Ashutosh Agrawal

Project finance for

Renewable Energy Projects
Risk Analysis

Aug 2009
Ashutosh Agrawal
Blog: www.frontiers2explore.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/itsmeashu
Email: [email protected]

1
Ashutosh Agrawal

Contents

What is Project Finance .......................................................................................................................... 3

Benefits of Project Finance ..................................................................................................................... 4
A Note on Structured Finance................................................................................................................. 5
Risk Considerations for Renewable Energy Projects .............................................................................. 6
Key Findings ............................................................................................................................................ 9
Works Cited........................................................................................................................................... 10

2
Ashutosh Agrawal

What is Project Finance

Project finance involves the creation of a legally independent project company financed with
nonrecourse debt for the purpose of investing in a capital asset, usually with a single purpose and a
limited life.

In context of an electric power project, the project company who owns the power project is the
legally independent entity. It is separate from its sponsoring firms. These sponsoring firms are
typically one to three which can be an EPC(Engineering Procurement & Construction) company or a
fuel (for power plant) company or an electrical utility or others. The sponsors contribute equity to
the project company typically upto 30% of total capitalisation. This equity appears as investments in
balance sheet of sponsors. The rest 70% comes in form of non-recourse debt.

Non-recourse debt would mean that in event of default the debt holders have no claim on sponsors’
assets. This in stark contrast with debt on corporate balance sheet where debt holders have claim on
corporate assets. In case of project finance the debt holders have claim only on the assets and the
cash-flows of the project company. The project finance deal is characterised with large amount of
contracts covering supply of inputs (Eg: fuel supply), purchase of outputs (Power off-take
agreement), EPC, Operations, Insurance and numerous others.

Project finance has emerged as one of the most important financing vehicles for investments in the
natural resources and infrastructure sectors such as power plants, toll roads, mines, pipelines,
airports, railways and telecommunications systems. (1)

3
Ashutosh Agrawal

Benefits of Project Finance

Project finance deals involve creation of a separate legal entity which is complex and takes long time
(6 to 18 months). Transaction costs are high for structuring such deals. Using corporate balance
sheet to finance a project is much cheaper. Yet project finance reduces total financing costs for a
firm in certain conditions. (1) (2)

Reduce Agency Costs:

The assets that are tangible and generate regular and high free cash flows run the risk of
managerial mis-management, wasteful expenditure and sub-optimal investments. Project finance
provides a separate asset governance system, decoupling it from corporate adventurism.
Numerous contracts reduce discretion of management of project Company and make the cash
flow easily verifiable. High debt structure reduces free cash flow and mechanism of allocating
cash-flows (Cash flow Waterfall) to debt holders provides monitoring control on managers.

Agency costs also come up due to possible opportunistic behaviour of the partners (like the
supplier of critical inputs, the buyer of outputs, the host country and others). A Power plant
positioned near the fuel supply point to reduce fuel transportation cost can provide bargaining
power to fuel provider in future. Project finance eliminates these risks by joint ownership, higher
debt level and long term contracts.

During distress there can be a conflict between debt holder and equity holder. In corporate
world, the equity holder would go for risky reinvestments to bring the company out of distress,
whereas the debt holder will look forward to lower risks and return on their debt through
liquidation of assets. These conflicts are avoided by Cash Flow Waterfall which removes any
doubt on claims on cash flow. Strong debt contracts prevent any discretionary acts on part of
equity and debt holders. Since the debt is often bank debt and not bonds, the restructuring is
easier.

Prevent Underinvestment (Debt Overhang):

Ability of a corporate to take up debt and increase leverage is limited. A high leveraged company
may not be able to raise debt at reasonable rates. Equity expansion is not preferred for various
reasons as dilution of equity, tax reasons and high cost of equity. This limited ability of a
corporate to raise finance based on its balance sheet is limited. This limited ability may result in
under-investment in positive NPV projects.

Non-recourse debt is not dependent on corporate balance sheet but on the underlying cash flows
that will be created by the project. As a result a corporate can preserve its debt capacity and still
generate required finance for large projects with positive NPV.

Reduce Risk Contamination:

A high risk project can increase the whole corporate risk. A failing project can drag down the
whole organisation with it. The volatility of project cash flow will add to the volatility of corporate
cash flow, undermining the ability of firm to raise capital and confidence of suppliers and
customers.

4
Ashutosh Agrawal

Project finance separates the risky project cash flows from corporate cash flows hence preserving
the risk profile of the sponsor. Also in case of project failure the loss is limited to the equity in the
project company.

Large projects in emerging markets can be optimally financed as local and foreign equity will be
short in supply.

High leveraged structure provides tax shield.

A Note on Structured Finance

Structured finance (2) (3) shares the structure of project finance and can be utilised towards Power
projects. A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) is created which is a legally independent entity. The project
future cash-flows are the assets which is securitised by the SPV and sold in open market to investors
or privately placed. The securities are often split into tranches. Each tranche has a different level of
credit protection or risk exposure than another. There are a senior (“A”) class of securities and one
or more junior subordinated (“B,” “C,” etc.) classes. The senior classes have first claim on the cash
that the SPV receives, and the more junior classes only start receiving repayment after the more
senior classes have repaid. This arrangement is same as Cash Flow Waterfall as discussed before.

If there is default on payments the loss is absorbed first by the most subordinated tranches followed
by other senior tranches. The senior securities are typically AAA rated, signifying a lower risk, while
the lower-credit quality subordinated classes receive a lower credit rating, signifying a higher risk.
The most subordinated tranche also known as equity class may be retained by the originator as a
potential profit flow, which receives only the residual cash flow after all the other classes have been
paid.

Securitisation can bring insurance companies and pension funds to invest in renewable energy
projects. Subsequent securitisation of investments under MPA (Master Purchase Agreements) can
provide exit strategy to equity investors. (4)

5
Ashutosh Agrawal

Risk Considerations for Renewable Energy Projects

Project finance has been increasingly resorted to for renewable energy projects. Due to high
administrative costs involved in project finance, the application is limited to large size projects. For a
successful financial closure of a project, all the risks attributed to renewable energy projects need to
be avoided or mitigated. The risks vary with renewable technologies and countries.

Key risks in renewable energy projects and available risk management strategies will influence our
choice of country and renewable technologies to invest in. For instance, a country with high margins
(high promised feed-in-tariffs) may have high perceived political and regulatory risk which will deter
financiers.

Following are the key risks (with available risk mitigation strategies) identified with large scale
renewable energy projects for project finance (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) :

1. Renewable Resource and Technology specific risks:

The sources of energy are natural sources and their availability imposes certain risks. Technology
risks relate to renewable energy technologies which are not mature and reliable yet.
These risks vary with individual renewable technologies.

1.1 Solar Photovoltaic: Photovoltaics are made of semi-conductor material which when exposed
to sunlight generate electricity. There are practically no resource related risks associated as
there is clear data on solar isolation at various parts of the world. Technology has matured
with time for both Crystalline-Si and Amorphous-Si.
Risk Mitigation: PV manufacturers generally provide guarantee for 25 years. Insurance
covers are also available for other risks. Eg. SolarPro from G-Cube insurance.

1.2 Solar Thermal: Solar energy is concentrated into to produce heat which is then used to
produce steam and generate electricity. Resource related risks are low. The technology risks
are low as the components are generally standard.
Risk Mitigation: Manufacturers guarantee and standard insurance cover are available. Eg.
SolarPro from G-Cube insurance.

1.3 Wind: Wind power is harnessed by rotor blades and converted into electricity. Resources risk
include long term wind power reliability. Technology and operational risks include wind
turbine breakdown by failure of control unit, electrical parts and pitch control.
Risk Mitigation: Resource risk can be reduced by looking into past wind history data. Wind
based derivative and insurance cover are also available to financiers. Insurance covers are
also available to technology and operational risks. Eg: WindPro from G-Cube insurance.
Insurers’ experience with offshore technology has been less and deductibles are high.

1.4 Hydro: The technology is mature and risks are low. Availability of historic water flow data
lowers the resource risk.
Risk Mitigation: Weather insurance or derivatives are available to minimise resource risks.
Standard insurance covers for other risks are available. Eg: HydroPro from G-Cube insurance.

1.5 Biomass Gasification/Biogas/Landfill Gas:

6
Ashutosh Agrawal

Biomass gasification refers to gasification of farm/wood waste in a reactor. The gas so

produced is burned to generate electricity.
Landfill gas refers to synthetic gas (syngas) generated from incineration of waste in a land-
fill.
Biogas is gas produced from anaerobic decomposition of animal waste.
Resource risk related to availability of input fuel is a major risk, affecting the long term
performance of the power plant. Technology risks exist as there is ongoing research in
various gasification systems.
Risk Mitigation: Long term contract with input fuel suppliers is key to minimise resource risk.
Fuel supply contracts need to be in place and fuel suppliers must be bankable. Contracts
with more than one fuel supplier reduce risk. Customised insurance covers (Eg: BioPro from
G-Cube insurance) are available for fuel supply risks. Machine breakdown insurance,
manufacturers’ guarantees and other standard insurance are available to cover technology
risks.

1.6 Geothermal: The heat below the surface of the earth is brought to the surface in primary
circuit and using heat exchanger the heat is transferred for power generation. The heat is
available in form of hot aquifers or hot-dry-rocks, upto a depth of more than 400m. A major
risk is uncertainty about the quantity and temperature of geothermal resource until first
drilling is not completed. Apart from geothermal resource risk, there are risks associated
with geothermal drilling operations (Blowout1).
Risk Mitigation: Insurance covers are available for geothermal resource risk and drilling risks.

1.7 Ocean: These further can be classified as tidal and wave. Tidal technologies include building
dams or installing tidal turbines similar to wind turbines. Wave technologies include
oscillating water columns, collecting water in basins, floating buoy anchored to sea bed.
These technologies have not matured yet and technology risks are high compared to
resource risk.
Risk Mitigation: Ocean renewable technologies are in demonstration stage and insurance
covers are not readily available. However some like WavePro from G-Cube proved
customised insurance covers.

2. Construction Risks: This will include risks associated with project not meeting its specifications,
cost and time overruns.
Risk Mitigation: Ensuring that the construction contractor has a good reputation and is bankable
(credit worthiness) helps to minimise this risk. Further there are standard insurance covers (9)
available to cover these risks. Construction contractors are required to give performance
guarantees/surety bonds.

3. Performance Risks during Operations: There is risk of equipment theft, damage, accidents and
fire. Further, O&M (Operations & Maintenance) contractor may fail to perform as per contracts.

1
Uncontrolled release of underground pressurised fluid during drilling, which can damage rig equipments and
fatalities to rig personnel.

7
Ashutosh Agrawal

Risk Mitigation: There are standard insurance covers for equipment related risks. Bankable O&M
contractor, surety bonds/performance guarantees reduce contractor performance risks.

4. Market Risks: This risk relate to price (at which power is purchased) and the time duration for
which it is available to cover the project costs and provide a reasonable return. This is critical as
renewable power is costlier than conventional sources and the pool price (regular electricity
market price paid to power generators). This is so because cost incurred in setting up
conventional energy projects does not include cost of negative externalities (carbon emission,
pollution) etc. Various governments, to promote renewable energy projects, provide incentives
like Feed-in-tariffs with guaranteed period and renewable certificate trading. These incentive
schemes are source of cash inflow for renewable energy projects.
Risk Mitigation: Entering a power-offtake agreement (PPA-Purchase Power Agreement) with the
power utility minimises the risk, ensuring steady cash inflow. There are no standard insurance
products to cover these risks.

5. Credit Risks: There is always a risk that the power utility may not pay the price as the payment
commitments extend long time into the future. Though these utilities are generally private but in
some countries they are also government owned and have non-commercial interests.
Risk Mitigation: There are no standard insurance products for this risk. However one can go for
credit default swap on individual utility company. Major financial institution can resort to credit
derivatives by pooling their portfolio of renewable projects.

6. Financial Risks: Volatility in interest rate, currency exchange rate and inflation can affect
economics of project, more so in overseas finance.
Risk Mitigation: Standard derivative products are available in the market to hedge these risks.

7. Legal Risks: Poor legal infrastructure of host country can increase the probability of default on
contracts and re-negotiations. The risk is generally high in least developed and developing
countries.
Risk Mitigation: There are no standard financial risk management products to mitigate the risk.
Some agencies like US based OPIC(Overseas Private Investment Corp.) provide political insurance.
Obtaining a guarantee from the government on the contracts and involving multi-lateral agencies
can reduce the risks.

8. Regulatory Risks: Incentive tariffs are decided by government regulators. In spite of PPA (Power
Purchase Agreement) being in place, there is possibility that regulators may revise the prices
downward midway of the PPA period and renegotiate PPA.
Risk Mitigation: There are no standard financial risk management products to mitigate the risk.
The renewable energy policies of the country and assurances from the government with which
they are pursued can give some confidence to financiers.

9. Political Risks: The associated risks are political violence in the country, expropriation of the
project assets and restriction on currency conversion.
Risk Mitigation: Political Risk Insurance is available from multilateral agencies which provide
cover for expropriation of funds, currency conversion and transfer.

8
Ashutosh Agrawal

10.Force Majeure Risks: There is a risk of natural disasters like earthquakes, floods etc. can hamper
the project during construction and operations phase.
Risk Mitigation: Standard insurance and re-insurance products are available to mitigate the risks.

An investment banking company, that provides project finance, evaluates project risks on a long list
of factors (5). These factors can be condensed into following key considerations:

Is there an off-take agreement in place?

Is the off-take agreement bankable?

Is Fuel Supply Agreement in place?

Is the EPC contractor bankable?

Is the O&M contractor bankable?

Key Findings
Based on the study of project finance and risks involved in regards to renewable projects, following
observations are made:

Credit worthiness of parties involved in project is an important criterion. It gives the confidence
to investors to lend money based on future assets and cash-flows the project will generate.

It’s highly improbable that any firm has a higher credit rating than the rating of the country itself
in which it is situated (5). Also a high country rating (sovereign rating) also minimises the credit
risk associated with power utility not meeting their payment obligations under PPA.

Legal, regulatory and market risks do not have any standard insurance covers or any other
standard financial instruments to mitigate risks. These risks are critical to project success and
there mitigation depends on choice of the country of the renewable energy project. A country
which has national level targets for renewable energy and policies and incentives framework
minimises these risks.

Future cash flows of the project form the underlying asset based on which investors finance the
projects. Renewable projects compete for finance and the projects with attractive cash flows with
minimal risk win. Cash flows in renewable energy projects are function of the cash grants, tax
incentives, subsidies and preferential tariffs provided by government, renewable resource density
and the cost of the setting up the power plant. Of these tariffs play a major role as they
guarantee the payment over the duration of the PPA.

The key considerations for investment decisions are minimising risks and maximising returns. A
framework analysing qualitative and quantitative factors detailed above has been devised by the
author for M/S First Sustainable LLC. All 200 countries and renewable technologies are analysed
using the framework and potential countries were ranked in order of investment attractiveness for
each renewable technology.

9
Ashutosh Agrawal

Works Cited
1. Esty, Benjamin C. The Economic Motivations for Using Project Finance. [PDF] s.l. : Harvard
Business School, February 14, 2003.

2. Campbell R. Harvey, Aditya Agarwal, Sandeep Kaul. Project Finance. [PowerPoint Presentation]
s.l. : Duke University, 2009.

3. Securitization. Wikipedia. [Online] [Cited: June 3, 2009.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securitization.

4. Sidell, Scott. Conn. Shop Plots Novel Solar Investment Scheme . Power Finance & Risk. [Online]
June 26, 2009. [Cited: June 28, 2009.] Featured as one of the Top Stories..
http://www.iipower.com/channel/1091/Top_Stories.aspx.

5. Sidell, Scott, CEO, First Sustainable, LLC. Telephone Interview. [interv.] Ashutosh Agrawal. May 10,
2009. www.firstsustainablellc.com.

6. Rodenhuis, Erik Jan. Green light for renewable energy investments : a risk analysis tool for
renewable energy project development. [Webinar] s.l. : Leonardo Energy, June 19, 2009.

7. Marsh. Scoping Study on Financial Risk Management Instruments for Renewable Energy Projects.
Sustainable Energy Finance Initiative (SEFI). [Online] 2009.
http://www.sefi.unep.org/fileadmin/media/sefi/docs/publications/RiskMgt_full.pdf.

8. United Nations Environment Program. Assessment of Financial Risk Management Instruments for
RE Projects in Developing Countries. [PDF] April 2006. UNEP/GEF Project.

9. GCube. Insurance today for greener tomorrow. [E-mail] s.l. : GCube Underwriting Ltd., 2009.
Contact: Tom Cain, Sales Executive.

10