“Schlop. Schlop. Beautiful schlop.
Beautiful schlop with a cherry on top!”
-- Dr. Seuss, Oh, The Thinks You Can Think
For many who follow alternative and distributed energy market
developments, the past five years have been a roller coaster ride,
with steep rises, falls, and twists of every sort. However, over
the past year, the alternative and distributed energy market seems
to be ripening in a real and sustainable manner, and the market
could be closer to a tipping point than anytime beforehand.
Exogenous factors are driving this changed market, including:
higher energy prices (by far, the most important driver),
reliability and security concerns, and environmental challenges.
In turn, these factors are intensifying a trend towards favorable
regulatory and political treatment. Many states are now branding
themselves in terms of their comparative advantages and support
for particular alternative energy technologies, with an eye
towards economic development and 21st century jobs.
In turn, customers are buying alternative and distributed
energy technologies and solutions. Energy technology companies
have restructured their marketing and sales efforts by narrowing
their offerings, improving the mix of direct sales as compared
with distribution partnerships or other channels, and providing a
total value solution from a customer’s perspective. As a result, a
majority of companies in the sector have seen improving top line
results, with revenue growing at 15 percent or more on an annual
basis.
The Distributed Energy Financial Group’s recent market research
is consistently showing a ripening market for alternative and
distributed energy. This article offers three signs of that trend:
1) positive market trends, 2) growing investor interest and
availability of capital, and 3) favorable regulatory treatment as
embodied in a ratcheting up of resource portfolio standards,
incentives and subsidies, and environmental policies that,
directly or indirectly, support alternative and distributed energy
technologies and solutions.
Market Is Bullish On Distributed Energy
The Distributed Energy Financial Group in partnership with
Market Strategies Inc. (MSI), recently completed the second annual
DE market survey. Approximately 550 stakeholders responded to the
survey representing all facets of the industry, including
utilities, vendors, regulators, developers, investors and other
interested stakeholders.
Over 75% of the respondents felt that revenue would grow in
2006. This year, slightly more respondents (45% v.s. 42% in 2005)
feel that sector revenue will grow by over 5 %. Investors (60%)
and executives (52%) are aligned on growth potential. 42 % percent
of respondents rate the sector as a buy, and only 5% rate the
sector as a sell.
While DEFG has a very broad definition of the distributed
energy sector that includes integrated systems and controls to
provide a full value proposition to customers, the market is much
more focused on specific facets of the distributed energy sector,
namely, renewable energy technologies and demand management. The
survey, therefore, asked respondents what specific segments would
be the most profitable from their perspective.
In regard to business issues, the survey examined the business
issues from the perspective of the customer, the criteria that the
customer used to make an investment, and then from the vendor
perspective, the top issues facing executives at companies that
provide DE solutions.
There is one obvious finding, energy prices matter a great deal
and that directly leads to total expected rate of return. In the
market, there is every expectation that we have entered into a new
era of relatively high energy prices, including electricity prices
as rate caps come off and a record wave of utility rate cases in
progress or planned.
Survey respondents also indicated that vendors must continue to
improve their technological advantage (23% of respondents) and
reduce their cost of production (17% of respondents) in order to
be successful in the future.
Admittedly, this is a tall order, with respondents basically
telling vendors to spend money on R&D and operations, and on the
other hand, to cut costs. No wonder then that so many DE companies
have trouble finding the right mix of investment and cutting costs
in order to increase operating margins.
In addition to improving the technological performance and
functionality of the offering, respondents highlighted the
importance of the entire offering, which would include the
presentation of the offering, the contracting process,
implementation, and service and maintenance after the contract is
signed. These are all components of the value proposition that
technology vendors, eager to sign deals, have somewhat downplayed
in the past.
When asked what are the most important issues for customers
purchasing DE solutions, respondents clearly stated “economic
advantage/ payback” and a “reduction in energy costs” were the
most important.
This finding has many important implications that are further
reflected in survey responses, including:
- Branding of products and the vendor offering should reflect
the value proposition from the customer perspective (“Power
Save” was chosen by close to 60 percent of the respondents from
a list of hypothetical brand names);
- For DE vendors discussing cost savings as part of the
offering is very important, with approximately half the
respondents indicating that the cost savings offered must be 15
percent or higher as compared with current energy expenditures
for the customer to be very interested;
- Large commercial was the customer segment that respondents
indicated would represent the most growth for the DE sector, and
to be effective with C&I customers, a short payback (50% of
respondents) and “reliable” technology (15% of respondents but
46% when factoring in for top two responses) are paramount.
- For residential customers, “simple and easy to use” was more
significant, with 32% of respondents indicating this response.
Investor Interest In The Sector Is High
The Distributed Energy Stock Index (DESI, pronounced Deh-Zee)
performed strongly with a 17 percent gain over its first year (Q3
2005 through Q2 2006), outperforming all the major benchmark
indices by a wide margin over the same period. For Q2 2006, the
DESI lost 6 percent for the quarter, even after reaching a record
high in May.
The DESI is comprised of six segments and a total of 42
companies divided up between the six segments. A few of the
segments accounted for most of the gain, especially the renewable
energy segment with a 76 percent gain for the year, and the steady
upward progress exhibited by the prime movers and project
developers segment.
But as indicated by the Q2 results, a roller coaster ride of
volatility is expected over the next year. The alternative fuels
segment, for example, gained 60 percent in the early part of Q2,
and then had loss almost all the gains by the end of the quarter.
Even so, with the prospect of double digit returns and with
many companies beginning to approach profitability after many
years of development, investor interest is expected to remain high
over the coming years. With new products and funds, such as
Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and a growing number of private
equity funds, institutional investors are beginning to also place
money in the sector. Look for this trend to intensify.
Favorable Regulatory and Political Trends
The third sign of a ripening market is that there is an
intensifying trend for favorable regulatory and political
treatment of alternative and distributed energy.
Various states have enacted resource portfolio standards (RPS)
which will require an increasing amount of renewable and other
alternative energy resources to be added to their energy portfolio
over fairly short periods of time. Wind, ethanol and other sources
of alternative energy are boosted by an increasing amount of tax
credits and subsidies.
The top regulatory driver, however, was “innovative rates.” The
market is beginning to recognize that we have entered into a
historic period of utility rate cases. Three major factors are
driving these rate cases: 1) many utilities have not gone in for a
general rate case for many years, especially for T&D; 2) under the
“back to basics” strategy, utilities have cut costs and have
delayed investments but this strategy has run its course, and
utilities are now looking to shore up their operations and for
revenue growth opportunities; and 3) rate caps are coming off in
restructured states which lead to rate cases.
Each rate case presents an opportunity to push for more
programs and/ or subsidies, incentives or other means to support
alternative and distributed energy. As importantly, utilities are
beginning to look at alternative and distributed energy
differently than even a few years ago, less as a threat and more
as an opportunity to defer capital expenditures or increase top
line revenue.
An interesting finding from the 2006 DEFG MSI DE market survey
was that demand response, demand management and energy efficiency
have gained a great deal of traction over the past year.
The Distributed Energy Market Index (DEMI) is a tool that we
use with clients to refine their commercialization strategies and
to undertake strategic planning. As the DEMI map above shows,
there is growing regulatory and political support for demand
response and demand management in California, the Midwest and the
Northeast. The recently passed Energy Policy Act 0f 2005 also has
strong language in the law supporting demand response across the
nation.
Given that demand management and energy efficiency technologies
are proven technologies, are supported by regulatory and political
trends, including meeting environmental goals, and with these
projects and programs being oftentimes quickest to implement, the
demand management, metering and energy efficiency segment should
experience strong growth over the next three to five years.
Conclusions
Contrary to what many observers believe, a majority of the
publicly-traded companies in the distributed and alternative
energy sector -- such as those in the DESI -- are not even close
to being profitable. "Ripening" of the sector does not mean that
the distributed and alternative energy sector is mature, or even
close to it. If anything, the market may be even more turbulent
and volatile in the future, and many of the companies that exist
today may be acquired or cease to exist in the future.
While the intention is not to oversell the sector, our market
research is pointing to growing evidence that this time is
different, and that current trends could be more sustainable and
supported by fundamentals than before.
Specific conclusions include:
- Market conditions, e.g., high energy prices and reliability
concerns, are ripening the market opportunity.
- Market awareness is growing of the value proposition offered
by alternative and distributed energy technologies, slowly
translating into actual sales, and ultimately, the expectation
of profitability.
- The value proposition is being continuously improved even
while vendors work to improve operating margins. Focusing on
commercial and industrial customers and refocusing the offering
on fewer products, more R&D focused on that narrow offering,
resulting in lower costs but improved customer service, are key
reasons for this improvement.
- Investor interest in the sector is very high. Billions of
dollars of capital are expected to enter the market over the
next three to five years. Institutional investors are becoming
much more active. The alternative and distributed energy sector
has outperformed other sectors and benchmark indices in the
stock market, and even with increased volatility expected,
should continue to perform strongly.
- Resource portfolio standards, incentives and subsidies,
especially for renewable energy and alternative fuels, will be
increasing substantially, and therefore will have a major impact
on the development of the market as it evolves over the short
term.
- A unique opportunity exists to bolster the value proposition
through innovative rate design and tariff structures because
regulators, customers and utilities are aligned on the solutions
that provide the most value. Environmental regulations could
also bolster this opportunity.
The sector is not a pretty one to analyze sometimes. Because of
the need to bring together different areas of expertise –
business/ financial, technical/ engineering and regulatory – in
order to fully understand trends and market opportunities, the
alternative and distributed energy sector can be maddeningly
difficult to predict. The past has been littered with broken
promises and experiments. To use a favorite word from Dr. Seuss,
it is like watching “schlop.” But it could very well turn out to
be “beautiful schlop with a cherry on top.”
The Distributed Energy Financial Group, LLC
recently released the results of its 2006 Distributed Energy
Market Survey that tracks market developments in the distributed
and alternative energy sector. Over 540 stakeholders responded to
the survey, providing a benchmark to analyze the progress of this
important sector. An article summarizing the results is now
available on the DEFG web site. To obtain a copy of the article at
no charge, go to: www.defgllc.com.
Readers Comments
Date |
Comment |
William Schenewerk
7.18.06 |
From: William E.
Schenewerk 5060 San Rafael Avenue Los Angeles CA
90042-3239 To: Jamie Wimberly Re: Distributed generation
Ms Wimberly Distributed generation is all about tax
credits and mandates. Just like wind energy. Tax credits
go away when they start costing the government too much
money. Mandates go away when the ratepayer is paying too
much. DWP is asking for more money when it is paying more
for "renewable energy" than for natural gas. Household
distributed generation has never been demonstrated. It
requires drying your hair while in the shower. Industrial
distributed generation is what is called Qualified
Facilities (QF) in California. Low megawatt producers that
burn natural gas. These have been around for years and the
easy applications are probably already done. Approximately
1/4 of California generation is QF. Two major
disadvantages are load matching and use of natural gas.
The naked emperor is heat pumps. Instead of generating
your own power and servicing a low temperature heat load,
heat pumps use electricity to directly service the low-temperator
heat load. Right now nobody seems to sell heat pumps that
product low-pressure steam from electricity. COP of 2.5
seems possible when making 15 psig steam. Power would come
from coal or atomic power at perhaps 8 cents/kWh. That
would make thermal energy cost 3.2 cents/kWh, or 9 USD/MMBtu
as steam. With typical boiler efficiency, that would be
equivalent to 12 USD/MMBtu natural gas. Of course heat
pumps do not get tax credits. Perhaps because they would
use atomic power or coal. I have not seen anything on low
pressure steam production using a compressor with flash
evaporation or an air-water heat exchanger. Research on
something that might actually work is not politically
correct. Heat pumps are presently in widespread domestic
use. So far I have only heard of using heat pumps for home
heating. I seem to remember seeing a heat pump water
heater some years ago. A heat pump water heater would be
particularly useful in warm climates if it sat in the
kitchin. Perhaps someone should make a combination
refrigerator-water heater.
|
Jason Makansi
7.18.06 |
I teach my kids (and
anyone else who will listen) to pay as much attention to
the source of information as the information itself. In
this case, let's be honest, DE Financial Group was formed
to give definition and focus to distributed energy (DE)
within the investment community. "Not (as Seinfeld's gang
would say) that there's anything wrong with that." This is
one of those articles that positions DE within the
investment community against other better defined sectors
(like public utilities, oil/gas, etc). Lumping everything
but the kitchen sink into DE does not add clarity to the
situation. I define DE as power generating or management
devices that function on the customer's side of the meter
and tend to exclude large industrial plants mostly
dedicated to providng power to a single facility.
Being familiar with, or having direct experience in,
every incarnation of DE since the early 1970s (Total
Energy, Packaged and Micro-Cogeneration, Purpa and small
Power, and now distributed power, let me add some pearls
of wisdom: 1. You need high electricity prices and low
premium fuel prices to make DE economics work. 2. if the
incumbent distribution utility isn't working with you, it
is working against you, usually in ways you won't discover
until too late. (Who else remembers Purpa-killer rates in
Southern California?) 3. The distributed computing model
does not seem to be analogous for distributed power.
Distributed computing broke the paradigm by being faster,
better, cheaper. There was also no "incumbent" supplier to
deal with, because there was no supplier at all for
"computing." 4. The "customer" usually doesn't care about
DE because historically (not currently), energy costs are
typically a small component of overall costs. Other value
elements like reliability don't resonate because the
customer really has no way to bencmark it. 5. Most
practical DE options are still fuel based (e.g. natural
gas) and therefore do not improve the environmental
footprint much, especially in the area of global warming.
Just because funding for fuel cells comes from a renewable
energy budget item doesn't make today's fuel cells a
renewable technology. 6. Creative investment ideas have
backslided. We're about to embark on a new round of
construction of coal and even nuclear power stations,
because that is what the financiers understand. Investment
doesn't flow to the best ideas; it flows to the most
predictable (at the time of the investment anyway)
returns. 7. Practical and confident use of DE depends on
energy storage devices and power electronics (PE) more
than most observers give credit, and most R&D funders are
neglecting. Ultimately, this may be the "Achilles heel" of
the sector, unless greater resources and attention are
devoted to them.
All that said, I think DE does have a future, in the
form of micro-grids. Tying multiple devices together, and
own/operating them like a "utility" using advanced
automation and power electronics allows you to achieve
economies of scale, as long as a utility-like entity is
still responsible for the customer interface. Once this
model is proven to achieve lower rates for the long term,
all of the stakeholders should be mollified.
Our multi-decade strategy for electricity
infrastructure development should include a "robust
backbone" based on the traditional grid model (large
centralized plants, long transmission lines, large energy
storage facilities, etc) and micro-grids in high
population centers, industrial centers, or special
reliability situations (telecom, chip-makers, etc) that
unify the DE resources, especially for those areas that
truly place a value the benefits DE can bring.
|
Todd McKissick
7.18.06 |
Jamie,
Interesting article. Very good detail on the subjects
discussed. However, I am disappointed to not see any
information regarding new and/or private startups. Not
every entrepreneur with a great alternative solution is
planning on going public and swimming with the sharks.
Almost every day, I hear of a new company in startup
mode with a promising new technology. Quite a few of them
have surprising technical merit too. Almost every other
day, I hear of one going under or giving up because of the
lack of appropriate funding. These guys (myself included)
want a way to finance the last stage of development on a
solution. Once proven, they can get further financing to
produce their product more easily. The problem is that
investors are only looking at proven technologies or ones
with a 3-5 year verifiable exit strategy of an IPO or an
acquisition. The company owner has no way of maintaining
ownership in his/her endeavor. Keep in mind that he is
most likely in it to solve the energy crisis 1st and make
lots of money 2nd, unlike the potential investors.
As far as government grants/loans/guarantees go, I
think Mr. Schenewerk summed it up best with his comment,
"Research on something that might actually work is not
politically correct." Pick your favorite new technology
that can actually make a significant differenct and see
how many grants it actually qualifies for. You'll find
that it uncannily falls between every crack in the
solicitations. Research is an all out joke in this
country. There are too many grant stalkers who milk these
grants for all the non-producing, continual free money
they can get and they consistantly win the grants that
should be going to Joe inventor. I personally know of one
in his ninth year of business, with 5-8 employees, who has
never sold anything, but keeps getting grants. If you do
get past these roadblocks, you'll find that grants are
usually stretched out timeframes and larger dollar values,
and require a 50% cost share. This eliminates everyone who
can't come up with half of a million dollar project cost,
leaving only big fish once again.
These are the ideas that will change the future and
until we can get the big corporation campaign money out of
the loop, we're destined to wait for some of these ideas
to find their way into some seriously creative money. My
amazement is centered on how none of the "venturing"
entities have noticed that their current investments will
become worthless when the ones "that might actually work"
finally do hit the market.
|
Dale Steffes
7.18.06 |
Next year, it will be 40
years ago that I was working with "Total Energy". Mr.
Makonsi referenced that term. In 1967, working for a major
natural gas transmission company, I was one of two
assigned to that effort. The natural gas industry was
fearful of losing the residential heating market to "Total
Electric". The electric rate was declining with huge
additional loads. The rate had been 8 mils and was
approaching 6 mils and the natural gas industry was
fearful of 4 mil power due to nuclear coming on.
Anyway, my position was eliminated when I told my
superiors that we could increase our market 6% next year.
Their view was that the U.S. was running out of natural
gas, and therefore they discontinued my marketing effort.
I have a lot more on this subject, but will save it for
the next generation. (Is that a play on words?)
|
Jamie Wimberly
7.18.06 |
From: Jamie Wimberly,
author of the article and CEO of the Distributed Energy
Financial Group. Thank you all for your insightful
comments so far. I wanted to take a moment to respond.
We don't disagree with Mr. Schenewerk's assessment of
the impact that public incentives have on particular
technologies or segments. However, as noted in the
article, those incentives have kick started the targeted
segments to the point that they are gaining market
traction on their own. Customers are seeking out the
technologies and offerings. Moreover, these markets are
global in nature, with many companies in this space
gaining market opportunities and share in countries
without the incentives but certainly the need.
I would also agree with Mr. Schenewerk that what
qualifies as a "resource" must be expanded. He provides a
good example with heat pumps, which should/ could include
solar, geothermal (direct access), even more efficient
heat pumps, etc.
Jason Makansi put his finger on a debate that has been
occurring for years, namely, the definition of what
qualifies as distributed energy, or even "green." At DEFG,
we prefer to look at how the pieces fit together within an
integrated, distributed system that provides a full value
proposition to the customer. The difference now than in
the past is that this movement is building off the
advances in managing networks and information. For
example, many energy storage companies look more like the
data centers that they serve than your typical energy
company.
Otherwise, you get into cat fights about semantics --
which, admittedly, have real economic consequences when
considering what gets incentivized and what doesn't. This
space has been dominated by a technological and/ or
regulatory focus for too long. What's interesting -- and
perhaps revolutionary -- is how this all plays out in
regard to system/ grid configuration that in turn will
produce new products and services that consumers desire.
For example, I think AMI, as a platform, has huge
potential to drive this kind of change.
Todd McKissick, we do keep track on IPOs and what is
going on in the private equity markets. We are
co-launching a fund focused on private equity in the
alternative energy space. But there is only so much you
can put in an article.
Finally, I appreciate Dale Steffes's observation.
Again, though, we think this go around might be different
than before. Let's hope so.
Jamie
|
Len Gould
7.18.06 |
Mr. Schenewerk declares
"Household distributed generation has never been
demonstrated. It requires drying your hair while in the
shower. " To that I would juxtapose "anything which is not
barred by physics is probable", then point out the physics
of burning natural gas as a heat source for home heating
or domestic hot water, especially in cold climates.
Producing a 1700 degK flame to heat air to 300 degK is a
waste of energy quality which only current failures in
markets allow, and must soon eliminate. Though it appears
it will be left to the Japanese to dominate this market as
well, smart investors preferring to wait for Honda to
resolve the issue then buy shares. Not because Mckissik
didn't warn everyone though. quelle domage
|
david dell
7.20.06 |
The facts are clear -
the glass is half full:
the markets are growing, technology is improving and
getting cheaper, the cost of energy is up and extremely
likely to remain higher than at the beginning of 2000.
Political forces and social pressures are more favorable.
Billions in subsidies and tax abatements are shaping the
market and more billions are lined up for invesmtent.
The facts are clear - the glass is half empty:
No one is making any serious money, old energy power
structures are not going away, the ROI's are not
compelling even with subsidies. There are no clear
technology winners nor standard interfaces to the grid.
The burdens of NIMBY and arcane local regualtions impose a
hidden "tax" burden.
Still, whether the glass seems empty or full, we can
all admit the glass is getting bigger. Day by day there is
more opportunity and upside - to paraphrase chicken little
"the sky is rising, the sky is rising!" Personally I bless
and applaud the stubborn optimism of Jamie and co. Sure,
we all have our agendas and hopes to benefit from growth
of alternate and distributed enrgy technologies, but I
prefer to applaud the messengers of hope - not shoot them.
|
|
|