Navigant Research Blog

Surprises in U.K. Renewables Bidding Round

— April 15, 2015

The U.K. Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) has announced the results of the first competitive Contracts for Difference (CfD) allocation round. CfDs are designed to give investors the confidence and certainty they need to invest in low-carbon electricity generation. The government does this by paying the generator the difference between the cost of investing in a particular low-carbon technology, known as the strike price, and the reference price, or the average market price for electricity. Generators participate in the electricity market, including selling their power, as usual. This means that if the reference price is higher than the strike price, generators must refund the difference.

The DECC assigned 27 contracts, totaling 2.1 GW of capacity, in round one; the government estimates its total spend will be £315 billion ($470 billion in 2012 prices). Wind projects will supply 1,910 MW of capacity, of which 750 MW will be onshore and 1,160 MW will be offshore. These projects, along with the five offshore projects (3,184 MW) that were allocated CfDs in the so-called round zero, underpin Navigant Research’s forecast in our World Wind Energy Market Update 2015 report that the United Kingdom will install 10.6 GW of wind capacity in the next 5 years.


In addition to the wind capacity, round one winners include two energy-from-waste projects, with associated combined heat and power systems, that total almost 95 MW of capacity. Three additional projects that use biomass gasification technologies have a combined capacity of 62 MW. Finally—and perhaps surprisingly, given the well-known cloudy and windy British weather—five solar plants, with a total capacity of 71 MW, are also included.

The winning strike prices also brought some surprises. On the one hand, low-bidding solar projects outbid onshore wind projects—which are usually considered the cheapest source of renewable energy. The solar projects offered £50 per MWh, or roughly $0.075 per kWh—very close to the current U.K. wholesale electricity price.

On the other hand, the offshore wind winning bids offered £114.39 ($0.169/kWh) and £119.89 ($0.178/kWh). Interestingly, the Danish Energy Agency announced the winner of its 400 MW Horns Rev. 3 offshore wind farm on the same day. The winning bid was 52% lower than those in the United Kingdom were and will run for 3 fewer years.

Storm Clouds 

If these solar projects actually get built, they will put solar costs in the United Kingdom at a similar level to winning bids in regions with excellent solar resources, such as Dubai and Texas. But there are some clouds on the horizon. James Rowe, director with Hadstone Energy (the developer of one of the lowest bidding projects), put this construction in doubt in a pair of LinkedIn posts (“We Got Our CfD … Oh Dear” and “What Went Wrong with the CfD Auction for Solar?”) in which he explored the reasons why the players (including Hadstone) bid so low.

At this point, it’s difficult to measure the level of success or failure of this allocation round. The solar bids at £50 per MWh are unlikely to ever be built. If others, which bid £79.23/MWh, do come online before the end of 2017, it will be the first time that solar in a resource-poor country has outbid onshore wind in a country with good wind resources.


Signposts Along California’s Distributed Generation Corridor

— March 24, 2015

Driving south on the Interstate 5 corridor from the Oregon border to the San Francisco Bay Area, you can see numerous renewable energy projects off I-5. These projects stand as modern signposts to the maturity of—and transition in—the U.S. clean tech industry. Five years ago, renewable installations were mostly limited to remote, utility-scale wind farms in Tehachapi and along the Altamont Pass. While utility-scale installations continue to grow, there is now also a strong focus on distributed generation: solar, wind, fuel cells, and generator sets located directly onsite or on the distribution grid.

The United States is expected to be a leading market for distributed generation, with more than 250 GW installed cumulatively between 2015 and 2023, according to Navigant Research’s report Global Distributed Energy Deployment Forecast. The sites discussed below are some of the most visible installations along the drive down to the Bay Area. They represent the focus on distributed generation today and in the years to come.


As you drive through the city of Red Bluff, you see a 1-MW General Electric (GE) wind turbine installed at the Wal-mart distribution center. Wal-mart is the leading consumer of solar PV among U.S. retailers, with 105 MW of installed capacity, twice as much as the second-leading company, Kohl’s, with 51 MW. Big box retailers have installed more renewable energy than tech companies have and are a coveted prize for installers looking for big customers.

If you take the shortcut from I-5 to 505 South, toward San Francisco, it connects to 80 West in Fairfield/Vacaville, where a 1.1 MW solar PV installation at the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant is installed. With large energy consumption, water treatment facilities are costly for cities to operate, leading to attractive payback rates.


When you drive further, the Budweiser plant catches your eye right off the freeway, with 3 MW of wind power located onsite. The plant also uses solar and bio-energy recovery systems. These systems combined produce approximately 30% of the plant’s power onsite. Belgium’s InBev may have offended the cultural sensibilities of some Americans when it acquired Anheuser Busch in 2008, but it used American turbines–GE 1.6-MW units.

One of the other noticeable aspects of the drive through California, particularly in Davis and Sacramento, is tract housing developments, where residential solar PV is increasingly prevalent. The residential solar PV market in California has nearly doubled in each of the last 3 years thanks to growth in the solar lease model.

California is expected to continue to lead the way in distributed generation, with systems increasingly utilizing energy storage. Though these storage systems won’t all be visible along the road, they will help more renewables capacity to come online, making the drive more scenic each year.


Investors Driving Energy Access Markets

— March 24, 2015

One of the signs of an industry that’s coming of age is when there are enough investors actually attending a conference that you can put investors in the title. Such was the case for the second annual Energy Access Investor Conference in London. Jim Rogers, former Duke Energy CEO, was the keynote speaker this year, adding some utility industry credit to the event.

When I talk to people about the opportunity for solar lanterns and solar home systems (1 W-200 W) for people making less than $2 a day, I usually receive a combination of blank stares and befuddled looks. But 2014 was a breakout year, and this innovative industry is expected to continue expanding in 2015. According to Navigant Research’s report, Solar Photovoltaic Consumer Products, annual revenues for pico solar and solar home systems are expected to grow from $430 million in 2014 to $1.3 billion in 2024.

2014 Highlights

A couple of highlights from 2014:

  • Public and private investment in off-grid lighting surpassed $80 million.
  • Big names entered the market, including SolarCity, Vulcan, Omidyar Network, Schneider, and DFJ.
  • Platform companies emerged, including d.light, Barefoot Power, Greenlight Planet, and others.
  • Markets such as Bangladesh continued to grow even as incentives continued to wind down.

The Year Ahead

Looking ahead in 2015, I expect to see four major trends. First, consolidation will become more common as the larger players continue to gain market share. Second, existing companies will need to expand into new markets, particularly as Kenya, India, and Bangladesh become increasingly saturated. Third, mobile payment and monitoring systems, such as M-KOPA, will gain traction and increasingly become standard in products. Fourth, direct current consumer products, such as fans, radios, refrigerators, TVs, and other appliances specifically designed for less than 200W solar home systems, will grow in popularity.

With any luck, the fifth major trend will be less befuddled looks on people’s faces when I discuss the innovation and economic opportunity in some of the world’s most remote markets.


Net Metering Fight Comes to New Mexico

— January 8, 2015

The fight over solar interconnection and net metering – a topic I’ve covered previously in several blogs (here, here, and here) – has come to my home state.  In a rate case filed in December, Public Service of New Mexico (PNM) asked that customers with their own solar generation capacity solar customers be charged $6 per kilowatt (kW) of capacity, per month, beginning in 2016.  It also proposed that “banking” of excess power sold back to the utility be discontinued; this means that rather than selling back excess kilowatt-hours (kWh) generated in March for top dollar in July, solar customers will receive the net value of the energy in the same month that it’s generated.

Girding for a Fight

Solar industry advocates suggest that the plan will severely dampen demand.  New Mexico has abundant sunshine, but a relatively poor economic base, and solar adoption in the Land of Enchantment has been lower than one might expect.  According to IREC, New Mexico ranked 9th nationwide in total PV installations, with 257 megawatts (MW), at the end of 2013.  With accelerating economic recovery and the expiration of federal tax credits just 2 years away, New Mexico is poised for strong growth in 2015-16.

And that’s why PNM is making this move now.  Its argument that non-solar customers are increasingly subsidizing solar customers has merit, and growth in installations is only going to cost PNM more as it not only loses revenue from solar customers, but also must invest in its grid to support increased two-way electricity flow and changing load profiles.

Hitting Home

I’ve studied the proposal with more than just professional interest.  I recently got a quote for a solar array on my own home, in southern New Mexico, and while PNM isn’t my utility, El Paso Electric, my local provider, will surely be watching the proceedings closely.  Here’s my take on the situation, both as an analyst and as a potential solar customer.

First, $6/kW is fairly substantial, from a solar customer’s point of view.  PNM says that the average New Mexico system in its territory is 3-5 kW, but solar installers suggest that recent installations average 6 or 7 kW.  In order to serve my 2,800 square foot home, a 10 kW system was proposed.

So while PNM says its fee would average $18-$30/month, my own system would cost $60/month under the PNM proposal.  That would extend the payback period for my system from 8 years to 11 years.  But, unless I sell my house in the next 10 years, it’s still a good investment.

The solar industry, however, doesn’t agree.  A recent article in the Albuquerque Journal offered detailed numbers to illustrate how PNM’s fees will change the solar equation to the point where consumers are better off sticking with the utility.

Payback Period

There are some flaws with this analysis, however.  First, solar panel prices have been falling dramatically, and should continue to do so for many more years.  So the math outlined in the Journal, based on current prices, will likely become moot in another year or two.  Second, the article fails to ascribe value to the fact that once the system is paid for, the homeowner pays only the connection fee to the utility.

In my case, the average monthly bill would fall from $223 (today) to $60.  Call it a $200 per month saving to account for rate increases.  Even with PNM’s proposed connection fee, the system will easily last long enough to support the investment.

New Mexico’s installed base of solar systems is likely to double or triple over the next decade.  It’s not reasonable to expect utilities to interconnect these customers for free, pay them peak prices for non-peak production, and spread those and other costs over the shrinking base of ratepayers.  But I do think it’s reasonable to question the $6/kW figure and ask PNM to justify it—especially since Arizona’s compromise plan last year came in at a far lower level.


Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date


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

By Author

{"userID":"","pageName":"Solar Power","path":"\/tag\/solar-power","date":"4\/18\/2015"}