California’s Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) has significantly advanced the state’s distributed energy storage market and has also highlighted the remaining challenges facing the industry. The program provides incentives for customers to install qualifying technologies including: small wind, waste-to-energy, generator sets and microturbines, fuel cells, and energy storage systems. SGIP has made California’s burgeoning energy storage industry one of the most advanced in the world. Storage systems currently receive incentives of up to $1.46 per watt, the second highest rate in the program. As a result, 224 storage systems have been deployed through the program, representing just over 11 MW of capacity. Despite this success, the industry still faces many challenges that are evident when analyzing the program’s project data.
While an impressive number of systems have been deployed through SGIP, many projects have been cancelled, and many others currently sit idly by with little chance of being developed. There are currently 301 systems in the SGIP pipeline that were initiated before the start of 2014. These systems account for $25.1 million of held-up incentives that could otherwise go to more active projects. Given the program’s annual statewide budget of $77.1 million, these languishing projects account for 32% of the available incentives.
One reason for this backlog is the relative ease with which customers can begin working with vendors and reserve incentives through the program. Several companies active in California have employed a strategy of taking as many reservations as possible from prospective customers, regardless of the odds of the companies following through with an installation. While this strategy may improve a company’s market share for pipeline alone, it is detrimental to the overall program goals because it works against the other companies that focus efforts on the appropriate and more reliable customers. A potential fix for the program could include stricter milestones and required reservation timelines. Currently, a proof-of-project milestone is due 90 days after the start of most projects, meaning many systems have been in the pipeline for well over a year since that milestone was passed.
The program’s large pipeline and rate of cancelled storage projects highlight challenges for both the program and the overall storage industry. The average ratio of systems deployed to systems that are eventually cancelled is only around 18% for leading vendors in the program. This results in a significant amount of capital resources for emerging companies that are lost on identifying and working with customers that never install systems. Furthermore, this dynamic highlights challenges with systems integration and installation that are faced by the relatively new industry. Changes in interconnection and installation requirements in different parts of the state—often not discovered until well into the development process—can add substantial costs to a project and significantly alter the overall economics, resulting in cancellations.
The large number of cancelled and delayed projects undoubtedly illustrates that the distributed storage industry as a whole must mature to improve the efficiency of operations and lower costs. Improvements should come naturally to the rapidly growing industry as customers become more educated and as increasing sales volumes lead to more standardization and streamlined processes, perhaps similar to California’s recent experiences with solar PV.
Tags: distributed energy storage, Energy Storage, Energy Technologies, Finance & Investing
| No Comments »