CoachKandSportsguy |
06-07-2020 07:48 AM |
solar panels, finance and the cost of the maintaining the old back up system
Good morning, as the debater of concepts with some experience and some expertise, currently working at an electric and gas utility company in finance, doing some regulatory reporting, doing some investment analysis, assisting in rate setting requests:
Observation: always interesting to read who uses a financial reason, who uses a faulty financial reason, and who uses an emotional or generalized reason as their valid point of view. Therefore, as a finance professional supporting or blowing up investment requests, not everyone should financialize their decisions about investing in solar power. There are good non financial reasons to invest in solar power. If you want to invest in them, please by all means do so.
But as in most individual decisions, there is a consequence of many individual decisions which most individuals can't see now, or in the future. So, please beware of unintended consequences of the progress of solar power, which I will explain the concept.
Utility economics:
First, current utility industry is broken down between generation systems, transmission systems, and distribution systems. Generation systems and transmission systems are regulated by FERC, which means the federal government. Retail generation and Distribution systems are regulated by the state department of utilities, different names in different states. By US governmental statute, utility companies are guaranteed a profit rate of return. The utility company applied to the state for the rate structure to charge its customers. The state government approves the rate structure. If the state government doesn't approve a rate structure, the utility has the right to sue in court and the judge will decide the rate structure. If the request is documented well enough and falls within the statutes, the judge can overrule the state regulatory body. likewise the state can pass legislation to force a utility to do something, like accept retail generation, which can bankrupt a utility. True story: State of New York required Niagra Mohawk to accept generation from alternate utilities, which increased their cost of supply above break even, and bankrupted them in the late 1990s. google it if you want, my source is one of the finance controllers who was there. So regulators control the system pricing, whether you like it, agree with it, or not.
So, how does this effect you? first, the initial distribution system was not built for two way electric flow. The unintended consequence is that a different electric usage and monitoring system has to be developed, and then installed, and then monitored for billing. This new system took time to design, develop, install and use. Yes, there was and still is a cost which is recovered with your current distribution rates. And in older systems, the 1950s mechanical switching systems are breaking with the quick reversing between generations flows and sun covering the solar panels. More investments, which the utility company is guaranteed a rate of return, remember from above? so again more background on your now backup system price structure Also, there is a control structure to energy flows, as there is no place to store/put in inventory, electricity for future use, at scale. (home batteries are not the point, FPL system storage is the concept) so the control structure is designed to keep stable system amount available at all times. That control structure now has to include the new uncontrollable incoming generation from your panels. That is a very large investment and task as solar comes on line, as the weather is not stable so neither is your generator to the big system. More investment and technical expertise needed, therefore more increase to your now traditional electric system, or your backup system.
So, the punch line: as more solar comes on line from retail sources, the less traditional energy will be consumed. Given that the distribution system to your house has a very large maintenance cost, million of miles of wires, millions of poles, thousands of transformers, millions of meters, usage collection systems, thousands of remote cell phone monitoring devices, etc, to cover those required costs to your backup system, with a guaranteed rate of return in order to guarantee 24x7 availability, traditional electricity costs will continue to increase, in a non linear, exponential way. As the percentage of customers with solar increases, a smaller traditional base (denominator) usage will have to cover the cost of the backup system, to be available at night, or during storms.
So unless you go off the grid 100% you are slowly for now, raising rates to everyone else, which includes all your grocery stores, retail stores, government offices, public lighting, etc. But the other point is that your current net metering agreement is subject to review and rate adjustments by the governmental regulators. With that uncertainty, you probably didn’t model those real long term changes into your somewhat flawed NPV or IRR model. (For the technical financial types, NPV is primarly a bond pricing model, with stable and predictable cash flows. IRR is better for a variable cash flow models, but still has a weakness of not separating out the different rates of investment return versus financing rates. Therefore, proper detailed financial model should use the MIRR formula to give a more correct answer. But that is the least of the return analysis)
If for any unforeseen reason that solar panels degrade and become a fire hazard, your insurance rates will increase, which may wipe out all the savings, and tesla panels have had lawsuits for roof fires.
The risk of solar investment return is that the current rates, both generation (wholesale) and usage, (retail) are stable. But that is not a guarantee, and with the potential for your usage rates to rise faster than inflation in order to maintain your backup traditional system, and your wholesale price to not go lower, your entire model is based upon the current spread between wholesale and retail pricing and your percentage of backup usage. With regulators being able to change that on a whim, or as a result of an unforeseen event, the societal impact of increasing solar is higher traditional energy prices for everyone.
So in reality your model is only good for about 5 years max. other than fed bond models with guaranteed cash flows, most commercial investment models good for 5 years. The world changes very fast, the cash flows are very uncertain with weather patterns, and cost and price subject to government changes. The best societal solar investment is in large solar farms which have critical mass, which feeds the system through a single entry point for control and monitoring the system, but will not eliminate your backup system cost, and the cost of maintaining the distribution system, unless you go complete off. . .
Which is why, if you want to invest in solar, go for it, but from a purely investment point of view, the investment is very, very difficult to predict and guarantee any payback or investment return to make financial types comfortable with a reasonable return. But please don’t think that your current year savings is the only point for evaluation for the next 10-20 years. . .
Sportsguy
|