DOCSLIB.ORG

Current Loan Guarantee Commitments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program: Current Loan Guarantee Commitments Passed as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program has $34 billion in authority to give loan guarantees to innovative technologies. 1 The 1705 program also had about $2.4 billion in Recovery Act funds to pay for the credit subsidy cost for renewable and energy efficiency projects, but those funds expired on September 30, 2011. So far, the DOE has finalized $16.13 billion worth of loans and committed $10.65 billion. Below is a list of applicants that have a committed or finalized loan; there are other companies that are in the process of applying for a loan and at least one company that has rejected the loan terms offered by the DOE. Nuclear Power Facilities Current DOE loan guarantee authority for the financing of nuclear projects is set at $18.5 billion with an additional $4 billion now identified for uranium enrichment (see see front-end nuclear cycle below).1 President Obama is requesting more. In both his FY2011 and FY2012 budgets, he included an additional $36 billion in loan guarantee authority for nuclear reactors. If his FY2012 budget is approved, loan guarantee authority for nuclear reactors would total roughly $50 billion. This authority is under the 1703 program. So far, only one nuclear company, Southern Company, has been offered a conditional commitment. Constellation Energy was in extensive negotiations with the DOE over a loan guarantee but backed out after citing the “unreasonably burdensome” cost associated with the loan guarantee the DOE offered and claimed that it would “create unacceptable risks and costs for our company.”2 Other nuclear companies are currently under review for a loan guarantee and rely on reactor designs that are currently in use in Japan. Table 1: Nuclear Power Facility Loan Guarantees Loan Loan Date of Date Guarantee Technology Location Guarantee Status Conditional Finalized, Recipient Allotment Commitment Accepted Georgia Power Nuclear Atlanta, GA Conditional $8,330,000,000 February 2010 TBD Company Generation Tucker, GA Commitment Front-End Nuclear Fuel Cycle Congress has appropriated $2 billion in loan guarantee authority for Front-End Nuclear Fuel Cycle technology, and the Department of Energy further allocated $2 billion in loan guarantee authority from previously unallocated funds passed by Congress in 2007.3 Of that, $2 billion has been conditionally offered to AREVA for a uranium enrichment center that sells fuel to nuclear reactors. AREVA has yet to receive proper licenses and permits from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in order to safely build and operate the facility, and it is not expected to receive those permits until later this year. USEC has updated its application after the DOE encouraged them to withdraw their application in 2009. This authority is under the 1703 program. 1 $4 billion in earmarked funds and $2 billion transferred from funds appropriated in 2007 for any technology Table 2: Front-End Nuclear Fuel Cycle Loan Guarantees Loan Loan Date of Date Guarantee Technology Location Guarantee Status Conditional Finalized, Recipient Allotment Commitment Accepted AREVA, Eagle Front-end Rock Conditional Nuclear Fuel Idaho Falls, ID $2,000,000,000 May 2010 TBD Enrichment Commitment Cycle Facility Coal-Based Power Generation and Advanced Coal Gasification Currently, no coal-based projects have been given a conditional commitment from the DOE for a loan guarantee, though several companies are currently under review. Congress has approved $6 billion in authority for Coal-based Power Generation and Industrial Gasification and $2 billion for Advanced Coal Gasification. This includes such technologies as coal-to-liquid, or converting coal into a liquid fuel through the Fischer Tropsch Process, and coal gasification. Several companies are actively seeking these loans and are in the middle of getting environmental impact statements from the loan guarantee office to determine if their projects are eligible. This includes a coal-to-liquid plant in Medicine Bow, Wyoming, an industrial gasification facility near Beaumont, TX, and another gasification site in Moss Point, MS, among several others. These projects would receive loans through the 1703 program. Renewable and Energy Efficiency The last area of funding under the loan guarantee program is renewable and/or energy efficient systems manufacturing and distributed energy generation, transmission and distribution. This program currently has $1.5 billion available in loan guarantee authority. Solar, wind, geothermal, and various energy efficiency technologies have received loans, while other energy alternatives are also under review. In April of this year, Congress decreased the budget authority cap for renewable projects and shifted $170 million to credit subsidy funds. As a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, $6 billion was appropriated to pay for the credit subsidy cost of loan guarantees under program 1705. Those funds were decreased several times by Congress to fund other projects, and the 1705 program had about $2.4 billion in credit subsidy funds. However, those credit subsidy funds expired on September 30, 2011, though President Obama proposed another $200 million to pay for the credit subsidy cost of renewable and energy efficiency projects under his FY2012 budget under section 1703 of the program. This would fund another $1-2 billion in loans. Most of these projects are funded under the 1705 program. Solyndra Inc, the first company to receive a loan guarantee, has been in financial trouble from the start after receiving a loan guarantee over a year and a half ago. The company had to close one of their plants and lay off 40 workers in the beginning of 2011 and sought some loan restricting from the DOE. In September of 2011, the company went bankrupt, laying off 1,100 employees. The company is under investigation by the FBI and House Energy and Commerce Committee. It is currently unclear how much of the loan guarantee taxpayers will ultimately lose. 2 Table 3: Renewable and Energy Efficiency Loan Guarantees Date of Loan Guarantee Loan Guarantee Date Finalized, Technology Location Status Conditional Recipient Allotment Accepted Commitment Solar Finalized, Solyndra, Inc. Fremont, CA $535,000,000 20-Mar-09 4-Sep-09 Manufacturing Accepted Nordic Windpower Wind Berkeley, CA Conditional $16,000,000 2-Jul-09 No Final Loan USA Manufacturing Pocatello, ID Commitment Stephentown, Finalized, Beacon Power Energy Storage $43,000,000 2-Jul-09 9-Aug-10 NY Accepted Red River Energy Littleton, CO Conditional Environmental $245,000,000 8-Dec-09 TBD Efficiency Coushatta, LA Commitment Products, LLC BrightSource Energy, Oakland, CA Finalized, Solar Generation $1,600,000,000 22-Feb-10 11-Apr-11 Inc. Baker, CA Accepted Energy Conditional SAGE Electrochromics Faribault, MN $72,000,000 5-Mar-10 TBD Efficiency Commitment Boston, MA First Wind- Kahuku Finalized, Wind Generation Kahuku, Oahu, $117,000,000 5-Mar-10 27-Jul-10 Wind Power, LLC Accepted HI Boise, ID Finalized, U.S. Geothermal, Inc. Geothermal Malheur $96,800,000 10-Jun-10 24-Feb-11 Accepted County, OR Nevada Geothermal Humboldt Partial Guarantee Finalized, Geothermal 15-Jun-10 7-Sep-10 Power Company County, NV of $98,500,000 Accepted Abengoa Solar, Inc. Finalized, Solar Generation Gila Bend, AZ $1,450,000,000 3-Jul-10 21-Dec-10 (Solana) Accepted Abound Solar Solar Longmont, CO Finalized, $400,000,000 3-Jul-10 14-Dec-10 Manufacturing Manufacturing Tipton, IN Accepted Johnson City, Finalized, AES Corporation Energy Storage $17,000,000 2-Aug-10 23-Dec-10 NY Accepted Gilliam and Partial Guarantee Finalized, Caithness Shepards Flat Wind Generation Morrow of 8-Oct-10 17-Dec-10 Accepted Counties, OR $1,300,000,000 LS Power Associates Ely to Las Finalized, Transmission $343,000,000 19-Oct-10 15-Feb-11 (ON Line) Vegas, NV Accepted Diamond Green Diesel, Advanced Conditional Norco, LA $241,000,000 21-Jan-11 Abandoned LLC Biofuels Commitment Agua Caliente Solar, Yuma County, Finalized, Solar Generation $967,000,000 21-Jan-11 5-Aug-11 LLC AZ Accepted Solar Finalized, SoloPower Wilsonville, OR $197,000,000 17-Feb-11 19-Aug-11 Manufacturing Accepted Finalized, Record Hill Wind Wind Generation Roxbury, ME $102,000,000 3-Mar-11 15-Aug-11 Accepted SunPower Corporation, San Luis Finalized, Systems (California Solar Generation $1,237,000,000 12-Apr-11 30-Sept-11 Obispo, CA Accepted Valley Solar Ranch) Solar Trust of America Conditional Solar Generation Blythe, CA $2,105,000,000 18-Apr-11 Abandoned (Solar Millenium) Commitment Cogentrix of Alamosa, Finalized, Solar Generation $90,600,000 10-May-11 9-Sept-11 LLC. Alamosa, CO Accepted SolarReserve, LLC Nye County, Finalized, 28-Sept-11 Solar Generation $737,000,000 19-May-11 (Crescent Dunes) NV Accepted Fotowatio Renewable NE Las Vegas, Partial Guarantee Conditional Solar Generation 2-Jun-11 No Final Loan Ventures, Inc. NV of $45,600,000 Commitment Jersey Valley, McGinness Partial Guarantee Finalized, Ormat Nevada, Inc. Geothermal 9-Jun-11 23-Sept-11 Hills, and of $350,000,000 Accepted Tuscarora, NV Abengoa Solar, Inc. San Bernardino Finalized, Solar Generation $1,200,000,000 14-Jun-11 13-Sept-11 (Mojave Solar) County, CA Accepted 3 NextEra Energy Riverside Partial Guarantee Finalized, Resources, LLC Solar Generation 14-Jun-11 26-Aug-11 County, CA of $852,000,000 Accepted (Genesis Solar) Mesquite Solar 1, LLC Maricopa Finalized, Solar Generation $337,000,000 15-Jun-11 28-Sept-11 (Sempra Mesquite) County, AZ Accepted Solar Conditional Calisolar Inc. Ontario, OH $275,000,000 16-Jun-11 Abandoned Manufacturing Commitment Solar Finalized, 1366 Technologies, Inc. Lexington, MA $150,000,000 17-Jun-11 8-Sept-11 Manufacturing Accepted Partial Guarantee Finalized, Granite Reliable Wind Generation Coos, NH 21-Jun-11 23-Sept-11 of $168,900,000 Accepted Partial Guarantee Finalized, Prologis (Project Amp) Solar Generation 28 States of 22-Jun-11 30-Sept-11 Accepted $1,400,000,000 Excelon Corporation Finalized, Solar Generation Lancanster, CA $646,000,000 30-Jun-11 30-Sept-11 (Antelope) Accepted Partial Guarantee First Solar, Inc.
Recommended publications
  • Tesla Motors

    Tesla Motors

    AUGUST 2014 TESLA MOTORS: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OPEN INNOVATION, AND THE CARBON CRISIS DR MATTHEW RIMMER AUSTRALIAN RESEARCH COUNCIL FUTURE FELLOW ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW The Australian National University College of Law, Canberra, ACT, 0200 Work Telephone Number: (02) 61254164 E-Mail Address: [email protected] 1 Introduction Tesla Motors is an innovative United States manufacturer of electric vehicles. In its annual report for 2012, the company summarizes its business operations: We design, develop, manufacture and sell high-performance fully electric vehicles and advanced electric vehicle powertrain components. We own our sales and service network and have operationally structured our business in a manner that we believe will enable us to rapidly develop and launch advanced electric vehicles and technologies. We believe our vehicles, electric vehicle engineering expertise, and operational structure differentiates us from incumbent automobile manufacturers. We are the first company to commercially produce a federally-compliant electric vehicle, the Tesla Roadster, which achieves a market-leading range on a single charge combined with attractive design, driving performance and zero tailpipe emissions. As of December 31, 2012, we had delivered approximately 2,450 Tesla Roadsters to customers in over 30 countries. While we have concluded the production run of the Tesla Roadster, its proprietary electric vehicle powertrain system is the foundation of our business. We modified this system
  • Beyond Solyndra: Examining the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program Hilary Kao

    Beyond Solyndra: Examining the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program Hilary Kao

    William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review Volume 37 | Issue 2 Article 4 Beyond Solyndra: Examining the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program Hilary Kao Repository Citation Hilary Kao, Beyond Solyndra: Examining the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program, 37 Wm. & Mary Envtl. L. & Pol'y Rev. 425 (2013), http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr/vol37/iss2/4 Copyright c 2013 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmelpr BEYOND SOLYNDRA: EXAMINING THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM HILARY KAO* ABSTRACT In the year following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, the renewable and clean energy industries faced significant turmoil— from natural disasters, to political maelstroms, from the Great Recession, to U.S. debt ceiling debates. The Department of Energy’s Loan Guarantee Program (“DOE LGP”), often a target since before it ever received a dollar of appropriations, has been both blamed and defended in the wake of the bankruptcy filing of Solyndra, a California-based solar panel manufac- turer, in September 2011, because of the $535 million loan guarantee made to it by the Department of Energy (“DOE”) in 2009.1 Critics have suggested political favoritism in loan guarantee awards and have questioned the government’s proper role in supporting renewable energy companies and the renewable energy industry generally.2 This Article looks beyond the Solyndra controversy to examine the origin, structure and purpose of the DOE LGP. It asserts that loan guaran- tees can serve as viable policy tools, but require careful crafting to have the potential to be effective programs.
  • Cadmium Telluride Photovoltaics - Wikipedia 1 of 13

    Cadmium Telluride Photovoltaics - Wikipedia 1 of 13

    Cadmium telluride photovoltaics - Wikipedia 1 of 13 Cadmium telluride photovoltaics Cadmium telluride (CdTe) photovoltaics describes a photovoltaic (PV) technology that is based on the use of cadmium telluride, a thin semiconductor layer designed to absorb and convert sunlight into electricity.[1] Cadmium telluride PV is the only thin film technology with lower costs than conventional solar cells made of crystalline silicon in multi-kilowatt systems.[1][2][3] On a lifecycle basis, CdTe PV has the smallest carbon footprint, lowest water use and shortest energy payback time of any current photo voltaic technology. PV array made of cadmium telluride (CdTe) solar [4][5][6] CdTe's energy payback time of less than a year panels allows for faster carbon reductions without short- term energy deficits. The toxicity of cadmium is an environmental concern mitigated by the recycling of CdTe modules at the end of their life time,[7] though there are still uncertainties[8][9] and the public opinion is skeptical towards this technology.[10][11] The usage of rare materials may also become a limiting factor to the industrial scalability of CdTe technology in the mid-term future. The abundance of tellurium—of which telluride is the anionic form— is comparable to that of platinum in the earth's crust and contributes significantly to the module's cost.[12] CdTe photovoltaics are used in some of the world's largest photovoltaic power stations, such as the Topaz Solar Farm. With a share of 5.1% of worldwide PV production, CdTe technology accounted for more than half of the thin film market in 2013.[13] A prominent manufacturer of CdTe thin film technology is the company First Solar, based in Tempe, Arizona.
  • AS You Sow on Creating Greener Solar PV Panels

    AS You Sow on Creating Greener Solar PV Panels

    AS You Sow on Creating Greener Solar PV Panels Andrew Burger. March 28, 2012 Advocating solar PV manufacturers adopt a set of industry best practices, a new survey and report highlights the environmental benefits of using solar photovoltaic (PV) energy as compared to fossil fuels, while at the same time criticizing ongoing, outsized government support for fossil fuel production. “Even though there are toxic compounds used in the manufacturing of many solar panels, the generation of electricity from solar energy is much safer to both the environment and workers than production of electricity from coal, natural gas, or nuclear,” stated Amy Galland, PhD and research director at non-profit group As You Sow. “For example, once a solar panel is installed, it generates electricity with no emissions of any kind for decades, whereas coal-fired power plants in the U.S. emitted nearly two billion tons of carbon dioxide and millions of tons of toxic compounds in 2010 alone.” Based on an international survey of more than 100 solar PV manufac- turers, the best practices in As You Sow’s report, “Clean & Green: Best Practices in Photovoltaics” aim to protect the employee and community health and safety, as well as the broader environment. Also analyzed are investor considerations regarding environmental, social and govern- ance for responsible management of solar PV manufacturing business- es. The best practices listed were determined in consultation with sci- entists, engineers, academics, government labs and industry consult- ants. Solar PV CSR survey and report card “We have been working with solar companies to study and minimize the environmental health and safety risks in the production of solar panels and the industry has embraced the opportunities,” Vasilis Fthenakis, PhD and director of the National PV Environmen- tal Health and Safety Research Center at Brookhaven National Laboratory and director of the Center for Life Cycle Analysis at Columbia University, explained.
  • Laying the Foundation for a Bright Future: Assessing Progress

    Laying the Foundation for a Bright Future: Assessing Progress

    Laying the Foundation for a Bright Future Assessing Progress Under Phase 1 of India’s National Solar Mission Interim Report: April 2012 Prepared by Council on Energy, Environment and Water Natural Resources Defense Council Supported in part by: ABOUT THIS REPORT About Council on Energy, Environment and Water The Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) is an independent nonprofit policy research institution that works to promote dialogue and common understanding on energy, environment, and water issues in India and elsewhere through high-quality research, partnerships with public and private institutions and engagement with and outreach to the wider public. (http://ceew.in). About Natural Resources Defense Council The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City; Washington, D.C.; Los Angeles; San Francisco; Chicago; Livingston and Beijing. (www.nrdc.org). Authors and Investigators CEEW team: Arunabha Ghosh, Rajeev Palakshappa, Sanyukta Raje, Ankita Lamboria NRDC team: Anjali Jaiswal, Vignesh Gowrishankar, Meredith Connolly, Bhaskar Deol, Sameer Kwatra, Amrita Batra, Neha Mathew Neither CEEW nor NRDC has commercial interests in India’s National Solar Mission, nor has either organization received any funding from any commercial or governmental institution for this project. Acknowledgments The authors of this report thank government officials from India’s Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam (NVVN), and other Government of India agencies, as well as United States government officials.
  • Lsoar Value Chain Value Chain

    Lsoar Value Chain Value Chain

    Solar Private companies in black Public companies in blue Followed by the founding date of companies less than 15 years old value chain (1 of 2) This value chain publication contains information gathered and summarized mainly from Lux Research and a variety of other public sources that we believe to be accurate at the time of ppggyublication. The information is for general guidance only and not intended to be a substitute for detailed research or the exercise of professional judgment. Neither EYGM Limited nor any other member of the global Ernst & Young organization nor Lux Research can accept responsibility for loss to any person relying on this publication. Materials and equipment Components and products Balance of system and installations Crystalline silicon photovoltaic GCL Silicon, China (2006); LDK Solar, China (2005); MEMC, US; Renewable Energy Corporation ASA, Norway; SolarWorld AG, Germany (1998) Bosch Solar Energy, Germany (2000); Canadian Solar, Canada/China (2001); Jinko Solar, China (2006); Kyocera, Japan; Sanyo, Japan; SCHOTT Solar, Germany (2002); Solarfun, China (2004); Tianwei New Energy Holdings Co., China; Trina Solar, China (1997); Yingli Green Energy, China (1998); BP Solar, US; Conergy, Germany (1998); Eging Photovoltaic, China SOLON, Germany (1997) Daqo Group, China; M. Setek, Japan; ReneSola, China (2003); Wacker, Germany Hyundai Heavy Industries,,; Korea; Isofoton,,p Spain ; JA Solar, China (();2005); LG Solar Power,,; Korea; Mitsubishi Electric, Japan; Moser Baer Photo Voltaic, India (2005); Motech, Taiwan; Samsung
  • Tesla, Inc. Form 10-K Annual Report Filed 2017-03-01

    Tesla, Inc. Form 10-K Annual Report Filed 2017-03-01

    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FORM 10-K Annual report pursuant to section 13 and 15(d) Filing Date: 2017-03-01 | Period of Report: 2016-12-31 SEC Accession No. 0001564590-17-003118 (HTML Version on secdatabase.com) FILER Tesla, Inc. Mailing Address Business Address 3500 DEER CREEK RD 3500 DEER CREEK RD CIK:1318605| IRS No.: 912197729 | State of Incorp.:DE | Fiscal Year End: 1231 PALO ALTO CA 94070 PALO ALTO CA 94070 Type: 10-K | Act: 34 | File No.: 001-34756 | Film No.: 17655025 650-681-5000 SIC: 3711 Motor vehicles & passenger car bodies Copyright © 2017 www.secdatabase.com. All Rights Reserved. Please Consider the Environment Before Printing This Document UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 OR ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File Number: 001-34756 Tesla, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 91-2197729 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 3500 Deer Creek Road Palo Alto, California 94304 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) (650) 681-5000 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, $0.001 par value The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
  • Bankrupt Companies

    Bankrupt Companies

    The List of Fallen Solar Companies: 2015 to 2009: S.No Year/Status Company Name and Details 118 2015 Enecsys (microinverters) bankrupt -- Enecsys raised more than $55 million in VC from investors including Wellington Partners, NES Partners, Good Energies and Climate Change Capital Private Equity for its microinverter technology. 117 2015 QBotix (trackers) closed -- QBotix had a two-axis solar tracker system where the motors, instead of being installed two per tracker, were moved around by a rail-mounted robot that adjusted each tracker every 40 minutes. But while QBotix was trying to gain traction, single-axis solar trackers were also evolving and driving down cost. QBotix raised more than $19.5 million from Firelake, NEA, DFJ JAIC, Siemens Ventures, E.ON and Iberdrola. 116 2015 Solar-Fabrik (c-Si) bankrupt -- German module builder 115 2015 Soitec (CPV) closed -- France's Soitec, one of the last companies with a hope of commercializing concentrating photovoltaic technology, abandoned its solar business. Soitec had approximately 75 megawatts' worth of CPV projects in the ground. 114 2015 TSMC (CIGS) closed -- TSMC Solar ceased manufacturing operations, as "TSMC believes that its solar business is no longer economically sustainable." Last year, TSMC Solar posted a champion module efficiency of 15.7 percent with its Stion- licensed technology. 113 2015 Abengoa -- Seeking bankruptcy protection 112 2014 Bankrupt, Areva's solar business (CSP) closed -- Suffering through a closed Fukushima-inspired slowdown in reactor sales, Ausra 111 2014 Bankrupt,
  • Mintz Levin Project Finance Greenpaper

    Mintz Levin Project Finance Greenpaper

    whitepaper Renewable Energy Project Finance in the U.S.: An Overview and Midterm Outlook Renewable Energy Project Finance in the U.S.: An Overview and Midterm Outlook I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Wind, solar and geothermal energy projects in the United States are typically paid for using an approach known as “project finance.” This is a structure employed to finance capital-intensive projects that are either difficult to support on a corporate balance sheet or that become more attractive when financed on their own. Project financing structures will vary on a project-by-project basis, but renewable energy projects in the U.S. utilizing project financing generally rely upon a mix of direct equity investors, tax equity investors and project-level loans provided by a syndicate of banks. Turbulence in the financial markets began disrupting the flow of project financing (both equity and debt) into renewable energy projects in the U.S. in the fourth quarter of 2008. Nearly two years later, the availability of project financing has improved considerably due to the thawing of the lending markets, with a return to longer tenors on term-debt, and legislative support mechanisms introduced as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)—particularly the ITC cash grant. In this report, we provide an update on the current terms and availability of project financing for large-scale wind, solar and geothermal projects in the U.S. and forecast the amount of project financing we expect to be sought by the sector through 2012. In analyzing where this financing is likely to come from, we address the potential impacts of the upcoming expiration of the cash grant and changes to the tax equity supply—two main themes in the renewable energy project financing arena at present.
  • Solar Photovoltaic Manufacturing: Industry Trends, Global Competition, Federal Support

    Solar Photovoltaic Manufacturing: Industry Trends, Global Competition, Federal Support

    U.S. Solar Photovoltaic Manufacturing: Industry Trends, Global Competition, Federal Support Michaela D. Platzer Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business January 27, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R42509 U.S. Solar PV Manufacturing: Industry Trends, Global Competition, Federal Support Summary Every President since Richard Nixon has sought to increase U.S. energy supply diversity. Job creation and the development of a domestic renewable energy manufacturing base have joined national security and environmental concerns as reasons for promoting the manufacturing of solar power equipment in the United States. The federal government maintains a variety of tax credits and targeted research and development programs to encourage the solar manufacturing sector, and state-level mandates that utilities obtain specified percentages of their electricity from renewable sources have bolstered demand for large solar projects. The most widely used solar technology involves photovoltaic (PV) solar modules, which draw on semiconducting materials to convert sunlight into electricity. By year-end 2013, the total number of grid-connected PV systems nationwide reached more than 445,000. Domestic demand is met both by imports and by about 75 U.S. manufacturing facilities employing upwards of 30,000 U.S. workers in 2014. Production is clustered in a few states including California, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Washington. Domestic PV manufacturers operate in a dynamic, volatile, and highly competitive global market now dominated by Chinese and Taiwanese companies. China alone accounted for nearly 70% of total solar module production in 2013. Some PV manufacturers have expanded their operations beyond China to places like Malaysia, the Philippines, and Mexico.
  • The Seeds of Solar Innovation: How a Nation Can Grow a Competitive Advantage by Donny Holaschutz

    The Seeds of Solar Innovation: How a Nation Can Grow a Competitive Advantage by Donny Holaschutz

    The Seeds of Solar Innovation: How a Nation can Grow a Competitive Advantage by Donny Holaschutz B.A. Hispanic Studies (2004), University of Texas at Austin B.S. Aerospace Engineering (2004), University of Texas at Austin M.S.E Aerospace Engineering (2007), University of Texas at Austin Submitted to the System Design and Management Program In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Engineering and Management ARCHIVES MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE at the OF TECHNOLOGY Massachusetts Institute of Technology February 2012 © 2012 Donny Holaschutz. All rights reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereqfter reated. Signed by Author: Donny Holaschutz Engineering Systems Division and Sloan School of Management January 20, 2012 Certified by: James M. Utterback, Thesis Supervisor David . McGrath jr (1959) Professor of Management and Innovation and Professor of neering SysemsIT oan School of Management Accepted by: Patrick C.Hale Director otS ystem Design and Management Program THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Table of Contents Fig u re List ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 T ab le List........................................................................................................................................................7 Executive
  • A New Energy Economy

    A New Energy Economy

    A BLUEPRINT FOR A New Energy Economy Report authored by Todd Hartman Photo, Above Mike Stewart looks over an array of solar panels at the Greater Sandhill Solar Project being constructed by SunPower Corporation outside of Alamosa. Photography by Matt McClain unless otherwise indicated Design by Communication Infrastructure Group, LLC No taxpayer dollars were used in the production of this report. On the Cover The light of the setting sun reflects off solar panels at SunEdison’s 8.2-megawatt solar photovoltaic plant outside of Alamosa. A LETTER FROM GOVERNOR RITTER A Letter From Governor Ritter Dear Reader, In four years as Governor of Colorado, I have made it a top priority to position Colorado as an economic and energy leader by creating sustainable jobs for our residents, encouraging economic growth for our businesses, and fostering new innovations and new technologies from our public, non-profit and private institutions. We call it the New Energy Economy, and it is built on the recognition that the world is changing the way it produces and consumes energy. By harnessing the creative forces of advancing the diversified energy resources In Colorado, we’ve elected to join that race, world, and give them the knowledge that we entrepreneurs, researchers, educators, that we turn to today, and will increasingly and together, we believe America can win worked with their futures in mind in hopes foundations, business leaders and policy do so in the future: solar, wind, geothermal, it. Colorado is proof positive that we can that they will do the same. makers, we have in Colorado created biomass, small hydro, Smart Grid and other create new opportunities for new forms of Sincerely, an ecosystem that is supporting private elements of the emerging new energy world.