of action is to weigh the value of a retrofit vs. the cost and to thoroughly understand tax-deductibility needs before repowering.

 

Risk analysis refinement

Lenders and insurers in the space are feeling pressure to refine and improve risk analysis to avoid unexpectedly high payouts in insurance premiums or shortfall in energy production. These issues lead to a default on installments to lenders and financiers.

For more on how the changing utility solar market is making risk assessment more complicated and valuable, see part 2, Historic and Current Market Risk Assessment. 

Click here for other articles by this author
Manufacturing & Supply Chain, Perspectives, Regulation & Policy

Part 1: Pitfalls to Avoid for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers

Written by

A man and a woman sitting next to each other discussing over a document

Throughout ARRAY’s 30-plus years in utility-scale PV, we’ve seen major shifts in the solar energy market. As the market currently expands with utility-scale PV assets, more and more lenders and investors are seeing the potential in funding these projects.

Considering that these are multi-million-dollar endeavors, it’s remarkable the amount of guesswork that can still sneak into the planning of many solar projects. Ensuring a profitable return requires a careful assessment of risks and avoiding common pitfalls.

In this three-part blog series, we’ll look at these risks for lenders. We’ll also speak to insurers about mitigating risk when underwriting projects.

We’ll do this by :

  1. Addressing common pitfalls and solutions on how to realistically mitigate them
  2. Examining the solar market evolution over time relating to these risks and what’s happening in the current market, and
  3. Discussing why trackers are critical to risk profile and giving practical insight into design and procurement for an optimal solar site

 

Risks to PV assets and in long-term asset management

Some risks overlap across categories for lenders and insurers. Six major solar project investment pitfalls include: 

  1. technical risks,
  2. construction risks,
  3. climate change,
  4. warranty liability,
  5. PPA prices and cost pressures, and
  6. utility-scale technology innovation.

 

Technical risks

For a good return on investment, the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) is a primary concern. Considerations for LCOE involve many technical aspects of the project, including costs associated with capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operational expenditure (OPEX), the project’s lifespan, energy production degradation over time, and yield estimation.

The bankability of each project is tied to accurately assessing each of these technical inputs with financial impact in mind.

TÜV released a report in Science Direct last year revealing that 30% of the PV power plants they investigated showed defects, and 50% of those defects were caused by installation errors. An increase in the use of low-quality materials and poor installation practices mean that performing due diligence into reliable equipment, vendor selection, project component choices, and proper installation is critical.

We’ll talk more about assessing component testing and performance in the next part of this blog series, “Historic and Current Market Risk Assessment for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers.”

 

Construction risks

Lender and insurer interests overlap here. Project timelines, costs, and performance all coalesce under the construction phase. Costs must be kept in check, delays and incompletion must be avoided, and quality assurance is everything.

During construction, there’s a higher potential chance of damage to equipment or injury to people. Both investors and insurers want to avoid these liability issues.

Lenders can protect their investment by adding the appropriate liability insurances into contracts. Insurers are more confident in the project they’re underwriting when it’s driven by investors and developers who are concordant with quality and safety standards.

 

Climate change 

More frequent and extreme global weather events affect both sides of the financier/insurer dynamic. These disasters impact the construction and operation of PV plants, hurting or halting investor returns and potentially causing sizeable insurance payouts. We have already seen documentation of numerous PV power plants heavily damaged and even completely destroyed by hurricanes.

More intense and damaging weather also poses an unpredictability risk, making PV sites more difficult for underwriters to assess. Insurers lean on the side of caution for more risk-prone projects, which in turn leads to higher insurance costs.

Some companies now offer utility-scale insurance covering weather events and other standard operational risks.

While no equipment is fail-safe, successful long-term projects are built with extreme weather resilient components built to withstand intense conditions. This is the best hedge against damage, downtime, and payouts. More on this in post #3 of this blog series for lenders and insurers: “Why PV Trackers Are a Critical Component of a Risk Profile for Utility-Scale PV Solar Lenders and Insurers.” 

 

Warranty bankability

Product manufacturers offer warranties that cover equipment malfunction or performance drops below a certain level. However, it’s important to verify (before any issues arise) that the property insurance covers problems outside the warranty coverage or timeframe.

Another potential pitfall is counting on a component manufacturer’s warranty made useless should the guaranteeing company claim bankruptcy or exit the market. This is unfortunately already a common occurrence in the solar PV industry, as there are many warranties that are no longer in effect.

Verifying that the manufacturer has an insurance backup or acquiring additional warranty insurance is incumbent upon financiers. Insurers too, would be wise to make sure this potential coverage gap is closed.

 

PPA prices and cost pressures

Wholesale market price reductions and regulatory environment evolution is increasing pressure for developers to stay competitive. The corresponding decrease in PPA prices erodes returns for investors.

The Q1 2020 LevelTen PPA price index report marked a 0.9% drop in solar PPA prices from Q1 2019 to Q1 2020. The Q2 2020 report reported that 8% of project developers anticipated a further drop in PPA prices in response to the Next Generation EU Fund.

Investors can hedge these risks by increasing the minimum expected rate of return and optimizing energy production. Since the reduction in PPA prices has essentially reduced the value of each unit of energy produced, there is less room for performance shortfalls. The need to produce maximum energy levels will matter more than ever.

Another step would be to ask for solar production insurance (SPI). This specialized insurance calculates the kWh output of solar projects (including PPAs) and addresses underperformance risk for both energy buyers and investors.

 

Utility-scale technology innovation

Developing plants and components with fewer moving parts and complex interconnections is on the rise. This helps reduce failure points in the system. New technology, such as bifacial modules, is also alluring for developers.

While this is a good thing, it’s increasing the number of requests for repowering or retrofitting relatively young solar sites. The best course of action is to weigh the value of a retrofit vs. the cost and to thoroughly understand tax-deductibility needs before repowering.

 

Risk analysis refinement

Lenders and insurers in the space are feeling pressure to refine and improve risk analysis to avoid unexpectedly high payouts in insurance premiums or shortfall in energy production. These issues lead to a default on installments to lenders and financiers.

For more on how the changing utility solar market is making risk assessment more complicated and valuable, see part 2, Historic and Current Market Risk Assessment. 

Click here for other articles by this author