Navigant Research Blog

ESCOs Start to Recover from the Recovery Act

— December 13, 2013

By many accounts, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was a boon for the American economy in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008.  The availability of $25 billion in federal funds for energy efficiency measures sent the building industry into action at a time when sluggishness in new construction was shifting attention to existing buildings, and concepts such as corporate sustainability and carbon regulation were in their infancy.  Leading energy service companies (ESCOs) such as Johnson Controls and Ameresco, which use a financing structure known as energy performance contracting (EPC) to guarantee energy savings for customers in long-term contracts, scaled up their energy efficiency capabilities to benefit from these generous incentives.

Briefly, it seemed that ARRA would be a net positive for the ESCO market.  From a base of $3.9 billion in annual revenues in 2008, the market peaked in 2011 with annual revenues of $5.6 billion.  Interestingly, ARRA actually had a negative impact in 2009, when many would-be ESCO customers deferred plans to hire ESCOs while awaiting the distribution of stimulus funds for 2010 and 2011.

And that was the first of several unforeseen consequences of ARRA for the ESCO market.  In 2012, the market underwent a painful contraction, with annual revenues shrinking to $4.8 billion – a 13% decline.  The causes of this decline were diverse, and include a range of factors such as the federal sequester and pervasive concerns among municipalities about ESCO-related debt (as EPCs typically show up on customer balance sheets as debt service obligations).  A more insidious cause of the decline was the fact that ARRA funds, which were largely exhausted by the end of 2011, created an expectation of low-interest financing and widespread rebates for energy efficiency measures among municipal customers, the core market for ESCOs.  As those financing facilities evaporated, so did many customers’ willingness to take on long-term EPCs characterized by pre-ARRA interest rates.  As a result, many municipalities now view the extended payback periods of EPCs (which are, in reality, consistent with the payback periods in the pre-ARRA period) as unacceptably long.

ESCO Revenue, United States: 2010-2020


(Source: Navigant Research)

Even in the post-ARRA era, though, EPCs represent a low-risk way for cash-strapped customers to reduce their long-term facility operating costs and finance other non-energy-related infrastructural improvements.  Changing the mindset in the municipal sector will be critical in resuscitating the ESCO market in the United States and placing it on a pathway for strong growth.

The good news for ESCOs is that the federal government has been aggressively promoting EPCs through the $2 billion Better Buildings Initiative and other policies, which will lead activity in that sector to grow considerably in 2014.  In our recent report, The U.S. Energy Service  Market, Navigant Research forecasted that the market will grow from $4.9 billion in 2013 to $8.2 billion by 2020.  The municipal sector will only recover to pre-ARRA levels of EPC activity, though, when municipal decision-makers recall the diverse cost reduction benefits afforded by ESCOs that they once enjoyed.


Energy Service Cos. in a Post-ARRA World

— December 6, 2011

Across the sectors of cleantech, from renewables to energy efficiency, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act originally seemed to be a huge boost for the industry.  The actual outcomes have been more nuanced than originally thought, and one way to examine the act’s real-world effects is to look at some of the unintended consequences in the energy service company (ESCO) sector.

At the NAESCO conference in San Diego recently, I got a glimpse into the post-ARRA world for energy performance contracting.  Despite the millions of ARRA dollars dedicated to energy efficiency, the ESCO industry has not yet seen a big surge of contracts in the federal sector, and has experienced a relative lag in the MUSH (that’s the Municipal, University, Schools, and Hospitals sector, not mush) sector.  In fact, the average number of ESCO projects initiated this year is below the historical average, at least for the federal government.  As it turns out, the backlash of the ARRA may have in fact resulted in less business.  The reason: companies and project developers sat on their heels waiting for ARRA money to become available and get spent.  The result was a hesitation to initiate projects using the energy service performance contract (ESPC) model, and thus a relative lag in ESCO business.  As a result, the entire sector has experienced lower revenues than anticipated.  

Nevertheless, the value of the ESPC model has not been undermined in the federal sector.  In fact, many federal agencies used the down time to overhaul the procurement procedures that will open doors to the energy service procurement model and the ESCOs themselves.  The Army and the General Services Administration (GSA), which manages a significant amount of Federal real estate, are undertaking significant efforts to educate their staff on the intricacies of ESPCs.

That’s why energy service companies are optimistic about the outlook in the federal sector, despite the paradoxical lag caused by ARRA funding.  The U.S. military in particular will be targeting more ESPCs for integrated energy efficiency and renewable energy projects.  Likewise, look for innovative new technology pairings to begin to surface in the Department of Defense and through the U.S. General Services Administration as it embarks on an experiment with net zero buildings.


Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date


Clean Transportation, Electric Vehicles, Energy Management, Energy Storage, Policy & Regulation, Renewable Energy, Smart Energy Practice, Smart Grid Practice, Smart Transportation Practice, Utility Innovations

By Author

{"userID":"","pageName":"Energy Service Companies","path":"\/tag\/energy-service-companies","date":"4\/16\/2014"}