Solar Archives

Main


July 19, 2010

Metrics for Thin Film Solar CIGS Company Comparisons

Joseph McCabe

Many people ask me, “which CIGS company is going to emerge as winner in the race towards high efficiency thin film PV’s? To provide an enlightened perspective to the question, some historical perspectives are needed.

First Solar (FSLR) has helped the Thin Film PV Industry by proving that respectable solar to electric area efficiencies can be achieved in a low cost manufacturing processes, with respectable performance over time. First Solar’s technology is cadmium telluride (CdTe) on glass. Previously, amorphous silicon was the thin film leader, with the highest commercially available thin film area efficiencies; currently they have a challenge in today’s low cost, higher efficiency, crystalline PV market. CIGS (copper, indium, gallium and selenium) currently holds the world efficiency record for a single layer thin film PV deposition in a laboratory setting. The promise of CIGS is that it can surpass the commercial manufacturing efficiency of the other thin film technologies in the near term.

In a recent presentation at Intersolar in San Francisco by David Eaglesham of First Solar showed their CapEx (the capital expense for the plant and manufacturing equipment) at $0.75/W, roadmapping (RM, future expected levels) to $0.65/W; manufacturing (mfg) costs (including depreciation and recycling) currently at $0.81/W, RM to $0.52/W; and current area efficiencies at 11%, RM to 14%. So a CIGS-on-glass company will need to compete with these current and future benchmarks to be at least competitive with First Solar. Flexible CIGS might have some greater market opportunities discussed below.

A second order performance factor in the PV technology race is temperature correction. PV is a direct energy conversion technology, which works better at lower temperatures. As PV modules are integrated into conventional building materials such as single ply roofing, standing seam metal roofing, or automobile surfaces, the modules will become hotter, and thus perform less than rack mounted PV modules which have air movement on the back sides. The moral of the finer system level details is that annual performance can vary with the various manufacturers’ module technology and should be a consideration when comparing various companies and technologies. Perhaps this can be a topic of a future altenergystocks article.

There is an additional economic metric which is required of PV systems, called balance of systems costs (BOS). Most PV on glass has similar BOS, between $1 and $3 a watt system level installation costs. The lower the module efficiency, the higher the area related BOS costs. Comparing 10% and 20% efficient modules both with area BOS of $2/W, the lower efficiency module has twice the costs because it uses twice the area. As the price of modules is reduced, the BOS becomes a more dominant factor in the installed system costs. A Deutsche Bank (DB) report expresses the concepts better than can be accomplished here. {July 9, 2007, DB “Technology and economics; thin films and crystalline silicon”} The costs are no longer valid, but the technology discussions are valuable. All manufacturers are being judged on their products utilization in a system that provides long term performance, expressed in the levelized cost of energy from the lifetime costs of the system.

From the previously mentioned DB report: “CIGS on flexible substrates offers a potential low cost, higher conversion efficiency modules, but has yet to enter commercial production.” And “We believe that flexible substrate CIGS based modules could have excellent applicability for building integrated PV (BIPV) applications as well as other applications like consumer electronics, and portable devices.” Be looking for the flexible CIGS products which have both TUV and UL certifications indicating successful completion of both long-term performance and safety testing.

Some CIGS on glass companies have been around for a long time, for example Solar Frontiers (Formerly Showa Shell, formally Shell, formally Siemens…). They make a beautiful, monolithic black glass modules with respectable performance, perfect for a vertical building integration application. Other companies are newer, some deposit CIGS on glass and others have flexible products and one coats the inside of glass tubes with CIGS. For CIGS, there is an inherent CapEx embedded in the deposition process. Current and RM CapEx should be considered for the various sputtering, electrodepositing, co-evaporation-in-vacuum or sintering processes used in CIGS manufacturing when comparing the various company technologies.

In summary, look for low manufacturing and capital equipment costs for a high efficiency CIGS technology which can reduce balance of systems costs. The winner in the race towards higher efficiency CIGS thin film PV systems will be the company that can provide long term confidence in their product, at system level costs similar or lower than First Solar, and solid business plan execution.

Joseph McCabe is a solar industry veteran with over 20 years in the business. He is an American Solar Energy Society Fellow, a Professional Engineer, and is internationally recognized as an expert in thin film PV, BIPV and Photovoltaic/Thermal solar industry activities. Joe can be reached at energy [no space] ideas at gmail dotcom.

May 04, 2010

Solar Parking Developer Envision Solar Now Public (OTCBB:EVSI)

Tom Konrad, CFA

One of the best things about Solar Photovoltaics (PV) is that they can be installed close to load but need not take up open space.  Now public company Envision specializes on solar shading for parking lots that not only produces power, but also shade where it's needed most.

I lived in Tucson, Arizona for two years in the early 2000s.  Like everyone who lives in the desert Southwest for any length of time, I became very aware of what would happen if I left my car in an open parking lot for more than ten minutes: it would get very, very hot.   Without a windscreen sunshade, you were liable to burn your hands on the steering wheel if you were not wearing gloves, but even with it, the car interior would feel like an oven.  It would take 5-10 minutes of the air conditioner running at full blast just to bring the temperature down to a bearable 90° F (32C).  If you don't consider 90 degrees bearable, don't move to Tucson, or get used to only going outdoors before the sun is up, at least in the summer.

Needless to say, Tuscon residents become adept at spotting one bit of shade in a parking lot from a scraggly mesquite or palo verde.  These spots of shade are at a premium because such desert trees are small and usually only cast enough shade for a single parking spot at most.

With that experience in mind, the value of Envision Solar's (EVSI.OB) photovoltaic parking lot structures is quite clear.

Envision Park Solar

Solar Trees

When it comes to solar, I much prefer developers to solar manufacturers.  Solar manufacturers face the prospect of ever declining prices for their product and a constant need for technological innovation to keep up in a fierce competitive landscape.  Solar project developers, on the other hand, have strong public support and interest in their product, combined with rising prices for the electricity they sell and declining prices for the solar panels they buy.  They also have much lower fixed costs, meaning that while the threat of new entrants will keep them from ever becoming wildly profitable, they also do not have huge capital investments that can lock them in if building solar installations becomes unprofitable.

The low barriers to entry for solar developers mean that strong product differentiation is valuable. 

Envision has developed parking lot structures they call "Solar Trees" for attractively shading parking lots while producing solar electricity.  The company promotes their products as "addressing the unused millions of acres of parking spaces."  I there's actually more too it than that, because in the sunnier parts of the country, there is value in both the electricity and in the shade.  In an extremely sunny city such as Tucson, Phoenix, or Las Vegas, I would expect that most shoppers would be more interested in visiting a store where they expected to get a shaded parking space, since almost all shady parking spaces in Tucson are almost always already taken.

The idea of solar on parking lot shades is not a new one.  I remember seeing one in the parking lot of an Austin Library Branch in 2000.  But earlier parking lot solar arrays were bespoke designs created anew for each individual project.  With a small number of flexible designs, Envision can not only keep engineering costs down, but also talk with some credibility about the cost and performance of previous arrays they have installed over nine MW of projects for clients such as Dell.  They've also teamed up with Bright Automotive to combine the solar parking structures (which require electric service) with electric vehicle charging stations. Along with the ready-to-build, relatively attractive designs, partners and previous clients like these could establish Envision as the go-to firm for parking lot solar.

EVSI Stock

Envision Solar International, Inc. stock started trading on the Over the Counter market under the symbol OTCBB:EVSI on May 3 through a reverse merger with shell company Casita Enterprises.

I usually like to wait a year or two for a newly listed company to develop a track record as a public company to help me assess the company's financial strength and management effectiveness.  Envision has not yet begun publishing financial statements as the newly merged entity.   I took a few minutes to look over their electronic investor kit, in the hope of finding some hard numbers.  Unfortunately, all the kit contains is an investor presentation without any hard numbers as to assets, revenues, debt, and income.  Until such information is available, I can't say if the stock is worth $0.04, $0.365 (the price it closed at on May 3), or $3.65. 

It's an interesting company, and I'll probably take another look at it when there is more to go on.  For now, the stock is a pig in a poke.

DISCLOSURE: No position.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

April 29, 2010

Stock Market Advice for Solar Energy Investors


J. Peter Lynch

I have been reading your articles for years and always thought your stock market related insight was interesting and helpful for me as an investor. At the current time I am worried about the market and am wondering where you think the market is currently, given the major run up we have had in the past year. I would also be curious about your view on solar stocks and what you see for them.

-- Claude M., France.

Claude, great questions.  You are really going to make me think about this one. Sorry for the long answer but the question really got me going.

Every step of the way since April of 2009 we have heard the popular financial press and the frenetic cable pundits tell us a litany of things to worry about - foreclosures, unemployment, the growing deficit etc. and it still continues today.

However, all along this troubled path the market has steadily moved up, climbing a classic “wall of worry” with all the major averages advancing significantly from the March 2009 lows - S&P 500 +77%, Dow Jones +68% and Nasdaq + 94%.

These are very strong numbers, by any historical measure and the logical conclusion to draw is that the market must be close to a top. I certainly understand that and in fact, personally “feel” (read that as “emotion”) that this is the case. But what is important to understand is not your or my emotions or what we think “should” be, but what is. Sounds simple and obvious, but believe me, it is not.

As I stated on 3-17-2009, a few days after the market bottomed and this bull market started:

I have been a student of the market since 1975 and I can assure you that there is plenty of FEAR out there now. Nothing is 100% for sure, as we all know. But I think we are either at a significant bottom or very close to it. Everything is so “oversold” at this time, that I think the worst case is that we get a significant rally in what could still be a bear market.

Once again, sounds obvious with all the historical data available. But how many people recognized this and had the courage and discipline to jump in at that time?

Currently the market is performing in a very orderly manner and the underlying technical measurements are sound and are still pointing to a higher market with the major longer term uptrend still intact, despite all of the worries and other concerns.  It is also true that the market is currently at a HIGHER relative level of risk (overbought short term) and things could change quickly.  But the market has done this before – back in late 2003 and early 2004 the market stayed at a comparable high level of risk for extended periods of time climbing another classic “wall of worry.”

At this time, some additional relevant historical data is worth considering. Since the beginning of this new bull market (March 2009) the stock market has had two meaningful corrections of greater than 5% and less than 10% (June – July 2009 and January-February 2010) and no corrections more than 10%.  This situation is historically a sign of a healthy unfolding stock market.   A market that goes “straight” up with no corrections is a dangerous situation not a healthy situation. 

As I said, the market has not had a correction of 10% or greater since March of 2009.  Why is that significant?  It is significant because there has never been a bull market in the last 80 years that has not had at least one 10% correction before it topped out (Credit: Invest Tech Research). As a result, it is likely (from an historical statistical point of view) that we will have at least one 10% correction and then another move upward before the end of this bull market.  Historically a lot of money has been left on the table after the first 10% correction, if you sold out too soon and did not give the market a chance to run its course.

Where we are now?  Somewhere toward the end of Stage 2!

I always think that a picture can tell a better story than hundreds (or thousands) of words, so take a look at the diagram below.  This is a snap shot of the classic stock market pattern, how it “usually” unfolds and where I think we are now on the curve.

These stages are the four classic stages of a typical market cycle that generally moves from fear to greed and back.

Stage 1 - Capitulation:  This was late 2008 and early 2009. The world as we know it is ending and all was lost. If you go back and look at the “headline hysteria” back then this would not seem far from the truth and the general consensus at the time.

Stage 2 – Doubt and Skepticism:  This is the period we are in currently, climbing a wall of worry. The market has been moving up for over a year and still most people do not believe that this can be real. This psychological fact is reflected in the various measures of investor sentiment according to the American Association of Individual Investors, which are currently approaching levels that are historically seen at correction or market tops. It is a scary time, but the main trend is still intact and can remain intact for quite some time, even at these levels. But a watchful eye is necessary at this time. Risk is higher, but opportunity may still be around until we see indications of entering stage 3.

Stage 3 – Euphoria:  Here is where the greed factor and fear of being left behind starts to come into play and usually after one last correction the market takes off on its last glorious run up, taking the general public with it. This always ends the same way. After this last run up there are no more buyers, the professionals are sellers and the public is left holding the bag with only hope to cling to. During this stage you will start to see very positive headlines and the pundits pointing to a bright future.

Stage 4 – Hope followed by Fear:  As the market begins to roll over and start down the slopes of hope investors keeping hoping that it will come back. Despite the clearly deteriorating underlying technical factors, people just do not want to believe (i.e. emotional decision) that it is happening.  They seem to think “this time it will be different.”  But alas, that is very seldom, if ever, true and the hope gives way to fear and finally to capitulation when investors dump all the rest of their stock (Feb-March 2009).

My advice to you is do not lose heart. I have been an investor for over 35 years and I know all of the above perfectly. But that does not mean that I do what I say and what I know from experience.  It is a constant battle and the best you can do is be aware of it, learn from it and try to develop an unemotional method to deal with it. It is an amazing 4-stage phenomenon (cycle) and the good news is that it has consistently repeated over the years and I would expect will continue to do so. If you are NOT invested now, I would not start now and I would at least wait for a pullback from current over-bought conditions.

Solar Stocks

Solar stocks did great for the first 12 months of the current bull market (3/09 – 3/10) — up an average of 124%. But as I mentioned in an earlier article the vast majority of that gain was centered in a 8 Chinese stocks — CSIG, CSUN, JASO, LDK, SOLF, STP, TSL and YGE — which were up an amazing 267.96% on average, certainly the major reason that the group as a whole was up 124%. Without the Chinese companies the solar group would have actually underperformed the major averages for that 12-month period.

 Looking a bit deeper, more than 50% of the 267.96% gain was from 2 stocks — CSIG and TSL.  This is an extreme case of narrowing (2 of 21) leadership in a sector and is usually a bad sign for the sector. Also the fact that all of these leaders were Chinese companies indicates to me that the trend is clearly to lowest cost.  Good for the Chinese companies, maybe not so good for U.S. and European companies.

Looking at the first quarter of 2010 the numbers reflect this narrowing with solar sector underperforming the general market significantly.

Solar Stock Performance  First Quarter 2010

 

 

 

 

 

All Solar Stocks Average

-9.89%

 

 

 

 

 

Dow Jones

 

+4.11%

 

S&P 500

 

+4.87%

 

NASDAQ

 

+5.68%

 

 

 

 

 

So what does this mean for the investor interested in the solar market sector?

 It means that the industry is starting another transition phase in its long-term growth.  This is a period of “lowest cost wins” and of industry wide profit margin compression. It means that because of these factors and probably a host of other factors (lower natural gas prices, uncertainly of government policy etc.) that the solar segment has been a lagging market sector and probably not one that is optimal at this time for new investment. Especially given the higher risk level that the general market is at now.

It also means, in my opinion, that the U.S. has to wake up and start to move forward now (instead of our usual approach of thinking about having a meeting to discuss planning to do something maybe sometime in the future when all the stars are perfectly aligned i.e. all talk and very little action of any significance) with a strategy to compete with our lower cost Chinese friends. I do not think we can beat them at their own game – lowest cost via cheap labor.

What the U.S has to do now is to do what we do best — innovate.  This is the time for investment and focus on new technologies and “out of the box” thinking. This is a time to increase focus, investment and activity rather than slow down and wait for someone else to do something that we have historically always been the best at doing. The ball is in our court.

Mr. Lynch has worked, for 33 years as a Wall Street security analyst, an independent security analyst an investment banker and private investor in small emerging technology companies. He has been actively involved in following developments in the renewable energy sector since 1977 and is regarded as an expert in this field. He was the contributing editor for 17 years to the Photovoltaic Insider Report, the leading publication in PV that was directed at industrial subscribers, such as major energy companies, utilities and governments around the world. He is currently a private investor and advisor to a number of companies. He can be reached via e-mail at: SOLARJPL@aol.com. Please visit his website for the promotion of solar energy – www.sunseries.net.



March 13, 2010

Solar Headwinds, Part II

Tom Konrad, CFA

Prospective investors in solar manufacturers should consider the competitive forces that constrain the industry's long-term profitability.

In the first part of this series, I showed how a competitive analysis of the corn ethanol industry in early 2007 illuminated the forces that soon caused ethanol company stock prices to collapse in late 2007.  I also implied that the solar cell manufacturers, including industry leaders such as Sunpower (SPWRA) and First Solar (FSLR) are vulnerable to these forces and may not be able to maintain high returns on capital over the long term.

I'm not predicting that solar stocks will collapse later this year, as happened with ethanol stocks in 2007.  The dramatic timing of my article on ethanol companies with the quick collapse of ethanol stocks was coincidental.  Competitive analysis of an industry can illuminate long term trends, but short term stock prices often have very little to do with long term trends or underlying economics.  Given that solar stocks have fallen considerably over the last two years (see chart), a further drastic decline seems unlikely.
Solar ETFs vs. S&P and Nasdaq
Solar ETFs KWT and TAN compared to market indexes Mar 2008 to Feb 2010.
 
Yet a recovery in solar stock prices that might bring solar indexes back into line with general market indexes is also unlikely, because the intense competition in the sector restrains the underlying profitability relative to companies in sectors with average levels of competition.

Returning to Micheal Porter's classic competitive forces model, each of the five forces are each composed of a number of factors.  The more of these factors are above average, the greater the overall competitive contribution of that force.  In the table below, I list above-average factors which contribute to competitiveness, and below average factors, which reduce competitiveness, and the resulting overall competition for each force.

Force
Factors increasing competition
Factors decreasing competition
Overall Competition
Industry rivalry
Large number of firms, High fixed costs, low switching costs, low product differentiation, specialized equipment, diverse companies
High market growth, nonperishable product
High
Threat of Substitutes
Electricity can be produced in may ways, and is usually more conveniently and cheaply available through the grid
Government requirements or subsidies for solar power
High
Buyer Power
Product is standardized
Many diverse buyers
Average
Supplier Power
Suppliers are concentrated (but becoming less so)
Commodity inputs, customers weak
Average to Low
Threat of new entrants
Constant innovation in solar technology, ability to purchase standardized manufacturing equipment, globally traded product, low minimum economy of scale, little brand franchise
Asset specificity
Very high

The key factors keeping competition high are the strong threat of substitutes and rapid innovation bringing new entrants into the industry.  Electricity from other sources such as fossil fuels or other renewable generation is functionally indistinguishable from solar electricity, and may be available at night or on cloudy days.  Hence there are not only readily available substitutes to solar panels, they are often more convenient to use.

I brought up the specter of innovation in solar technology as a risk factor for solar stocks in my recent article on risks for alternative energy investors.  The great hope for the solar industry is that constant innovation will quickly bring down costs to the point where solar power is cost-competitive with electricity from the grid, or grid parity.  But that same innovation, if it comes from outside the current industry, will undermine the economics of manufacturers using current technology.  The advent of First Solar (FSLR) is a case in point.  Because First Solar can produce its CdTe technology at much lower cost per peak watt than conventional silicon manufacturers are able to match, First Solar is able to expand its market share at the expense of other manufacturers while maintaining strong profitability. 

But First Solar may only be in its current privileged position for a few years: other thin-film technologies such as Copper-Indium-Galium-diSelenide (Ascent (ASTI), DayStar (DSTI), and many private companies) or amorphous Silicon (Applied Materials (AMAT), Sharp (SHCAY.PK) and many others.)  Beyond these up and coming thin-film technologies, there is a constant stream of new innovations such as organic PV and PV from abundant materials (IBM) that could potentially be manufactured at much lower cost than current thin film technologies.

There are also non-photovoltaic competitors.  Bloom Energy is trying to present itself as an alternative to solar, but not very credibly.  Concentrating Solar Thermal Power (CSP) has long had a cost advantage for large scale farms, and has the additional advantage of producing on-demand power because it is simple to integrate with inexpensive thermal storage.  PV is not safe from encroaching thermal technologies even at the residential level.  One potential challenger is startup Cool Energy.  Cool Energy's combined heat and power system uses an array of evacuated solar thermal collectors to provide space heating in cold months, and then uses a Stirling engine to convert excess heat in warmer months into baseload or on-demand electricity. 

Conclusion

Because of rapidly falling costs and a vast solar resource, solar PV is likely to produce a significant and growing portion of our electricity in years to come.  But this growth trend is an industry trend, and the growth could easily come from new competitors at the expense of current solar stocks. 

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

March 11, 2010

Solar Headwinds, Part I

How Solar PV is like Ethanol

Tom Konrad, CFA

High levels of competition in the the solar photovoltaic (PV) industry mean that buy-and-hold investors should look elsewhere.

In May 2007, I published a competitive analysis of the corn Ethanol industry based on Michael Porter's classic Five Competitive Forces model.  At the time, Ethanol stocks were flying high, but my conclusion was that "the prospective ethanol investor should be very careful about investing in corn ethanol producers at random."  If anything, I understated the case.Ethanol Stocks

This chart shows three ethanol stocks that have survived since 2007.  As survivors, they are among the best performers in the industry; several others declared bankruptcy.

Corn ethanol is not a great business to be in; it's too competitive.  If you buy assets at the right price, you can do well, but it's all about timing.  A passive buy-and-hold strategy will  under-perform the same type of strategy in a less competitive industry.  Companies in less competitive industries can maintain higher returns on capital for longer periods.

Solar Manufacturers

It's not a secret that I'm no fan of investing in solar stocks, although I understand why enthusiasts are seduced by the sector.  Unlike corn ethanol, solar PV will likely be a significant part of any future sustainable energy mix, but that is not the same thing as saying that today's solar stocks will be good long-term investments.  Americans watch more television today than ever before, but were network television stations a good investment over the last 20 years?  No, because new entrants came in and stole their audience: the industry has become much more competitive than it was 20 years ago.

Thinking that todays solar stocks will do poorly over the long term is not the same as thinking that the solar industry will flop.  Rather, it is the belief that increased competition will drive down returns at existing companies.  This will be great for buyers of PV panels, but not so great for owners of PV stocks.

Porter's five competitive forces model of competion bears this out, just as it did when I analyzed the corn Ethaonol Industry in 2007.  The next article in this series will take a look at the five forces, and how they apply to solar PV manufacturers.

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

October 28, 2009

Why Do Green Energy Experts Buy Solar Stocks? 

Green energy experts accept that solar panels are one of the least cost effective ways to reduce your carbon footprint.  Nevertheless, many buy solar stocks.  They should rethink their investment strategies.

I recently spoke on "Stock Selection in the Era of Peak Oil and Climate Change" at the ASPO 2009 International Peak Oil Conference.  Whenever green energy enthusiasts find out that I analyze green energy stocks professionally, they react in one of two ways.  Many want to know my top stock pick in general (New Flyer Industries NFI-UN.TO/NFYIF.PK) or in their favorite sector (see below.)    Others tell me about their own green energy investments.  

My guess is that the latter group hopes I will stamp some sort of stock guru seal of approval on their portfolio.  If so, they usually go away disappointed.  This is not only because I have not yet been issued with a special seal by the stock guru union.  It's also because, even if I had such a stamp of approval, I would seldom need to use it. 

I find that even industry experts who know more than I do about green energy fail to apply that knowledge when it comes to investing.  Enthusiastic amateurs are often worse.  The typical green stock holdings of a brilliant cleantech engineer are a couple solar stocks, like First Solar (FSLR) and Sunpower (SPWR.)  People who will lecture tirelessly on the need to improve the efficiency of buildings before slapping solar on the roof don't walk the walk when it comes to their investment portfolios.  Instead, they take whatever portfolio they have, slap on a couple solar companies.  They forget all about the efficiency stocks and other, more cost-effective renewable options such as wind, geothermal, and biomass that they would recommend if they were asked about what we needed to decarbonize the economy.

Invest In What You Know, Use What You Know

To be fair, none of these people are professional investors. They cannot be expected to make the same sort of decisions that a professional would.  On the other hand, many are extremely knowledgeable when it comes to green energy.  The old adage "Invest in what you know" does not mean that a pilot should buy airlines.  It means that that a pilot will have more knowledge of the airline industry than an industry outsider, and my be able to use this knowledge to either choose between well-run and poorly run companies, or to have a better understanding of industry cycles, and buy when industry fortunes are on the upswing, and sell before a decline in profitability.  The key to successful investing is not depth of knowledge, but knowledge that other market participants lack.

Likewise, an energy rater will know that efficiency improvements will deliver much faster paybacks than solar PV.  Yet, based on my informal survey, energy raters are more likely to own a solar stock than an energy efficiency stock  Dedicated greens know taking mass transit or biking to work is much greener than any private car, even an electric one.  Yet these same greens are more likely to have investments in electric vehicles or battery stocks than investments in mass transit or bicycle companies.

"But I Don't Know any Energy Efficiency Stocks"

When I ask these people why their portfolios don't match their lives, they usually tell me they don't know what stocks to buy.  Ignoring the fact that people who aren't willing to do several hours of research for every stock they own should not be venturing into the Wild West of individual stock investing (don't say I didn't warn you) here are a few of my favorite investments in each of the major green energy sectors.

Sector Investments Related Articles
Energy Efficiency Waterfurnace, Cree, Flir Heat Pumps, LEDs, Infrared
Clean Transportation PTRP, New Flyer ETFs, New Flyer
Wind FAN Wind ETF, ETFs,
Transmission/Grid Quanta Services, ABB, General Cable Transmission shopping list
Batteries / Energy Storage Enersys, Exide, A123 Irrational Battery Investments
Solar Solar Millennium, Satcon Solar Shopping List
Geothermal Ormat Geothermal & the ARRA
Smart Grid Echelon, Telvent Smart Grid Shopping List
Biomass/Biofuel Aracruz, Plum Creek, Potlatch Forestry Stocks and ETFs

Note that this is not intended as a list of companies to buy now.  I currently consider most stocks to be overvalued, and am waiting for a market decline before buying again.  But, if you have an urge to buy a glamorous solar stock today, or are reading this article after the market has descended to more reasonable valuations, I hope you'll use this list to buy stocks in the sectors you know are greener, even if they're not as sexy.

The Right Questions

Using your knowledge from the real world to help choose your investments is another variation on the theme of Asking the Right Investment Questions I recently discussed.  The easiest way to gain an advantage over other market participants is to zig when emotional investors zag.  Solar has a lot of appeal because it lets anyone with a rooftop generate electricity, and emotional green energy investors tend to buy solar stocks.

It's difficult to underestimate the emotional appeal of the personal energy independence photovoltaics seem to promise.  Nevertheless, few rooftop solar installations do add to our personal energy security: They are grid-tied, and stop producing power whenever the grid goes down.  While solar panels can be a good investments with sufficient subsidies and tax breaks, or where electricity is extremely expensive, government subsidies and small markets with expensive electricity are not good foundations for the explosive growth that solar stock speculators are betting on.  

Financial modeling shows that solar will only be a significant part of the most effective carbon mitigation strategies if prices fall quickly and dramatically.  Such cost improvements are possible, but will come with the risk of extreme disruption for the current crop of solar stocks.

Investors swept up in the emotional appeal of solar stocks are providing those of us who pay close attention to the economics of green energy an opportunity to profit at their expense.  Taking advantage of the opportunity is not only likely to benefit the investor, it will also help the companies we do invest in raise capital.

DISCLOSURE: Long WFFIF, CREE, NFYIF, PWR, ABB, AXPW, ORA, ELON, TLVT.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

October 20, 2009

What Shouldn't Be in a Green Energy Portfolio

The London Accord took a look at what portfolio theory would suggest as the most effective ways to address Climate Change.  Knowing which technologies don't make the cut is at least as useful as knowing which technologies do.

I recently looked at a paper from the London Accord which used portfolio theory to recommend the best mixes of technologies to deliver different levels of carbon abatement.  The most useful technologies to achieve the needed levels of carbon abatement were Forestry, Hydropower, Biofuels, Wind, Efficiency, and Geothermal. I suggested stocks that investors might consider to invest in each of these sectors.

abatement portfolios.bmpOther technologies played on bit parts in the abatement portfolios (left) the report found are likely to achieve the needed levels of climate reduction most efficienctly.  

If we were to assume intelligent political policies, these bit-part technologies should be avoided by investors.  The assumption of intelligent political policy is unlikely to be realistic, however:  Some of these technologies will turn out to be good for investors, even if they fail to achieve the desired goals for the climate.  

Below, I try to imagine the political decisions which would lead to each of these also-ran technologies rewarding investors. 

Nuclear

Nuclear power plays a large role in abatement portfolio 1, shown to the left.  This portfolio delivers about 3 gigatons of worldwide CO2 equivalent (Gt CO2e) abatement per year, at a cost of $25B annually.  Given that necessary level of abatement is at least 5 times that amount, portfolio 1 represents a vastly inadequate policy response to climate change.  We could get such an inadequate policy response if opponents manage to convince decision makers that an adequate response to climate change will do unacceptable harm to the economy.

Such policies would sad for humanity, ibut good for investors in suppliers of nuclear equipment.

Nuclear does not play a big role in the larger mitigation portfolios simply because it's potential for carbon mitigation is limited.  Nuclear plants take a very long time to build, and concerns about the disposal of waste and the desire of most people not to live anywhere near a nuclear plant are not likely to go away.  Furthermore, nuclear power and other baseload technologies which are difficult to stop and start quickly are somewhat incompatible with variable renewable energy such as wind and solar.  If wind is to meet its much larger potential for climate carbon mitigation, nuclear will have to play an even smaller role. abatement cost.GIF

Solar

Solar only plays a significant role in the most aggressive portfolios, 4-6.   As you can see in the chart above, portfolios 5 and 6 do not produce much extra carbon savings even though they cost two and three times what portfolio 4 does.  The implication is that solar will do best if society decides that action against climate change is worthwhile regardless of the cost (scenarios 5 and 6,) or in a scenario where we decide that we need to be very aggressive about dealing with climate change, but should keep an eye on costs.

One significant caveat here is that the above abatement portfolios are based on the 2007 IPCC Working Group report, "Mitigation of Climate Change."  This report may have had much too conservative assumptions for cost reductions in solar technology (right).sarasin abatement.PNG

With Sarasin's more optimistic assumptions about cost reductions for solar technology, it plays a large role in all mitigation portfolios on the efficient frontier.  Here "solar" refers to solar photovoltaic (PV) and Concentrating Solar Thermal Power (CSP): solar thermal collectors were not modeled.

Stock market investments in solar make sense so long as you believe that you are investing in a company which is capable of drastically reducing the cost of the technology, and will be able to cut solar costs more quickly than its rivals, including those which are yet to emerge.

Carbon Capture and Storage

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), the enabling technology for so-called "Clean Coal" does not play a role  in any of the mitigation portfolios which achieve less than 15 Gt CO2e (portfolios 1-3) and only small roles in portfolios 4-6.  This is very similar to solar under the 2007 IPCC Working Group assumptions.  However, CCS differs from solar in that all the believable cost estimates I've come across (even those originating from CCS proponents) expect it to remain very expensive.

Coal with CCS also has the same problem as nuclear: because it is difficult to ramp such "Clean Coal" plants up and down, they are relatively incompatible with large penetrations of wind.  If CCS does take its place as part of an efficient carbon abatement portfolio, it will probably be CCS used in conjunction with natural gas turbines, rather than coal. 

Hence, it would only be reasonable to make stock market investments in CCS technology if you expect significant spending on the technology by governments with little regard to cost.  Given the power of the coal lobby, such a scenario is a real, if unappealing, prospect.

Conclusion

I do not include any of these technologies in green investment strategy.  Even though I believe that the optimistic case for quick reductions in the cost of solar technology makes sense, I do not think that I have the skills necessary to pick a company today which will be able to survive the rapid industry upheaval a technological revolution in PV technology would entail.

All three technologies have the potential to receive large amounts of government largesse, even if the economic case for such help is weak.  However, I am not confident that I can predict the direction of such largess, and more deserving green technologies with better economic prospects seem just as likely to receive government money than these three.  Given my uncertainty about the future direction of government support, I think it makes more sense to invest in forestry stocks, building and industrial efficiency stocks, transport efficiency stocks, and geothermal stocks, than it does to invest in nuclear, carbon capture and storage, or solar stocks.

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

October 14, 2009

Oil & Alt Energy Redux

Charles Morand

Last week, I conducted an analysis showing the lack of evidence supporting claims that oil and alt energy returns are strongly correlated (claims that sometimes come from outfits as reputable as Bank of America Merrill Lynch).    

I don't want to belabor this topic but I thought I would post the results of another, similar analysis I conducted following comments I received on how to improve the first one. In a nutshell, the comments suggested I do the following:

1) Look at daily correlations or even smaller periods, as "common knowledge" market movements can often dominate over the real relationship in the short and very short run

2) Look at absolute (price) correlations as well as relative (return) correlations (my first analysis looked only at relative movements)

3) Look at directionality (i.e. what % of the time do assets X and Y move in the same direction regardless of the size of the move)

4) Extent your analysis to five years or greater

New Analysis, Same Difference

The three sets of tables below show daily return correlation coefficients, daily price correlation coefficients and daily directionality statistics (% of days that the assets close Up, Down or No Movement together) for oil, nat gas, the S&P 500 and alt energy stocks.

The time periods have been extended from three to five years or since inception. The oldest alt energy ETF available is PBW that was listed on March 03, 2005 - not quite 5 years but a decent chunk of time nonetheless. The other 3 ETFs (sector specific) were all listed in the 2nd half of 2008.


Correl Returns Oct 14-09_3.bmp

Correl Prices Oct 14-09.bmp


Correl Returns Oct 14-09_2.bmp

The first set of tables show that returns on oil are not particularly useful at explaining returns on alt energy stocks on a daily basis (let's say that we enter useful territory at 0.5 and above), although the results for PBW show the relationship strengthening somewhat in the last year (which has been anything but a normal year for the markets). These results are in line with those from my previous analysis which looked at weekly returns.

As far as absolute prices go (the second set of tables), correlation coefficients for oil and alt energy are high, but they are just as high if not higher for alt energy and the S&P 500. PBW shows the relationship strengthening over time, but it strengthened even more between oil and the S&P 500, something Tom opined might be the case a few months ago.

I don't find absolute price correlations all that useful. In the medium and long terms, returns matter far more than absolute prices. If a $1 movement in oil consistently results in a $1 movement in an alt energy ETF over the long run, the high coefficient could obscure a divergence trend between the returns on both assets as their prices rise.

Finally, the directionality tables (note that assets appear in a different order) show a fair bit of co-directionality between oil and alt energy (with the exception of PTRP [alternative transportation], something Tom and I discussed last week). But here again, the S&P 500 emerges as the stronger predictor.

Conclusion

I did not go any more granular than daily data: anything beyond that becomes relevant only to traders.

Once again, the general conclusion that emerges from this analysis is that oil - whether in terms of returns, prices or directionality - is not a particularly useful indicator to go by when investing in alt energy stocks, especially when compared to equity markets in general (i.e. the S&P 500).

The implication for investors is that they should not invest in alt energy as a hedge against or a play on rising oil prices. If anything, what little relationship does exist will probably tend to disappear overtime as alt energy and cleantech stocks respond more to core business fundamentals than to seemingly logical yet unproven narratives about external drivers.  

DISCLOSURE: None

October 07, 2009

Crude Oil & Alt Energy: The Non-Relationship That Just Won't Go Away

Charles Morand

The relationship - or lack thereof - between oil prices and the performance of alt energy stocks has been a long-time interest of mine. I discussed it last in late March when I looked at correlations between the daily returns of alt energy and fossil energy ETFs. At the time, I found that only a weak relationship existed between the two and that if someone wanted to make a thematic investment play on Peak Oil, alt energy ETFs were not an ideal way to do so. 

Seeing as the popular press and countless "experts" continue to claim, whenever they get a chance, that the fortunes of alternative energy stocks are closely tied to the price of oil, I figured I would revisit the topic.

Fossil & Alternative Energy: The Relationship That Isn't There

This time around, I took a slightly different approach for my analysis: I correlated the weekly returns for US oil and US natural gas directly (as opposed to through an ETF) with returns for the S&P 500 and four alt energy ETFs. For US Oil and Nat Gas, I used price data provided by the Energy Information Administration here (Spot Price FOB Weighted by Estimated Export Volume) and here (Contract 1), respectively. I got ETF and S&P 500 price and index value data from Google Finance.

For the ETFs, I picked the Claymore/Mac Global Solar Index ETF (TAN) as the solar sector representative, because I took a position in it in March (which I liquidated last week even though I initially claimed I would hang on to it for 18 to 24 months. I have now grown more worried about downside risk than I am optimistic about upside prospects over that time horizon, so I took my money out).     

The other ETFs were: the First Trust Global Wind Energy Index (FAN) for wind, because it represents a more direct play on the sector than the alternative; the PowerShares Clean Energy (PBW) ETF for alt energy other than solar and wind, as an analysis I conducted earlier this year indicated it is the best way to access other sectors; and the Powershares Global Progressive Transport (PTRP) ETF, as it provides the only proxy I know of for returns on a basket of stocks with exposure to alternative modes of transportation.          

The graph below displays returns for all four ETFs, Oil, Nat Gas and the S&P 500 between Jan. 1, 2007 and Sep. 25, 2009 (click on the image for a large view).             

Oct 7-09 Chart 1_2.bmp

The table below shows returns and volatility for all seven assets over the same time interval but broken down into sub-periods. Seeing as 2009 and the post-Lehman collapse period have been eventful times to say the least, I thought it would make sense to create a few distinct sub-periods for analytical purposes.

What jumped out at me from this table is the relatively strong performance of the Powershares Global Progressive Transport (PTRP) ETF, even after adjusting for volatility. As the correlation analysis below demonstrates, this performance is not due to a rise in oil prices.

My going theory is that there is a Green Stimulus Effect at work given how much of global stimulus dollars have gone to transportation programs. This would be something worth exploring further but it certainly seems in line, at least on the surface, with a prediction I made nearly one year ago. 

Oct 7-09 Fig 1_2.bmp

The following three tables contain the real meat of my analysis. They are fairly self-explanatory: they show correlation coefficients between US Oil, US Nat Gas and the S&P 500 with all other assets. The correlations are for the periods outlined in the tables or since inception in the case of PTRP (Sep. 19, 2008), TAN (Apr. 18, 2008) and FAN (Jun. 20, 2008). The correlation coefficients above 0.5 are highlighted.


Oct 7-09 Fig 2.bmp

These results are, once again, in line with my expectations: there is little reason to believe that there is a strong relationship between changes in the price of oil and the performance of alt energy stocks. Even for natural gas, where one could expect a correlation with wind and solar given that all three fuels are used in power generation (or load abatement), there does not seem to be a strong relationship.

TAN and FAN have not yet been around for long enough to analyze returns going very far back into the past, but PBW has. Although the correlation between PBW's returns and oil's returns seems to have strengthened somewhat in the past year, it certainly does not qualify as strong.

I must admit that I was fairly surprised to find such a low correlation between the returns on oil and those on the PTRP ETF. My guess is that this ETF hasn't been around long enough, and that a relationship might emerge under an extreme Peak Oil scenario. That said, spending on public transportation is heavily dependent on the fiscal health of various levels of government, and we've just been moved from the emergency room to the critical care unit.    

On the other hand, I was not particularly surprised to see that returns for all four alt energy ETFs are strongly correlated with returns for the S&P 500 - that seems intuitive enough given that they all belong to the same asset class. 

Conclusion

It doesn't really matter how one slices and dices the data: there just does not appear to be a strong relationship between returns on oil and returns on alt energy stocks, including alternative modes of transportation.

That's not going to matter to a great many commentators who will continue to claim in newspaper and magazine articles, on blogs and on TV that the success of alt energy stocks is closely tied to the price of crude, even though that's mostly untrue.

Those who invest in alt energy should, however, pay close attention. These results suggest that there are far more important factors than oil prices, most notably returns in equity markets in general and regulatory incentives by governments.

There is a good chance that equity returns and returns on oil will diverge in the next couple of years as oil prices climb and equities stagnate or decline. If such a scenario materializes, those who have the relationship backwards could be in for unpleasant surprises.   
  
DISCLOSURE: None

September 10, 2009

Book Review: Investment Opportunities for a Low Carbon World (Wind + Solar)

Charles Morand

Tom and I recently received complimentary copies of a new book called "Investment Opportunities for a Low Carbon World", edited FTSE Group's Director of Responsible Investment Will Oulton*. 

Sep 10-09 book review.bmp

The book is a compendium of articles by 31 different authors broken down into three main categories: (1) environmental and low-carbon technologies; (2) investment approaches, products and markets; and (3) regulation, incentives, investor and company case studies.

While Tom will provide a comprehensive review of the book once he's finished reading it in its entirety, I will instead review a few selected chapters over the course of the next couple of weeks.

I decided on this approach as that is how I generally use such a resource; I select the chapters and authors that I am interested in and I read only what I selected. That said, the majority of chapters in this book were of interest to me and I ended up selecting 19 out of 27 that I'm going to read (I won't be reviewing them all!) Truth be told, reviewing the contents section made me feel like a kid in a candy store and I suspect that most alt energy investing aficionados would feel the same. If I like what I read, I will most likely finish the book.    

This first post provides reviews of Chapters 1 and 2 on the wind and solar sectors.

Wind Power

By Mark Thompson, Tiptree Investments ltd

I tend to consider myself pretty well-versed in all things wind power, and so I was especially eager to read this chapter. Overall, I was very pleasantly surprised.

The author provides a good review of the wind turbine and wind turbine component industries. I especially enjoyed the technical discussion on turbine size and optimizing turbine output, which will become a critical competitive element for turbine makers.

For instance, we learn that because of the relationship between diameter and surface area for a circle, the power of one machine can be increased to match that of several smaller machines by simply lengthening the blades, thus lowering requirements for a range of other components and materials (for instance, two turbines with rotor diameters of 40 meters will have a power output of about 1000 kW, whereas one turbine with a rotor diameter of 80 meters can power 2500 kW.) Because of the mathematics of this, power output increases acheived through longer blades should further improve the economics of wind, so this is definitely a trend worth keeping an eye on.  

We also learn that while the turbine market has been chronically under supplied for the past few years, conferring the incumbents an appreciable amount of market power - the author estimates that the top six makers hold a combined 84% market share -, barriers to entry remain high and very difficult to surmount for would-be suppliers. Concerns over quality, durability, track-record and the strength of the balance sheet to support warranties are all factors that make it very difficult to secure funding for projects using a newcomer's technology. It is fair to say that Thompson is bearish on new market entrants.

Finally, we learn that the trend toward turbine makers internalizing sub-component design and manufacturing is restricting investment opportunities in pure-play supply chain opportunities.

However, what I enjoyed the most about this chapter was the detailed overview of how wind projects are built and what factors make them successful. When it comes to wind power, investment commentators tend to focus on turbines and turbine components, even though very interesting opportunities exist in the project development and operation space. In the author's words: "the development process offers some of the best returns in the sector [...]."

One key point made by the author in that regard is that headline figures about the size of various developers' portfolios are rarely - if ever - comparable given the various developments stages involved in bringing a project into operation. The risk-return profile for pure-play wind power developers is far more driven by the quality of the projects than by the size of the portfolio. However, disclosure tends to be weak in that regard, making it difficult for small investors to gauge the real value of a portfolio.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this chapter. In my view, the information would be most useful to a fundamentally-driven investor looking to really understand how wind power and the wind power industry really work. While the chapter does not answer every question an investor might have, it nonetheless provides the right balance of technical and business information to set someone on the right path. It is a reference to which I will go back.  

Those looking primarily for stock picks, however, will be disappointed. The lack of stock picks is probably the chapter's weakest point, especially given that the book is purportedly about investment opportunities. Having said that, investment ideas abound on the Internet these days and books focused too heavily on providing stock picks at the expense of more general information risk having very short shelf-lives.

Solar Power          

By Matthias Fawer, Bank Sarasin

Writing a book or a book chapter on solar power, especially solar PV, is always a risky endeavor as the information could be outdated 12 months after publication. I thus salute the effort of those who undertake to do it, but in my view this sector is best left to specialist consultancies and sell-side analysts because they can easily update their analysis when conditions change, something that happens frequently in the world of solar PV.

Matthias Fawer's chapter does, in a lot of ways, read like a sell-side report. It covers three broad sub-sectors of solar: (1) solar photovoltaic; (b) solar thermal; and (c) solar collectors. Other than for solar thermal, the way in which the chapter is written assumes the reader already has a fair bit of solar knowledge. For instance, unlike your typical generalist piece on solar PV, few if any details are provided on what the main solar PV cell technologies are, how they compare in terms of price and performance and which company makes them.

The advantage of this approach is that it allows the author to jump straight into industry-level dynamics and not waste precious space explaining what many people already know. For instance, we learn fairly early on that Bank Sarasin sees silicon cell production appreciably outpacing module production until about 2012, potentially providing module makers with a margin expansion opportunity. We also learn that the plant engineering firms that had done so well when every cell manufacturer and their grandmother was adding production capacity during 2007 and 2008 could underperform in the next few years.

Of course the drawback from not providing a lot of technical background is that it makes the chapter a lot less useful for the novice solar investor, or even for the investor who knows a little bit but does not follow the industry closely. The author does, however, provide a ranking of the "strategic positioning" of 27 solar PV firms based on a proprietary model, with his top pick being Q-Cells (QCLSF.PK) from Germany.

The section on solar thermal, also known as concentrating solar power (CSP), contains more basic information on the technology, and provides an overall very good introduction to the sector. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of CSP investment options, and this sector is thus effectively off-limit to most retail investors.

The section I liked the most in the chapter was the one on solar collectors for building and water heating, an industry I knew about but had never researched. I learned, much to my amazement, that by the end of 2008 there was 142 GW of solar collector capacity installed worldwide, versus 12 GW of solar PV and 1.3 GW of CSP.

China is by far the largest market for solar collectors and, unlike in other industries, it absorbs, according to the author, 90% of its own production. Fawer expects annual growth to be about 25% until 2011 and to settle at 18% between 2011 and 2020. However, the much larger installed base currently means that the absolute level of new installations could be quite massive. Although the section on solar collector does not provide stock picks, it most definitely poked my interest and convinced me to look further into this.

Overall, while I was a bit underwhelmed by the solar PV section, I found the CSP section useful and the section on solar collectors very interesting. A greater technical focus would have strengthened the chapter given how technologically complex solar is, and more stock picks would have been appreciated. However, I will definitely go back to the chapter when I do research on solar collectors and even CSP.

DISCLOSURE: None

* We are always interested in reviewing books and reports in the areas of alternative energy, cleantech or other environmental industries, especially where they add value to the investment decision-making process. If your organization would like a new book or report reviewed, please contact us    

August 11, 2009

The Performance Of Solar PV Systems

Aug 11-09 Solar PV Charles Morand

A couple of weeks ago, I noted the importance of examining parameters other than module costs when gauging the economic competitiveness of solar PV energy. I noted how multiple factors influence the levelized cost of energy produced by solar PV systems, and thus its relative cost position on the grid. Nothing new here.  

However, besides standard test conditions (STC) conversion efficiency, or nameplate conversion efficiency, public data on parameters other than cost per watt-peak is not always easy to come by. That's why I found reading "Potential of photovoltaic systems in countries with high solar irradiation", a paper about to be published in the journal Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, particularly interesting.

The Study

In the authors' own words, the paper reports the results of the following study (funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU)): 

Thirteen grid-connected PV systems of nominal power 1 kWp each have been installed in Nicosia, Cyprus and Stuttgart, Germany [...] providing the opportunity for direct comparisons under the different climatic conditions of the two countries.

More specifically, the installed PV technologies [...] consist of twelve fixed plate mounted systems, a two-axis tracking system and a flatcon concentrator system. The systems range from monocrystalline, multi-crystalline silicon to amorphous silicon, CdTe, CIGS, HIT-cell and other solar cell technologies from a range of manufacturers such as Atersa, BP Solar, Mitsubishi, Sanyo, Solon, SunPower, etc.

The PV modules are mounted on mounting racks at the optimal inclination to provide maximum annual yield for each respective location.

This study thus examines the performance of the main commercially-available solar PV cell technologies under the same real-world conditions, rather than in the lab. The annual solar irradiation measured on-site at the ideal inclination was 1997 kWh/m2 in Cyprus and 1460 kWh/m2 in Germany. This equates to roughly 5.5 kWh/m2/day and 4.0 kWh/m2/day, respectively. The NREL Photovoltaic Solar Resource map provides a rough guide to equivalent US locations, while Solar4Power's global maps do the same for the rest of the globe.    

The systems were initially deployed in June 2006 and the data reported is for the first year of operation, so until June 2007.

The systems under study are as follows:

Manufacturer (Ticker) Technology System Power (Wp) Size (m2) Nameplate Module Efficiency (%)
Atersa (uses Q-Cells cells, QCLSF.PK)   Mono-crystalline silicon (tracker) 1020 7.90 12.9
Atersa (uses Q-Cells cells, QCLSF.PK) Mono-crystalline silicon 1020 7.90 12.9
BP Solar (BP) Mono-crystalline silicon (Saturn-cell) 1110 7.52 14.8
Sanyo (SANYY.PK) Mono-crystalline silicon (HIT-cell) 1025 6.26 16.4
Suntechnics (Uses Sunpower cells, SPWRA) Mono-crystalline silicon
(back contact-cell)
1000 6.22 16.1
Schott Solar (Private) Multi-crystalline silicon (MAIN-cell) 1020 7.87 13.0
Schott Solar (Private) Multi-crystalline EFG silicon 1000 8.58 11.7
SolarWorld (SRWRF.PK) Multi-crystalline silicon 990 7.82 12.7
Solon AG (SGFRF.PK) Multi-crystalline silicon 1540 11.50 13.4
Mitsubishi (MIELY.PK) Amorphous silicon (single cell) 1000 15.74 6.4
Schott Solar (Private) Amorphous silicon (tandem cell) 960 18.00 5.4
First Solar (FSLR) Cadmium Telluride 1080 12.96 8.3
Wurth (Private) Copper–Indium–Gallium–
Diselenide
900 8.75 10.3

The study uses energy yield - kWh produced divided by nameplate kWp - to directly compare the performance of each system. Theoretically, this should normalize out conversion efficiency differences between the various systems and, because other key factors such as inclination are kept equal, the performances of the systems should be roughly equal.

The figure below displays the annual energy yield for the Cyprus location. Ignoring the tracker-equipped system, we note some non-trivial differences in AC energy yields between the various systems, with the Suntechnics (SunPower), Wurth, Sanyo and First Solar systems performing best, and the BP Solar and Schott a-Si systems performing worst.    
Fig 1 - energy yield by system cyprus.bmp


The figure below depicts the energy yield by season for the Cyprus location. As can be noted, the thin-film technologies (a-Si, CIGS and CdTe) tend to have higher energy yields in the summer months than most crystalline technologies, but perform in roughly similar fashions or even slightly worse in winter months.

Fig 2 - energy yield by season cyprus.bmp

The seemingly wider variations between summer and winter months for thin-film systems are not actually due to the properties of thin-film materials, but rather to the properties of crystalline materials. The table below displays deviation from the average AC energy yield across all systems, as well as the MPP power temperature coefficient. The latter metric shows the drop in system power per one kelvin increase in temperature.

As can be noted, overall, the crystalline technologies tend to experience much greater performance declines under warmer conditions than do their thin-film brethrens. The authors note that the technologies with the lowest MPP power temperature coefficients showed the highest average energy yields during the summer period. 

Fig 3 - deviation and temperature.bmp


The phenomenon discussed above is perhaps best captured by the graph below, which displays seasonal module efficiency for the Cyprus systems. Once again, by-and-large, thin-film technologies tend to experience much lower drops in efficiency with higher temperatures than do crystalline technologies, with the First Solar CdTe system showing the most stability.

The authors note that the systems installed in Cyprus showed a lower average measured performance ratio than those installed in Germany because of higher temperatures.

Fig 4 - pv module efficiency.bmp

Conclusion

A couple of fairly obvious insights emerge from this article.

First, at least for the time being, crystalline technologies retain an edge over thin-film for applications where available space is an issue. Lower efficiencies in thin-film are forcing much larger system sizes, as depicted in the first table above. The urban roof-top market thus remains crystalline technologies' domain.

However, and far more interestingly in my opinion, thin-film technologies' relative performance stability in warm weathers, as demonstrated by lower MPP power temperature coefficients, makes them superior alternatives for areas where temperatures between seasons range from very hot to hot, and where module temperatures are likely to be fairly high year-round. In Cyprus, according to data in the study, average monthly temperatures stood near or below 15 degrees Celsius (~60 degrees Fahrenheit) during six months out of the whole year. Several potenially large markets will show much higher temperatures throughout the year.    

Incidentally, such regions could become, because of their solar irradiation regimes, very attractive solar PV markets. Areas such as India, North Africa, the Middle East and Australia all come to mind (the scale shows kWh/m2/day).

India recently announced it would be targeting 20 GW installed by 2020, and it was reported that it would institute a production-based incentive, which generally takes the form of a production tax credit or a feed-in tariff. In regions of Southern India with very hot summers and hot winters, thin-film technologies would probably offer the best alternative for ground-mounted installations, which will likely spring up in fields across the region if the incentive is generous enough.

DISCLOSURE: None                   





July 29, 2009

India Joins The Solar PV Club

Charles Morand

One of the - if not THE - most popular debates in solar PV circles is about when exactly the electricity produced by solar PV systems will reach "grid-parity", or become competitive with like-generation fuels (i.e. non-baseload) on a stand-alone basis (i.e. no feed-in tariffs, mandates or rebates).

A lot of the time, these discussions slip into arcane sub-debates about module costs, as expressed on a dollar per watt basis, and how far they need to fall for solar PV to be competitive. But module costs are only one part of the equation; inverter, installation and other balance-of-plant costs can make up to 50% of the installed cost of a system, and the local solar regimes, cell efficiency, interest rates and system orientation can all impact the levelized cost of the power produced, and thus its relative cost position on the grid.

While such discussions are most definitely intellectually stimulating, the fact remains that the solar PV industry is, by-and-large, heavily dependent on regulatory incentives for growth. Recent figures by REN21 (p. 24 of the PDF document) demonstrate the extent of this dependency. In 2005, Japan accounted for ~24% of new installations and ~35% of total installed capacity for grid-tied solar PV globally, while for Spain the numbers were ~2% and ~2%, respectively. By the end of 2008, Japan made up ~5% of new installations and ~15% of installed capacity, whereas Spain accounted for ~48% and ~26%, respectively. What changed in those three years? Japan canned its residential incentive in 2006 and Spain implemented its feed-in tariff in 2004. Now, both countries have made 180-degree turns, with Spain canning and Japan re-instating. I expect investment flows to reverse. 

Reaching grid parity in certain regions with high wholesale power prices is not going to change that situation overnight - last year, McKinsey & Co published a forecast in which they estimate that economic demand for solar PV will begin outpacing policy-driven demand by about 2015. By 2020, the authors believe, policy-driven demand will still account for a little under a third of total global demand. Regulatory incentives are thus going to account for a substantial portion of installed solar PV capacity for at least the next decade.

That is why solar PV investors should be elated that India has finally decided to join the solar club by planning to have its own targets and incentives announced by September. Early information points to a non-trivial target of 20 GW installed by 2020 (Germany had about 5.4 in 2008), with 1 to 1.5 GW installed by 2012. The scope for solar PV growth in India is massive, especially growth in distributed solar as over 600 million people - mostly in rural areas - currently don't have access to electricity.

As of yet, few details have been made public on the upcoming policy so it is difficult to gauge what this will mean for the solar PV sector. However, if India's solar ambitions turn out to be as big as their IT ambitions, this could prove a welcomed boost for the industry.  

I am finding it difficult to pick stocks in the solar PV sector for three reasons: (1) the intense sell-side focus - exemplified by the fact that every shop on the Street now has a solar PV analyst - makes it very difficult to gain and exploit an informational advantage; (2) stocks tend to be highly volatile, with the success stories trading at astronomical multiples (e.g. First Solar) and the firms experiencing difficulties getting destroyed (e.g. Timminco); and (3) the industry remains relatively young, with new entrants and emerging technologies continually threatening established market positions.

My favorite way to play this sector and macro events like the India announcement thus remains through one of the two solar power ETFs: the Claymore/Mac Global Solar Index ETF (TAN) or the Market Vectors/Van Eck Global Solar Energy ETF (KWT) . While volatility and high multiples remain a factor for the ETFs, they nonetheless eliminate much of the firm-level risk.

I took a long position in TAN in early March, and this has done quite well for me so far. My time line there was 18 to 24 months and that remains the case today. However, the announcement by the Indian government in September could provide near-term momentum for these two ETFs, especially if the program is to be implemented sooner rather than later.

DISCLOSURE: Author is long TAN       

July 20, 2009

Grid-Based Energy Storage; Notes, Questions and Heresies from Storage Week

John Petersen

Last week I had the pleasure of participating as a panelist in Infocast’s Storage Week and attending four days of presentations by industry executives, national thought leaders and policymakers. While most of the presentations were too detailed and specific for a blog about energy storage stocks, there were a few high-level discussions that may be interesting to readers and while I'll never qualify as a journalist I can at least share some of the thoughts I jotted down.

Storage for Integration of Renewables

Two of the most important presentations came from Dr. Imre Gyuk, the DOE's Program Manager for Energy Storage Research, who explained that the unbuffered grid is vulnerable to collapse, noted that power outages cost American business an estimated $79 billion per year in lost productivity, and described grid-based energy storage as "a disruptive technology that will induce a paradigm shift in the utility industry." He further explained that storage has become a national priority as an integral subset of the smart grid program because of the multiple benefit streams it offers utilities in the form of frequency regulation, peak shaving, energy management, and transmission and distribution system upgrade deferral.

In his presentation, Dr. Gyuk specifically asked participants to support S. 1091, the Wyden Bill, which will provide a 20% investment tax credit for grid connected storage facilities that have at least 2 MW of capacity and can deliver 500 kWh for a period of 4 hours; makes utility-owned storage facilities eligible for clean renewable energy bonds; and provides a 30% investment tax credit for residential energy storage equipment. When the new subsidies are coupled with existing provisions that provide investment tax credits for storage system manufacturing facilities; ultra-rapid depreciation on eligible projects; and a short-term program that will offer cash subsidies to renewable energy storage projects in lieu of tax credits, the potential impact is massive.

In his discussion of the challenges associated with integrating intermittent renewables into the power grid, Dr. Gyuk explained that the peak-efficiency hours for both wind and solar do not mesh well with periods of peak demand for electric power. In the case of wind, the peak efficiency is usually at night when customer demand is lowest. In the case of solar, peak efficiency is usually around noon. Since peak demand typically occurs at about 4 P.M., Dr. Gyuk explained that short-term storage to shift power availability from off-peak to peak hours significantly increases both the usefulness of intermittent power sources to utilities and the economic returns to owners of those generating assets.

Community Energy Storage

Another important presentation came from Ali Nourai, AEP's manager of distributed energy resources who provided an overview of AEP's new Community Energy Storage (CES) program. In discussing the CES program, Dr. Nourai explained that the concept is "technology neutral" and emphasized that system reliability and "commodity priced batteries" would be critical drivers. He also noted that if PHEVs and EVs follow their expected development path, the batteries used in CES installations would likely be the same batteries used for automotive applications because widespread adoption in the auto industry would drive battery prices down to a level where they would likely be attractive to utilities. The key factors that Dr. Nourai stressed as critical for the CES program were:

  • Improved safety and security;
  • Increased customer reliability and value;
  • Optimized realization of multiple value streams;
  • Simplified integration of distributed power generation;
  • Simplified budgeting for smaller neighborhood projects; and
  • Simplified purchasing decisions by lower-level personnel.

Since the CES proposal contemplates installing batteries in a standard sized transformer box and assumes that Li-ion batteries will become a dominant technology for PHEVs and EVs, it clearly gives a short-term advantage to Li-ion battery developers who can make products that will fit in a limited volume. I remain skeptical about whether Li-ion battery technology will ever be robust enough or cheap enough for widespread adoption in the automotive industry and I wouldn't be surprised to see the volume constraints relaxed over time to facilitate the substitution of flow batteries and advanced lead-acid batteries. Seriously, does anyone really care whether the ugly green box hiding behind the shrubs is 3' by 3' instead of 4' by 4'? For the time being, the CES program favors Li-ion technology by imposing size constraints that have nothing to do with performance. It will be interesting to see how the program evolves as the cost and performance profiles for various battery technologies become clearer.

Energy Storage Heretic

On the third day I had an opportunity to play devil's advocate during a presentation by Mark Peters, the Deputy Associate Laboratory Director for the Li-ion battery development program at Argonne National Laboratories. During the question and answer session, I explained that for several months I've been suggesting that the inflection point for Li-ion batteries seems to be when you put a plug on a car because until you get to an all-electric drive train, the weight and volume differences don't justify the additional cost. Mr. Peter's response came as a pleasant surprise to me because he basically said "While there are members of my staff who would probably disagree with you, I tend to personally believe that your assessment is reasonable and the sweet spot for Li-ion batteries arrives when you add a plug."

By the afternoon of the fourth day, I had lapsed into full heretic mode for a panel discussion on the future of vehicle to grid technology. I think it came as a bit of a shock when I said "I don't believe V2G will happen because I don't believe PHEVs and EVs will happen in anything that even remotely resembles current plans." I then laid out the simple case against PHEVs and EVs as follows:

  • The principal goal of the smart grid is the minimization of waste in the electric power industry;
  • The most wasteful activity I personally engage in is using gasoline to power 4,000 pounds of car and 300 pounds of passengers at highway speed;
  • The only activity I can imagine that would be more wasteful is using batteries to power 4,000 pounds of car and 300 pounds of passengers at highway speed;
  • While most of the conference participants can afford the $40,000 cost of an eco-bling PHEV or EV, that option is not available to over 90% of the car buying public who need to worry about things like budgets and car payments;
  • There are 6 billion people who live in crushing poverty and for the first time in history most of them understand that there is more to life than subsistence farming;
  • As the 6 billion become consumers, our biggest challenges will be finding relevant scale solutions to shortages of water, food, energy and virtually every commodity you can imagine;
  • Last year 23 million electric bikes and scooters were sold in China and those E2Ws used the same battery capacity that one million American style PHEVs would have required;
  • From the perspective of a foreign government planner, providing mobility for a million wasteful Americans is not as important as providing mobility for 23 million locals who have more reasonable demands and aspirations; and
  • From the perspective of raw economics, a purchaser who needs a small battery pack can afford to pay a higher price per watt-hour than a purchaser who needs a large battery pack, which will leave PHEVs, EVs and grid-connected applications at the bottom of the food chain rather than at the top.
I wonder if they'll invite me back as a panelist for next year's conference.

July 19, 2009

Clean Energy Stocks Shopping List: Solar Stocks

The market correction I've been expecting seems to have begun.  If it continues, I will start buying again.  Here are five solar (and solar balance of system) stocks I'd buy at the right price.

Tom Konrad, Ph.D., CFA

This article continues my Clean Energy Stocks Shopping List series.  So far I've brought you:

Long-time readers will know that I don't focus on solar because I feel that too many other analysts cover the sector, and so it is much more difficult to gain an informational advantage.  I expect the price drops in the cost of photovoltaic modules, caused by efficiency gains from thin film producers such as Ascent Solar Technologies Inc (ASTI) and First Solar Inc (FSLR) and from increased solar grade silicon supply continue.  For instance, LDK Solar (LDK) is having trouble with decreasing revenues despite increased demand.  This trend should benefit sellers of balance of system components, such as inverters, something which many investors considering solar plays are unlikely to consider.

I'm also a long time fan of Concentrating Solar Power (CSP), mainly because it is the only dispatchable form of renewable electricity that has no practical limitations on scale.  My optimism is fueled by the Department of the Interior's recent move to speed solar development on public lands, something which has been a major roadblock to CSP.

#1 Solar Millennium AG (SMLNF.PK) is a proven project developer, having completed two 50 MW CSP plants with 8 hours of thermal storage in Spain.  When I wrote about Solar Millennium in May, the stock was trading at $18.  I didn't buy, because I was already becoming bearish about the short term market outlook, but readers who did have seen 80% gains, due to a deal with Southern California Edison to build two 242 MW CSP plants, and the growing momentum of the Desertec initiative.  I still like the company, but I don't like the price, so I'm waiting on the sidelines.

If Solar Millennium's stock does not drop to a point where I again feel comfortable, I can continue to participate in CSP through the back door with my Electricity Transmission picks. More than any other form of renewable electricity, CSP will need a massive investment in transmission infrastructure.  The best solar resources for CSP are in deserts, mostly far from the large electric load centers (with the exception of the desert Southwest and Southern California.  In order to achieve its potential of balancing fluctuations from other renewable energy sources, we will need continent-wide networks of powerful electricity transmission, as envisioned by the Desertec initiative, and North American grand solar plans.  Such plans typically call for High Voltage Direct Current transmission, in which Siemens (SI) and ABB Ltd. (ABB) lead.

#2 SatCon Technology (SATC) is a leading supplier of inverters for large scale Photovoltaic and Wind farms.  The company is not currently profitable, although analysts currently expect profitability in 2010.  Between then and now, Satcon needed to find the money to fund at least another year of operating cash losses, which amounted to $10M in 2008.  On July 3, the company raised $25M in additional preferred and common equity capital, which is enough to give the company a comfortable cushion.  

The stock seems reasonably valued at the current $1.70, but a market decline will probably knock SatCon back with everything else.

#3 Power-One, Inc. (PWER) is far more diversified than SatCon, producing a wide range of power conversion products in addition to renewable energy conversion. They serve both commercial and residential markets with their inverters, and their power converters for electronics are ubiquitous. 

They are also not currently profitable, but they have substantial cash and recently raised more through a private offering, so they should only need to raise further cash if it comes on favorable terms.  

Renewable energy is still only a small slice of their business (only part of the 16% of revenues in their "other" segment), and so Power-One is still mostly a bet on the IT market.  But the strong balance sheet makes this one worth watching.  I especially like the fact that two of the directors have been buying shares.

#4 Sustainable Energy Technologies (STG.V) is a development stage company working to use a massively parallel approach in order to achieve a higher electricity output from PV farms, with their technology especially targeted towards the fastest growing segment of PV, thin film.  The company is not particularly well capitalized, with less than a year's worth of operating cash on the balance sheet, and the stock could easily be knocked down if they are forced to raise capital on unfavorable terms.  However, an investor who uses such an opportunity to buy shares on the cheap will have bought a low-cost, highly leveraged thin film solar play.

#5 Advanced Energy Industries (AEIS) is another diversified electronics play, which not only does power conversion for the solar market, but also power conversion for PV manufacturing.  They also sell liquid and gas control systems and thermal instruments.  The solar market accounts for about 20% of their sales.  

Their solar inverters (introduced only in 2007) are particularly efficient, having achieved record ratings from the California Energy Commission, an advantage which should enable them to gain market share.  With positive cash flow and a strong balance sheet, AEI seems to be the safest way to play the solar Balance of System.

DISCLOSURE: Tom Konrad and/or his clients own SI, ABB, SATC, STG.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

July 09, 2009

$3 Billion For Cleantech & Alt Energy

Charles Morand

The DOE made public earlier today the amount of money that will awarded to clean power projects in lieu of the usual tax breaks: $3 billion.

This will allow project proponents to receive a direct cash grant now instead of a Production Tax Credit or an Investment Tax Credit later on. The guidance document notes the following:

"Section 1603 of the Act’s tax title, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act, appropriates funds for payments to persons who place in service specified energy property during 2009 or 2010 or after 2010 if construction began on the property during 2009 or 2010 and the property is placed in service by a certain date known as the credit termination date (described more fully below in the Property and Payment Eligibility section). Treasury will make Section 1603 payments to qualified applicants in an amount generally equal to 10% or 30% of the basis of the property, depending on the type of property."
 
This is the cherry on a sundae of cash handouts announced over the past few months for the alt energy and cleantech industries. Solar and wind installations - which account for the lion's share of alt energy investments - have yet to come back to life in any significant way. It is hoped by both government and industry people that this new measure will provide sufficient impetus in the near term to carry the sector through the remainder of the recession.

To be continued... 

May 26, 2009

Doing Solar Incentives Right

Different solar incentives encourage different types and locations of solar installations.  Better solar installations will result if we first decide what we want from solar, and then choose the solar incentives we use to match.

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

Choosing Carefully

This article is based on a presentation I gave at Solar 2009 [11.7 MB].  As with wind, the current incentives for Solar photovoltaics are good for encouraging more solar, but they are less effective at encouraging better solar.  Jigar Shah, founder of SunEdison and Jigar Shah Consulting, told the audience that they should be very careful in calling for a Feed-in-Tariff for solar, saying that "Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered," in his keynote address at that same conference.  He was concerned that Germany might become the market of last resort for solar PV because of the supply glut in 2009, and that their government might decide to put a hard cap on the total installations under Germany's Feed-in-Tariff in response.

What do We Want?

Before we advocate for a solar incentive we should look at what we want the incentive to accomplish.  I don't mean the obvious facetious answer "more solar."  James Groelinger, the former President and CEO of EPV Solar, speaking on a panel on investment opportunities in solar, said, "What counts is not modules, systems, megawatts, or capacity; it's energy.... in America we've been rewarding watts installed, while Germany is rewarding kWh produced.  Germany gets approximately 50% more kWh per watt installed than the US, after adjusting for the lower solar resource."

I agree that the relatively low energy production on US systems is probably an indicator of perverse incentives, but Solar should not be considered as solely an energy resource.  For instance, the correlation of PV output with demand is valuable in its own right, and the greater that correlation, the more valuable the energy produced will be, even if greater correlation comes at the expense of slightly lower output.

 We should look at what we want from solar.  We should ask, "What are solar PV's benefits and weaknesses compared to other technologies?"  How important these benefits and disadvantages are greatly depends on how solar is installed.

Benefits of Photovoltaics

Problems with Photovoltaics

Price Stability Current high cost
No Carbon Emissions High Embodied Energy
Timing: Correlated with demand Cloud Transients
Distributed: can be used to defer T&D upgrades Distributed: May result in stranded T&D assets
Timing: Good complement to Wind
Can be installed on low-value surfaces (roofs, and BIPV)

A look at current incentives show that more could be done to take advantage of more of these incentives.

Incentives for energy production

Many incentives for solar involve direct payments per kWh produced.  These include Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) which consumers often use to buy green power, Renewable Electricity Standards (RES), Feed-in-Tariffs (FIT), such as the one just passed by Ontario and the one in Germany which James Groelinger credits for the higher energy output of German solar farms.   Such incentives clearly encourage production of more energy (kWh), but by not differentiating between when or where the energy is produced, they can lead to perverse incentives.  Energy production incentives typically lead to:

  1. South-oriented panels which produce more, but often lower-value, electricity than panels oriented to the southwest.  
  2. Large clustered farms which may have quick fluctuations in output when a cloud passes over (cloud transients.)  A recent study, Quantifying PV Power Output Variability presented by Tom Hoff  on the same panel where I presented showed that, if a cluster of PV installation  is sufficiently dispersed (relative to cloud speeds), the variability of solar output from cloud transients will be reduced by a factor of approximately the square root of the number of installations.
  3. Installations may cluster on the wrong distribution feeders.  If a local electric substation is nearing its capacity at peak times, placing PV on the distribution system of that substation can allow the utility to delay a very expensive substation upgrade.  On the other hand, most new substation are likely to have significant extra capacity, and placing PV in the areas served by that substation will force the utility to pay back the investment on that substation over a smaller number of kWh, a problem referred to as stranded assets. 
  4. The carbon intensity of the electricity displaced by power from PV will vary with time, and, if cloud transients mean that gas turbines must ramp up and down quickly, that will also decrease turbine efficiency and change the carbon intensity of displaced electricity.

From an economic perspective, it makes sense to subsidize peak power production which can help delay a substation upgrade more than pure kWh production, especially if it is from an installation which might strand transmission and distribution (T&D) assets.

Net Metering

Net metering, or allowing the PV owner to sell electricity back to the grid at the same price he pays for it, is also a subsidy.  Net metering may not compensate the utility for the cost of making sure that the power is always there, depending on the tariff.  This is especially true on typical flat-rate residential tariffs, where payments are typically a fixed price per (net) kWh used, and produces incentives very much like the Energy Production incentives discussed above.

A Time-of-Use (TOU) tariff, where a kWh produced when demand is high receives a much higher value than one produced when demand is low, is much better for compensating the utility for the demands a user places on (or removes from) the system.  

In contrast, a typical commercial or industrial tariff, which is based on a low charge per kWh, but a large demand charge payment based on the highest 15 minutes of demand in any given month, can produce very perverse incentives.  Because of cloud transients, PV systems seldom will do much to reduce demand charges, and the low energy payment does little if anything to compensate for the PV investment.  This means that many otherwise ideal spaces on commercial properties are not economically viable for PV installations.  Ron Binz, the Chairman of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, uses the example of the corners of square farm fields which are irrigated by rotating sprinkler irrigation.  Since farms are normally on demand charges in Colorado, these large areas of otherwise unused, flat space near electric distribution infrastructure are unavailable for PV installations.

Creative tariff structures might be used with net metering to help distribute solar where it could do the most good in helping to defer T&D upgrades.  This could be done with higher per kWh charges for T&D in areas which might soon need T&D upgrades, but probably is not politically possible because of concerns about fairness.

Incentives to Reduce Carbon

If the goal for solar is to reduce global warming pollution, then the best way to do it will be to put a price on Carbon.  This will not only mean that a solar installation which displaces high-carbon electricity (such as coal or inefficient natural gas peaking turbines) will receive a higher incentive than an installation which displaces low-carbon electricity (such as efficient natural gas combined cycle turbines or nuclear,) but it will also take into account the high embodied energy of crystalline silicon PV (if produced using fossil fuels) relative to the lower embodied energy of thin-film technologies.

One weakness of pure carbon pricing (at least from the perspective of solar advocates) is that it does more to encourage less expensive technologies that have quicker energy paybacks.  But if the goal is to reduce overall carbon emissions, that is precisely the result we want.  To take into account the other benefits of solar, other types of incentives will need to be used in conjunction with a carbon price.

Incentives for Investment

Incentives for investment, such as the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and accelerated depreciation, help with the high cost of PV, but if used alone, without other incentives to reduce carbon or produce peak power, may lead to many installations which don't do much of anything, as highlighted by James Groelinger above.  They are simply an incentive to spend more on solar installations, even if the energy produced has very little value.

By reducing the effective cost of PV, they also blunt some normal market incentives.  Solar manufacturers and installers have less incentive than they otherwise would to cut costs, because their customers are only picking up a fraction of the bill.  Part of any incentive for spending on solar will go to the installer and manufacturers in the form of higher prices.  While this may be a good thing if the goal is to grow the solar industry, a large solar industry is only as useful as the solar installations it provides.

Overall, incentives for investment do not produce many distortions to incentives, and can be an effective way of reducing the cost of solar, so long as they are used in conjunction with other incentives which will assure that the solar installations produce valuable power.

Conclusion

If we want to encourage solar,  we can, and there are many potential benefits to society.  By understanding those benefits, and by not being blind to the drawbacks of solar, we can design incentives which encourage just those benefits we want at relatively low cost, both in terms of price and in terms of the costs that the electric system must bear to integrate solar.

Ask for solar, but be careful how you ask.

May 25, 2009

From Solar 2009: Investment Opportunities in Solar Stocks: Solar Millennium (SMLNF.PK)

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

This is the third in a series of entries on opportunities in solar stocks, based on a panel at Solar 2009.  The the first article introduced the panelists, and took a look at the solar sector as a whole.  The second was about First Solar.

Allen Goodman  on Solar Millennium (SMLNF.PK)

"Project developers [such as Solar Millennium] stand out because of their ability to have a relationship with the customer."

Peter Lynch on Solar Millennium (SMLNF.PK)

"I liked Solar Millennium before it ran up to $90 last year, I liked it at $90, and I like it today at $16."

Investment Action

Solar Millennium closed on May 15 at $17.75.  That's over $16, but a lot lower than $90.  If you're looking to buy a solar stock despite the scary market conditions I discussed in the first part of this series, Solar Millennium should be at the top of your list.  Since it's a Concentrating Solar Thermal Power (CSP) developer, an exciting technology I recently highlighted for its ability to produce dispatchable power.  It's one of the rare developers that has show it can build real plants (that differentiating factor Allen Goodman spoke of.)

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

 

May 20, 2009

From Solar 2009: Removing The $2,000 ITC Cap

Charles Morand

Like Tom, I attended part of the Solar 2009 conference last week. One of the most interesting presentations I heard was by Andy Black, CEO of OnGrid Solar, on the potential impact on residential solar installations of removing the $2,000 ITC limit (link to the actual paper). Prior to changes in October 2008, ITC tax credits for rooftop solar PV installations were capped at $2,000. In the author's own words:

This paper presents revised and expanded financial analyses of residential cases [...]. It will look at Internal Rate of Return (IRR) only (for simplicity of cross comparison) [...] accounting for the increase in the ITC and brought up-to-date with current electric tariffs, incentives (federal, state & local) and, as applicable, Solar Renewable Energy Certificate (SREC) values. The paper then expands coverage to additional US states (NJ, NC, CT, AZ, HI, CO), and also performs a couple of “what if” scenarios to illustrate the effects of changes in individual variables.

The following two tables sum up the author's findings.

There are certain caveats to these results that are discussed in the paper. But if Andy Black is within a 100 basis points of IRR in most cases, we're looking at some very interesting numbers. Residential installations currently account for about 35% of installed solar capacity in the US so this segment is material to the industry.

Ground-mounted and commercial installations will most likely account for the majority of incremental capacity added over the next few years. Credit difficulties, however, are hitting both segments particularly hard (especially ground-mounted). Residential might thus represent a glimmer of hope for the solar PV industry, especially given that module prices are falling rapidly (see the second table).

With the meltdown in equities that occurred in the wake of Lehman Brothers' failure last fall, resulting in a "lost decade" (read: flat for those who bought and held) for the S&P 500 and the Dow, many households are seriously rethinking the wisdom behind putting one's savings in equities. Cash is a lousy asset class, especially in a world where the price of energy will drive crippling inflation, and bonds often provide mediocre real returns. This kind of thinking by German households, prompted by generous government incentives, drove massive amounts of capital into the solar PV industry in that nation.

If households, because of aggressive incentives, are able to generate pre-tax IRRs of upwards of 10% for 10 to 20 years in a nearly riskless venture, I wouldn't be surprised to see some serious money flow into this area. The states covered in this analysis account for about 23% of total US population, an appreciable number. Local governments and utilities have already, in some cases, scaled back incentives following the removal of the $2,000 cap, but even after these reductions households are still be looking at double-digit or near double-digit returns in certain cases.

A surge in demand driven by the residential sector would benefit primarily the silicon-oriented firms with their higher efficiencies, especially in a context where less generous local and utility incentives are counterbalanced by falling module prices.

DISCLOSURE: None

From Solar 2009: Investment Opportunities in Solar Stocks: First Solar (FSLR)

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

This continues a series of entries on opportunities in solar stocks, based on a panel at Solar 2009.  The first article introduced the panelists, and took a look at the solar sector as a whole.  The others focus on individual companies.

Pradeep Haldar

  • Investors remain bullish on thin film technologies such as CdTe (First Solar's technology.)
  • CdTe currently has the lowest cost, but it may not have long term sustainability.

Peter Lynch on First Solar (FSLR)

  • If First Solar ever stumbles, gravity will take over. They could fall 50% in a day.
  • They are up too high with the P/E's, which is why they are difficult to invest in.
  • They have a differentiating factor- the lowest cost- and investors like that.

Investment Action

If you decided to short a solar stock after reading part 1, First Solar should be up on your list.  The next entry will be a solar stock the panel liked. (Link broken until published.)

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

 

May 15, 2009

From Solar 2009: Investment Opportunities in Solar Stocks, Part 1

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

The last panel I attended at Solar 2009 focused on investment opportunities in Solar.  This is the first of several entries with ideas from the speakers.   They were:

Each had perspectives on the solar (mostly photovoltaic (PV) industry, and struck me as very knowledgeable in the field.  The caliber of the industry and investment knowledge on display impressed me, so I'll share with readers some of the panelists thoughts.

Peter Lynch on the Solar Sector

  • Wall Street likes “techie glitz” of PV because it means they really don’t have to focus too much on reality.
  • In the last 8 weeks, solar stocks have gained 72% on average.  This is unsustainable.
  • Solar Stocks have a very bright future, but you'd better be a trader.
  • All stocks took off in early march.  When stocks move the good ones move first, and others get swept up.  I believe that the Solar stocks were ones that got swept up. 

Allen Goodman on the Solar Sector

  • There are lots of claims [of low-priced PV modules.]  If they can [produce them at that price], that's great, but the challenge is on the companies.
  • The key to picking profitable solar companies is to look for ones with key differentiating factors.  For developers, this may be the ability to have a relationship with a customer, obtain financing, and do permitting.  The other end of the spectrum is to have an edge with technology.

Investment Action

I agree with Lynch that if you're going to make money in Solar stocks today, you have to do it as a trader.  I also agree that the current move is unstainable (I recently called it a bear market rally.)  So if you are a trader, the trade today should be on the short side.  Future articles in this series will have a couple stocks that the panel panned, or you can short the sector as a whole, with either of the Solar ETFsTAN or KWT.

DISCLOSURE: None.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here and in the comments are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

April 19, 2009

Bragawatts

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

When Solaren announced they are seeking PUC approval for a power purchase agreement (PPA) with PG&E (NYSE:PCG) for solar power from outer space, I wasn't too surprised.   California utilities signing deals for large solar projects which quite likely may never be built is something of an industry trend. 

At a Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) conference last fall, John White, the Executive Director of Cleanpower.org, said that competitive solicitations for power supplies in California are becoming a sideshow, and that the "Process lacks credibility among the most serious and qualified developers." 

Rainier Aringhoff, the president of one of those serious and qualified developers, Solar Millennium (SMLNF.PK), agreed.  "Building CSP plants with storage is only with in the reach of a few companies," he said, "and these companies require regulatory certainty."  If the PUC is approving renewable projects that are unlikely to be built, how likely are they to enforce California's RPS if utilities fail to meet them because of developers' failing to deliver?

Sun, Sun Everywhere, But Not a Gigawatt Built

There are more than technical and financial barriers to development of large CSP projects.  According to Aringhoff, the transmission regulatory bodies FERC and CAISO need to sort through all the interconnection applications and determine which are for otherwise viable projects. They should also create land use corridors along main transmission trunks throughout the western electrical system which can be more easily permitted for renewable energy.  A full 5,000 MW of renewable energy projects are waiting on transmission upgrades.

Land use rules are also important.  One of the best areas for solar development would be the Mojave Desert, given its high insolation and proximity to California's population centers.  Unfortunately, the West Mojave Plan actively hinders renewable development, with only one percent of the land area set aside for renewable development.  Five percent is dedicated to off road vehicle recreation.  

As John White said, "It’s amazing that we can take a disturbed piece of ground where there is development across the street and the Mojave Desert commission will say 'No, we have to protect the Mojave ground squirrel.'"

Given these barriers, it's less surprising that PG&E is looking to space, where there are no endangered ground squirrels.

I'm not a space exploration expert, but solar from space seems fraught with technical risk, and Solaren seems to be planning to start with a commercial scale project (200 MW, to be scaled up to 1700 MW.)  If the technical problems were solved, it would still be at risk of destruction by space debris and any country with a functioning space program.  Assuming such a satellite could collect about ten times as much energy per acre as a ground-based plant, it would still need to cover 100 acres of increasingly cluttered space in order to produce 200 MW, or 850 acres for 1700 MW, making it likely to suffer regular impacts.

Would investors in any climate be willing to fund such an essentially unknowable venture? Perhaps they would if some deep-pocketed entity decided to take on much of the risk, as United Technologies Corp (UTX) is doing with Solar Reserve.  But, according to Jonathan Marshall, a PG&E spokesman, "There is no risk to PG&E ratepayers for this."  If there is no risk for ratepayers, there is no protection (at least from PG&E) for Solaren investors.

Of the companies that have signed PPAs with California utilities, Stirling Energy Systems' 1750 MW of projects have been most often cited to me as unlikely to be built.  They have signed PPAs with San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, but if these projects do not get built, they will probably not be alone in that.

Strategic Shifts

In contrast, Ausra, with their innovative Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector (CLFR) geometry, has not been signing PPAs they won't be able to fill.  Seeing the harsh financial climate, they took the logical step and decided not to develop their own plants, but rather to sell equipment into the process heat market.  I recently wrote skeptically about this while pondering the future of Concentrating Solar Power, but not because the move is foolish.  The question in my mind is if the move will be enough.  Can a CSP equipment manufacturer be able to ride out the storm by selling equipment to power generators or industrial customers with other, less capital intensive options that work around the clock?

Other solar developers think so.  They are following this path and choosing to reduce their financial risk and need for capital by becoming equipment suppliers.  Skyfuel has always been a technology and equipment provider, rather than a developer.  The recent announcement from GreenVolts shows a similar shift in emphasis to selling equipment (although GreenVolts is not quite comparable to Ausra and Skyfuel, being a CPV startup that sells electricity (not heat) producing equipment.)  

In addition to the financial crisis, these shifts may have been encouraged by a recent change in the Investment Tax Credit rules which allows utilities to own projects and still gain the tax benefits.  But unless someone is willing to take on technical and regulatory risk, we're going to see a lot fewer of these projects built than we would like. 

If we can't build new transmission, and allocate more than 1% of the Mojave to renewable development, we may just have to hope for solar electricity from space.  Unfortunately, as Brett Steenbarger said in a recent interview "Hope is comforting, but ultimately is not a particularly effective coping strategy."  

Hope's not a good coping strategy for climate change, either.

DISCLOSURE: The author has a long position in UTX.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

April 16, 2009

The Future Shape of CSP

Parabolic Troughs have dominated Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) until recently, but several companies are vying to replace them. Will the upstarts succeed, or will incumbency and improvements to trough technology ward off the competition?

Dr. Arnold Leitner, CEO of Skyfuel, Inc., thinks the battle for dominance of CSP will be "winner-take-all."

The technology which can deliver power when it is needed at a reasonable price should triumph. Photovoltaic (PV) technologies are rapidly producing price reductions, and can be used almost anywhere, but only produce power when the sun is shining. In contrast, CSP is still cheaper than PV enables inexpensive thermal storage, with the promise of dispatchable power to compensate for the variability of other renewable power sources and demand. Dispatchability assures CSP with storage a place in the eventual energy mix.

Heat Transfer Fluids

The ability and efficiency of a technology to accommodate thermal storage (and provide dispatchability) is a function of the heat transfer fluid and working temperature.

Three heat transfer fluids have been demonstrated to date: Steam (in power towers and troughs) mineral oil (in most parabolic trough plants,) and molten nitrate salts (in power towers.) The working temperature for steam is limited by the potential for corrosion. Molten salts and oil break down at high temperatures, with molten salt and steam capable of achieving the highest temperatures (about 565° C for nitrate salts.)

Companies such as BrightSource and eSolar are currently working to commercialize supercritical steam in power towers.

Lower temperature steam is also the working fluid for Ausra, a company working to commercialize the Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector (CLFR) geometry. CLFR breaks up a trough into a series of narrow, nearly flat, reflectors saving on the high cost of carefully focused troughs.  Ausra recently announced that they were refocusing on becoming a technology and materials provider, rather than building solar farms on their own.  An industry observer who prefers to remain anonymous thinks that this will mean the end of the company for practical purposes, since the process heat market is very difficult to sell into, and few companies are willing to back expensive, untried technology, especially from a third party vendor. Ausra is hardly alone in grappling with scarce financing in a capital-intensive industry, and the same could be said about several competitors.

Oil is commonly used as the heat transfer fluid in parabolic trough systems because it does not freeze at night (nitrate salts freeze at 220° C) and operates at lower pressure than steam. According to Bill Gould, Chief Technical Officer of Solar Reserve, such systems have peak operating temperatures of 375°C.  Solar Reserve is working to commercialize the nitrate salt/power tower combination which was demonstrated at DOE's Solar Two in the late 1990s, for which Bill Gould was the project manager.

Nitrate Salt

Composition

60% NaNO3 and 40% KNO3 by weight.

Melting Point

221 °C

Boiling Point

Has very low vapor pressure, but begins to decompose around 600 °C

Cost

$90-$160/kWe (trough); $30-$55/kWe (tower)

Other uses

Fertilizer

Thermal Storage

The best established thermal storage system is two-tank molten salt, according to Greg Glatzmaier, a Senior Engineer II on the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) CSP research team. Pressurized steam or oil have also been used, but at higher cost per kWh.  Pressurized steam is only practical for short term buffer storage, according to Greg Kolb, a Distinguished Member of Technical Staff National Solar Thermal Test Facility.

Commercial projects using oil as a heat transfer fluid and molten salt for thermal storage include Nevada Solar One and Solar Millennium's (SMLNF.PK) Andesol parabolic trough plants. Solar Millennium is currently the only pure-play publicly traded CSP company I'm aware of.) 

According to Gould and Glatzmaier, the thermal storage systems systems at the Andesol plants suffer 7%-10% round-trip energy losses in heat exchange. If molten salt is also used as the heat transfer fluid, then there is no need for heat exchangers, and no such heat loss. The lower working temperature of these plants also requires much more salt and larger tanks to effectively store the same amount of electricity as for a power tower, once the lower temperatures and  efficiency losses are taken into account..

Gould calculates that a trough plant will require three times as much molten salt (along with larger tanks to store it) as a power tower to store an equivalent amount of energy. With additional information from Glatzmaier, I calculate that, to store the equivalent of 1 kWh of electricity at a trough plant requires approximately $90-160 of capital cost, compared to about $30-$55 at a tower, with the variability arising from the commodity price of salt, which is mainly used as fertilizer.

The Shape of Things to Come

In terms of configuration, many experts see long term advantages in power towers. Nate Blair, a Senior Analyst at NREL says the underlying efficiency advantage of towers arising from higher working temperatures will lead to more power from a similar investment in hardware. A Rankin cycle turbine will operate at about 37% efficiency for troughs, or 41% for a tower, meaning a tower can produce approximately 8% more electricity from the same amount of heat.

The combination of energy storage using molten salt, no heat transfer losses, and the thermal efficiency of power towers, point to power towers with molten salts as the working fluid as the long-term favorite.

There are challenges. Only parabolic troughs are a proven, bankable technology. Dr. Leitner estimates that it will cost between $500-$700 million to commercialize a new technology. Solar Reserve plans to overcome this barrier with a performance guarantee from United Technologies (NYSE:UTX) up to the value of the contract, or $200 million, but in the current financial climate financing remains difficult.

SkyFuel has plans to use the innovative reflective film ReflecTech in a hybrid of parabolic trough and CLFR configuration called a Linear Power Tower (LPT). By increasing the diameter of the receiver they hope to reduce heat loss and allow the salt to stay molten for longer periods. ReflecTech enables relatively inexpensive, large parabolic mirrors to be used in the CLFR configuration, with 10 mirrors, each about 3 meters wide focused on each receiver. This should achieve 85x magnification, sufficient to reach temperatures comparable to those in a power tower.

SkyFuel hopes to commercialize the LPT incrementally, by first testing it as part of existing parabolic trough plants using oil as the heat transfer fluid. Might the parabolic trough triumph by incorporating the advantages of power towers?

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.  

DISCLOSURE: The author has a long position in UTX.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

April 08, 2009

Why CSP Should Not Try to be Coal

Joe Romm, at the influential Climate Progress blog, has hit on a formula for countering the coal industry's claims that we need baseload power sources.  Since Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) in conjunction with thermal storage can be used to generate 24/7 or baseload power Joe has renamed it "Solar Baseload."   This is win-the-battle-lose-the-war thinking.  While it does neatly counter the argument we need coal or nuclear, since there are renewable power sources which can produce baseload, such as CSP, Geothermal, and Biomass.  I fell into this coal-industry trap myself in a 2007 article about Geothermal, as did AltEnergyStocks Editor Charles Morand in an article on CSP.

Dispatchable Solar, not Solar Baseload.

Continuous power from solar energy was first demonstrated at the Department of Energy's (DOE) Solar Two project in the late 1990s. I recently interviewed Bill Gould, CTO of CSP company Solar Reserve.  Solar Reserve is now working to commercialize the molten salt thermal storage and solar receiver technology demonstrated at Solar Two, where Bill Gould served as project manager.  

According to Gould, DOE's intent at the Solar Two project was to demonstrate dispatchable power, not baseload power.  Dispatchable power is power that can be called on when needed, in contrast to baseload power, which is essentially always on.  As a demonstration, Gould's team throttled back the output from Solar Two to 10% of capacity, and this allowed the plant to produce power continuously for a couple weeks until it was interrupted by several consecutive days of cloudiness.  But, in essence, it was a stunt: baseload power is far less valuable than dispatchable power.

The coal industry says that we need baseload power because our refrigerators still come on in the middle of the night.  This is like saying we should have the water running constantly in the kitchen sink because we may get thirsty at any time and want a drink.  Put in these terms, the assertion that we need baseload power is clearly nuts: what we need is controllable power that's there when we need it, but is not wasted when the lights are off and the fridge is not running.  

The Problem With Baseload

Last spring, I discussed one of the problems with baseload power.  The more baseload power you have, the harder it is to use variable generation such as photovolatic (PV) solar and wind power.  Or, from the baseload generator's perspective, the more variable generation on the grid, the less baseload power can be added.    This fact has not been lost on the UK's nuclear industry, which is fighting to get wind targets lowered.

To illustrate the incompatibility of baseload and variable energy sources, I downloaded 4 days of real demand data (January 1-4, 2008) from ERCOT's website.  I then simulated production curves for two variable sources, one designed to mimic solar PV (only on during the day, with some variability due to clouds) and a more random type of generation to simulate wind.  I then fixed the amount of baseload power at 25,000 MW (68% of demand) and 5,000 MW (14% of demand) in each of two scenarios, and saw how much wind and PV the remaining demand could accommodate with the constraint that total generation could not exceed demand.

wpe6.gif

wpe5.gif

As you can see, when I dropped baseload power from 68% to 14% of demand, I was able to increase the power of variable sources from 10% to 36% of demand.  Almost half of the drop in baseload power was filled by variable power sources, with the balance requiring an increase in dispatchable generation.  If you'd like to try your own scenarios, you can download my Excel spreadsheet here.

Better than Baseload

It should be clear that  dispatchable generation is a truly premium power source.  Dispatchable generation, like energy storage, long distance transmission, and demand response, all allow the grid to accommodate more variation in both power supplies and in demand.  In a carbon-constrained world, where we want to use as much variable generation such as wind and PV as possible, zero carbon, dispatchable power from CSP can do far more to help us decarbonize the grid than CSP baseload.

Baseload power is part of the problem; it's not the solution.  We should not denigrate CSP by pretending it is only a substitute for coal or nuclear.

Concentrating Solar Power is much better than baseload.

Tom Konrad, Ph.D.

March 28, 2009

Do You Need To Invest In Oil To Benefit From Expensive Oil?

Two months ago, Tom told us how he'd dipped a toe into the black stuff (i.e. bought the OIL etf) on grounds that current supply destruction related to the depressed price of crude oil would eventually lead to the same kind of supply-demand crunch that led oil to spike during the 2004 to mid-2008 period.

If you need evidence that the current price of crude is wreaking havoc in the world of oil & gas exploration, look no further than Alberta and its oil sands. The oil sands contain the second largest oil reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia, but more importantly will account for the lion's share of incremental supply as conventional oil production continues to decline. The province's economy, which had been growing at a breakneck pace for the past five years, has come to a grinding halt: employment insurance claims grew by twice the Canadian average over the past year; personal bankruptcies jumped by 61%; and home foreclosures are on the rise. This is the result of significant project cancellations that will no-doubt limit Alberta's ability to ramp-up output once prices climb back again.

It is thus no surprise that Cambridge Energy Research Associates and others are warning about the economic hazards of curtailing investments into conventional and alternative energy.  

Alt Energy & Fossil Energy

Oil being the most followed of the energy commodities, it is no surprise that it is receiving most of the media attention. Arguably, natural gas and coal prices should matter more to alt energy investors than oil prices: according to REN21, of the $71 billion invested in renewable energy in 2007, 47% went into wind and 30% into solar PV. Both technologies are used for power generation (investments into transportation alternatives are comparatively small) and, in the US, coal and natural gas are the dominant fuels in power production. The relentless focus of the popular press and other pundits on the the economic case for alternative energy being closely tied to the price of crude oil is thus mostly misplaced.

Case in point, last November, a reader wrote me with a correlation analysis conducted over a 5-year period (or, where there wasn't five years' worth of data, since inception). The correlation coefficients between the returns on crude oil and those on alt energy securities were as follows: GEX, 0.19; PBW, 0.14; TAN, 0.18; and the index underlying FAN, 0.19. These are, by most measures, pretty low correlation coefficients. Given the reader's reputation, I trusted the numbers. 

Nevertheless, in alt energy investing as in life, perception is often reality. Given the many signs pointing toward a rapid escalation in crude prices - demand can and will rebound far quicker than supply - I decided to re-explore the relationship between fossil and alt energies. If a strong positive correlation can be found between alt energy investments and crude oil, natural gas and coal investments, there may not be a need to dip a toe into the black (or colorless) stuff at all - one can focus on alt energy alone and still enjoy the ride up.

In order to verify this, I ran a basic correlation analysis with the daily returns on the KOL (coal), OIL (crude) and UNG (nat gas) ETFs/ETN on the one end, and the daily returns on the alt energy ETFs on the other. I got the return data from Yahoo Finance using the Adjusted Close prices that include dividends and splits. Given the results above from our reader's analysis, I only went back six months to see if the (lack of a) relationship still held.   

OIL and UNG track the prices of futures contracts in the underlying commodities, so they are pretty decent securities to use to estimate the returns on crude and nat gas investments. KOL, on the other hand, tracks a basket of coal company stocks. It's the closest thing I could find but it's not ideal as stock returns don't necessarily track commodity returns. For instance, large mining firms will often sell a high proportion of their output through fixed-price contracts, preventing them from benefiting from sudden surges in spot prices. 

The boxes delineate general alt energy ETFs (ICLN to GEX), the solar ETFs (TAN, KWT) and the wind ETFs (FAN, PWND). There aren't any notable differences between the ETF categories, with the most significant differences being between the fossil fuel ETFs/ETN and the alt energy ETFs.   

The relationship between alt energy stocks and coal stocks appears relatively strong. However, in the absence of return data on coal, it's hard to tell whether investing in alt energy stocks (or coal stocks for that matter) is an optimal way of playing increasing coal prices. Given the structure of the coal market, with significantly less involvement by purely financial actors than in oil or natural gas markets, this is a hard one to play for retail investors, although data appears to suggest there is a play.

Though the correlation appears to have strengthened somewhat between crude oil and alt energy investments in the last six months, it remains weak enough that if someone wants to play a return to expensive oil they are still better off dipping a toe (or even an entire foot!) in the black stuff. The same holds for nat gas.

This quick and dirty analysis wouldn't withstand close methodological scrutiny. My only intent here was to see whether these relationships were worth exploring further - they are not. If you want to benefit from crude oil and nat gas price increases and have no ethical qualms about it, invest in them directly!

DISCLOSURE: Charles Morand has a long position in TAN.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

March 03, 2009

Dipping a Toe in the Golden Stuff

And I'm not talking about gold, but I liked the play on this title. Last December, I wrote about a report that claimed that solar stocks were the best play on the cleantech revolution. In that article, I analyzed the two solar ETFs: the Claymore/Mac Global Solar Index ETF (TAN) and the Market Vectors/Van Eck Global Solar Energy ETF (KWT).

At the end of the article, I said I had an open buy order on TAN. That buy order expired unfilled in January as the suckers rally progressed, but TAN then dropped to the kinds of levels I was looking for on Monday so I took a position at $5.



As I said in the December article, this is long-term. I don't expect this investment to realize its full potential for another 18 to 24 months, so patience is of essence. Of course, certain catalysts, such as a rapid rise in oil prices, could push this ETF up before then, and I would be more than happy to take a little profit if that happened (I haven't been taking a lot of that recently...). But my time horizon is two years plus here - this a play on the thesis put forth in the report that in the long run solar stocks have significant capital appreciation potential.

DISCLOSURE: Charles Morand has long position in TAN.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

December 23, 2008

Solar Stocks As the Best Play On The Cleantech Revolution? (Part II)

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about a recent report claiming that solar PV was going to be at the fore of the "cleantech revolution." I've never doubted solar PV's potential. What I like most about it, besides the fact that it's the most abundant energy form on Earth, is the ability for solar technologies to be deployed either through the building stock as a load-abatement measure or in large arrays of panels as solar parks. No other power generation technology can be scaled simultaneously through these two routes.

Besides investments in Energy Conversion Devices (ENER) and Suntech Power (STP) in 2006, I've largely stayed away from solar PV stocks in the past two years. For one thing, the onslaught of coverage initiation from the sell-side has made it difficult to gain a real informational edge for a retail investor such as myself. Throw on top of that the onslaught of retail investor interest in the sector, and you're starting to have a very unattractive asset class as far as I go. Investing in solar has become, over the past three years, either about momentum trading or the belief that incredibly rich valuations will endure for a while.

There's no doubt that the bashing of solar stocks that has taken over the past few months has rekindled many people's interest in the sector, including my own. Although from a fundamental point of view the ugliest is probably still to come for solar, there is no doubt that the space is looking a lot cheaper than it did six short months ago. With the overall market seeming like it's begun the process of finding a bottom, is now a good time to consider entering the solar PV space for the long-run (>18 months)? Even though I do think solar will probably continue to underperform for a few more months, I have been thinking about re-entering the space as a long-term play since I mostly share the perspective put forth in the report. Moreover, since I'm a lousy market-timer, now seems like a good time to get in and I'd prefer to sit through a bit more downside than to let upside escape me because I haven't timed my entry appropriately.  

Since I haven't been following the space closely over the past couple of years, and because there is a good deal of uncertainty out there, my preferred approach is to go with one of the two solar ETFs: the Claymore/Mac Global Solar Index ETF (TAN) or the Market Vectors/Van Eck Global Solar Energy ETF (KWT). This approach allows me not to have to do a detailed analysis of any one company in particular, a process which can be very time consuming for someone not intimately familiar with the sector. Moreover, the portfolio approach inherent to ETF investing allows for a spreading of risks. I've therefore conducted an analysis somewhat similar to the one I did for wind ETFs a few months ago.

Solar ETFs              

Solar ETFs: Basic Metrics

Item TAN KWT
Expense ratio 0.65% 0.65%
# securities in portfolio 25 35
Weighted avg. PE 34.5 (Sep. 30) 33.97 (Oct. 31)
NAV/closing pr (12/12) 0.987 1.008

As can be noted from the table above, the PE figures available are a bit outdated and are therefore not particularly useful. For the NAV/closing price, large discrepancies can provide interesting long (NAV>closing prices) or short (NAV<closing price) opportunities. In this case, neither shows a huge difference between asset value per unit and closing price. Both ETFs have the exact same expense ratio. 

One of the key differences between these two securities is the number of stocks within each and the relative concentration of risk. For TAN with 25 stocks, the average holding accounts for 4.00% of total fund value, whereas for KWT with 35 the average holding accounts for 2.86% of total fund value. However, the top ten holdings make up about 64% of fund value for KWT versus roughly 58% for TAN - risk is therefore more concentrated at the top for KWT than it is for TAN. Top-ten holdings for both ETFs are as follows:

Solar ETFs: Top-10 Holdings
TAN Weight KWT Weight
First Solar Inc. 11.21% First Solar Inc. 13.68%
Renewable Energy Corp AS 6.95% SolarWorld AG 9.85%
MEMC Electronic Materials Inc. 6.46% Q-Cells S.E. 7.85%
Solarworld AG 5.66% Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. ADR 5.94%
SunPower Corporation 5.09% Renewable Energy Corp. ASA 5.06%
Q-Cells AG 4.89% Evergreen Solar Inc. 5.01%
Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. 4.60% SunPower Corp. Cl A 4.57%
Evergreen Solar, Inc. 4.42% PV Crystalox Solar PLC 4.52%
Yingli Green Energy Holding Co. Ltd. ADR 4.27% Energy Conversion Devices Inc. 3.95%
LDK Solar Co. Ltd. ADR 4.20% Yingli Green Energy Holding Co. Ltd. ADR 3.86%
 

TOTAL

57.75%

TOTAL

64.29%

The main thing I really wanted to examine was relative exposure to the various segments of the solar supply chain. At a broad level, my preference is for the ETF with the greatest exposure to the wafer, silicon cell and thin-film segments, all of which have higher barriers to entry because of larger technological requirements. I want to stay away from heavier weightings into the silicon end of the market because of the commodity nature of it, and the modules and installation ends of the market because of the low barriers to entry and relative labor-intensity. I thus classified stocks in the two ETFs into the following categories: silicon, wafer, cells, thin-film, module, installation, solar thermal, integrated and other. I created categories to account for the companies that span two segments, and companies that spanned three or more segments are considered integrated. "Other" is made up mostly of firms providing manufacturing technologies for solar firms.

Solar ETFs: Segment Allocation
Segment TAN (% fund value) KWT (% fund value)
Silicon 0.00% 0.00%
Wafers 16.62% 9.47%
Cells 11.61% 14.11%
Thin-film 15.81% 17.87%
Modules 2.64% 3.44%
Installation 0.00% 3.20%
Cells & Modules 10.63% 8.66%
Modules & Installation 4.66% 5.25%
Integrated 28.51% 30.36%
Solar Thermal 0.00% 1.85%
Other 9.53% 5.82%
TOTAL 100% 100%

Unsurprisingly, both firms have First Solar (FSLR), the recent poster boy for the solar PV sector's success, as their top holding. Also unsurprisingly, the largest category for both is "Integrated", as more and more firms try to extend their reach up and down the supply chain. Both ETFs are overall quite heavily tilted toward pure-play solar stocks with little in the way of indirect plays. These two ETFs don't provide as clear-cut an alternative to one another as do the wind ETFs. KWT has a slightly higher weighting in stocks in the "Modules" and "Installation" ends of the supply chain. Coupled with the higher concentration of fund value (i.e. risk) toward the top-ten holdings, that makes me lean toward TAN.    

Decision

As someone who hasn't followed the solar sector closely and am not intimately familiar with many of the companies, I'm hoping taking a position in one of the solar ETFs is a good way to benefit from the upside associated with solar's long-term potential. These two ETFs are relatively similar in terms of supply chain segment allocation, and are likely to perform in a roughly similar fashion. As I said above, I'm leaning toward TAN and have put in a buy order for it. Barring a major recovery of the solar sector in 2009 that would make me want to take profit - something I believe has a small probability of occurring - my time horizon is at least 18 months. I'll provide an update then.  

               


DISCLOSURE: Charles Morand does not have a position in any of the ETFs discussed above, but has an open buy order on TAN.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

October 05, 2008

Concentrated Solar Power and the New ITC

When the financial turmoil began, I sold my riskiest stocks.  Even a successful bailout bill is unlikely to return us to the heady days of 2006 and 2007.  Yet there is a bright side for clean energy investors.  Despite the recent evidence to the contrary, a financial crisis is likely to convince legislators of the importance of getting the economy going again, and of doing so with the least amount of public money possible.

Concentrating Solar Power

It was with this thought in mind that I attended CSP Today's Second Annual CSP Summit US in San FranciscoCSP, or Concentrated Solar Power, is a proven technology.  Several CSP plants have been operating reliably in the California desert since the late 1970s.  The technology uses mirrors to concentrate the sun's heat, and that heat is used to create steam to run a turbine, just as the heat from fossil fuels is used to create steam to run a turbine in a conventional gas or coal fired power plant.

What do utilities like about CSP?

  • Steam and turbines are familiar technologies.  It's hard to underestimate the attraction of the familiar, especially in a conservative industry like electric utilities..
  • The generation profile of CSP is an excellent match for load shape, especially in the sunny locations where CSP works best.  In this aspect, CSP is a better match for load shape than even photovoltaic solar power, because the thermal latency of the system means that, even without storage (see below), CSP tends not to be subject to temporary losses of power each time a cloud passes over (cloud transients.)
  • Thermal Storage.  Unlike chemical storage (batteries) which degrade when charged and discharged, thermal storage such as the commonly used molten salts are unchanged when they are heated and then cooled.  While these salts (a mixture of ammonium nitrate and potassium nitrate, both also used as fertilizer) are expensive in the quantities used in CSP, expanding storage capacity on a CSP plant is just a matter of building bigger insulated storage tanks and buying more fertilizer.  This means that a CSP plant can be built to be a nearly perfect match for a utility's load, and even used for voltage support and load following.
  • Price.  According to California's Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative (RETI) report [.pdf], referenced by Mark Rawson of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District as an accurate analysis of cost figures, the levelized cost per MWh for CSP varies from $140 to $190 per MWh (or 14 to 19 cents per kWh.)  This makes CSP price competitive with natural gas peaking turbines, and although these prices are more than twice the prices usually quoted for wind power, this is not a barrier for power which fits a utility's load.  Hal LaFlash of PG&E  mentioned that the most recent RFP from San Diego Gas and Electric was offering four times the price for power produced in the afternoon compared to power produced at night.  In markets like that, firm, dispatchable, on peak power at three times the price can easily out compete power from wind, which tends to be anticorrelated with load.

As with all new energy, there are barriers.

  • Incentives.  The nearly  universal refrain at the conference was that CSP needs an 8 year extension of the Investment Tax Credit (ITC.)  The complex permitting issues, transmission connection times, the large size of the plants, and wait times for the turbines mean CSP has a longer development cycle than most other renewables, hence the need for the 8 year extension of the ITC.   Since an 8-year ITC extension for solar was included in the financial "rescue" package which was just signed by President Bush, and this bill also makes the ITC exempt from the Alternative Minimum Tax (ITC), CSP was a big winner from the delay of the rescue package.   The first version of this bill did not contain the tax credit extension.
  • Transmission.  CSP is not a distributed technology, and it relies on direct ray radiation, and project sizes running into the hundreds of MW.  We currently have no national transmission planning, and only a few states have gone through a process of locating renewable energy resource zones and have a plan to get the transmission to where the power is needed.
  • CSP, like all thermal electric technologies, uses water for cooling, unless designed for dry cooling.  But dry cooling comes with a penalty of about 15% higher capital costs and about 9% lower efficiency of power production.  Despite the efficiency hit and added costs, most CSP projects in California are looking at dry cooling.
  • CSP is land intensive, producing only 4 to 6 acres per MW (according to Michael DeAngelis of SMUD).   According to Rainer Aringhoff of Solar Millennium, the current West Mojave Plan strongly hinders CSP development.  Even though the Mojave Desert has the highest direct ray radiation in California (and the world), the West Mojave Plan allocates only 1% of the land area to renewable energy... less even than the 5% allocated to off-road recreation.  This is only dramatic one of the many environmental barriers to CSP development, but the consensus at the conference is that CSP faces a regulatory thicket which must be dealt if CA will be able to bring on the 800 MW of CSP a year it needs to meet its recently passed goals in AB 32.  (Numbers also according to Rainer Aringhoff.)
  • Financing.  Especially for newer technologies, banks are uncomfortable financing a project they are not certain will work.  The companies which will have an advantage getting financing will be the ones with technology that banks and tax investors can be confident the power plant will continue to operate long enough to pay off their investment.

The Light at the Other End of the Tunnel is the Sun

Overall, CSP is likely to be a relatively calm place for investors during the coming years.  The financial rescue package is not going to make the underlying problems which cause the current financial turmoil go away... it will simply smooth the current market and probably avoid the collapse due to loss of liquidity of many financial institutions.  But this does not change the fact that Concentrating Solar Thermal Power is the only renewable energy resource that is can deliver dispatchable, firm power and also has the scale to meet a large percentage of our electricity needs.  In the Southwest US, which does not have the wind resource of the Great Plains, solar is the only renewable option which states can use to meet renewable portfolio standards once they get into the double digits.  Since CSP costs considerably less than PV solar technologies, and can match local peak demand with just a few hours of storage, CSP is likely to be a large share of it.

Investing in a Shifting Landscape

All Renewable technologies are likely to benefit from the ITC and PTC extensions in the recent bailout bill. But the big winner is Solar, and specifically large scale CSP.  The scale, permitting, environmental, and interconnection issues of these giant plants mean that without the long term certainty that the 8 year extension of the ITC, the plants would have had trouble getting financing.  

The good news for CSP does not stop there.  With the ITC exemption came two changes to the current ITC.  First, the tax credit has received an AMT exemption, which, according to Michael Bernier, and attorney at Ernst & Young, this allows a much broader class of investors to invest in CSP for the tax benefits, and allows existing investors to invest more.  This new source of funds will be critical for CSP given the gigantic capital costs for the projects.  Where previously the only major tax credit investors were investment banks and General Electric (NYSE:GE), new investors such as Property and Casualty insurers will become interested.

The second change in how the ITC work was the lifting of the "Public Utility exemption."  Previously, a utility could not own a solar plant and take advantage of the ITC.  Now they can.  Since many utilities would prefer to own generation so that it can be incorporated in the rate-base and earn a return on equity, vendors of CSP technology and developers who can sell a turnkey plant to the utilities will gain an advantage over developers who want to own the plants and only sell the power to the utilities.

The changes also mean that developers with proven technology, who already had an advantage getting financing, have an even greater advantage because the new tax investors will not know the industry as well as the current investors.  This means that developers will need to spend more time assuring investors that their technology is reliable, and a long track record will be an advantage in doing so.

For public company investors, the options for CSP investments are still slim.  Acciona (ACXIF.PK) is a diversified Spanish renewable energy company with a strong presence in CSP, and United Technologies (NYSE:UTX) has a small exposure to solar thermal through their investment in solar tower vendor Solar Reserve.  On the bright side, both of these companies have what it takes to reassure a new crop of tax credit investors.  Acciona built the only recent full scale CSP plant in the United States, Nevada Solar One, while Solar Reserve's less proven but more efficient power tower technology was demonstrated by the same engineers now working for Solar Reserve demonstrated the technology (and thermal storage with molten salts) at Solar Two in the Mojave desert in the late 1990s.

For investors willing to take a less direct approach, we can be certain that a large build out of CSP plants will have to be preceded by a large build-out (or at least upgrading) of transmission lines in the desert Southwest.  I discuss several transmission stocks which should benefit in this entry on renewable energy and transmission.

DISCLOSURE: Tom Konrad  and/or his clients have long positions in GE, UTX, ACXIF.

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

July 27, 2008

Equus: A Solar Inverter Play For Free!

Equus Total Return (NYSE: EQS) is a closed-end fund that trades at a 42% discount to its net asset value (NAV). The fund invests primarily in both debt and equity instruments of small-caps and private companies. Each quarter, management must report the fair value of its net assets, but the stock market value of Equus is much lower than that of its net assets. Here's a chart showing Equus' discount to its net assets for the last five years:





As we can see, Equus is used to trading at a discount to its NAV, but recent negativity across the US market has taken it to even newer lows relative to what it owns.

One of Equus' key holdings (in fact, it makes up almost one third of its portfolio) is an equity position in Infinia Corporation. Infinia is a company aspiring to mass produce a low-cost solar power converter. The fair value of one of Equus' investments in Infinia (based on follow-up venture capital investments) recently jumped from $3 million to over $20 million, as the company demonstrated a prototype late last year that converts solar energy into electricity at twice the efficiency and at a lower cost than existing products.

One way to look at a purchase of Equus' stock at this discount level is that for the price of one share at $6.90, you're getting all of its other assets (which are worth about $8.30/sh) for a slight discount, and on top of that you're getting the investment in Infinia (valued at $3.50/sh) for free! Of course, before jumping in blindly you'll want to make sure you read Equus' latest reports along with its financial statements and their notes, as we've discussed here.

In reading these reports, I found that Equus does carry some debt on its balance sheet, which is somewhat rare for a fund. This has the effect of amplifying any changes in the values of their investments, both to the upside and the downside (the effect of leverage).

Furthermore, most of the investments are in companies that aren't public, and therefore Equus is not as liquid as those funds that invest only in the stock market (undoubtedly, this liquidity premium contributes to the larger than average historical discount we see in the chart above). The lack of market quotations also makes it more difficult for management to value each of it's holdings. Infinia is one such example, as it doesn't trade on the stock market and so it's not available for an individual investor to buy. Although the drawback is that Equus' investments are illiquid, it provides an investor the opportunity to get into a company like Infinia when it would otherwise be limited to venture capital firms.

The discount is a bonus that makes this an intriguing play from a value investing point of view.


Saj Karsan is a guest contributor on AltEnergyStocks.com. Saj is a value investor at Barel-Karsan, and can be regularly found writing for Barel-Karsan's blog.

DISCLOSURE: The author does not have a position in EQS

DISCLAIMER: The author is not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.


June 08, 2008

Bosch Acquires Ersol Solar, Large Industrials Moving Into Solar Sector

Subject line

The recent announcement on June 2, 2008 , that Robert Bosche GmbH (privately-held) plans to buy German-based Ersol Solar Energy AG (FRA:ES6) provides another example of how global industrial conglomerates are carefully watching for opportunities in the fast-growing solar sector. 

 Bosch bought a majority stake in Ersol for 546 million euros from Ventizz Capital Partners at a 63% premium to Ersol’s closing price on May 30.  Bosch plans to make a public tender offer for the remaining 50.45% of the company, according to Bloomberg News.  Ersol’s stock rallied 63% on June 2 in response to the takeover news and has since remained near that level, indicating market confidence that the takeover will be completed.

 Ersol Solar Energy AG is a diversified solar player that has a scrap silicon recycling operation and produces polysilicon, silicon wafers, silicon solar cells, and thin-film solar cells and modules.  Ersol has about 1,000 employees.  Revenues in Q1-2008 roughly doubled year-on-year to 52.4 million euros and net income was 3.2 million euros.  Ersol’s management expects to have 180 megawatts of wafer production capacity and 220 megawatts of crystalline solar cell production capacity by the end of 2008.  Ersol has provided guidance for 300-320 million euros of revenue in 2008 and 70-80 million euros of operating profit.  Ersol said that its production output for 2008 is already completely sold out.

 What is one of the world’s largest automotive component part maker, with 46 billion euros in sales, doing buying into the solar sector?  The simple answer is diversification into the promising solar sector and away from the low-margin automotive components industry.

 The solar industry has grown at a 47% average annual rate in the past six years and is poised to grow at an annual rate of about 40% for at least the next several years.  The solar industry has reached mass production stage with about $30 billion in sales in 2007, according to Photon International.  The upside for solar is truly massive since solar power accounts for only 0.06% of world electricity generation at present (according to Photon Consulting), meaning the sector has room to grow at double-digit rates for literally decades without hitting saturation levels.

 There are a handful of large industrial conglomerates that have already been in the solar business for years.  Several Japanese-based conglomerates were pioneers in the industry and have long ranked in the top 20 global solar cell/module producers.  In 2007, Sharp (SHCAY (ADR), TSE:6753) ranked as the second largest solar cell/module producer (behind Q-Cells FRA:QCE in first place), Kyocera (NYSE:KYO ) as fourth, Sanyo (SANYY.PK,TYO:6764) as seventh, and Mitsubishi Electric Corp (TYO:6503) as twelfth, according to PV News’s 2007 rankings (www.prometheus.org). 

 Other global conglomerates have also been players in solar for years including BP, General Electric and Boeing’s Spectrolab.  Two large companies, Swiss-based OC Oerlikon AG (VTX:OERL) and U.S.-based Applied Materials (NASDAQ: AMAT ) have quickly become the two leading players in producing turn-key thin-film solar module fabrication lines that other companies can buy to produce solar modules in their own factories.  Large utilities and construction companies have also entered into the business of developing solar photovoltaic or solar thermal projects, including (among others) Spain-based Acciona (MCE: ANA , ACXIF.PK), Spain-based Iberdrola SA (MCE:IBE) and its recent spin-off off its Iberdrola Renovables unit (MCE:IBR), and FPL Group (NYSE: FPL ).

In another example of large companies moving into solar, Moser Baer India Limited (BOM:517140), the world’s second largest manufacturer of optical storage media, has entered the solar sector in a big way with both crystalline silicon cell technology and thin-film technology.  Moser Baer plans to use its world-class manufacturing know-how to drive down the costs of solar cell production and become a major global player.

 What’s going on here?  Simply put, the solar industry is growing up.  The solar industry is simply following the tried-and-true industry model where small, specialized players blaze the way with revolutionary technology and a big dose of risk-taking and fortitude.  Then the large players in the sector snap up the winners after they prove their technology and sales traction.  This is akin to the old adage of letting the pioneers in the industry get shot in the back with arrows and then buying up the ones that are ultimately successful.  The solar industry has now reached a level of maturity where there are likely to be more cases of large industrial companies buying up mid- to larger-tier solar companies.

_____________________

By Richard Asplund, investment analyst and author of Profiting From Clean Energy: A Complete Guide to Trading Green in the Solar, Wind, Ethanol, Fuel Cell, Carbon Credit Industries, and more.

Disclosure: Richard Asplund does not have positions in any of the stocks mentioned in this report.

 

March 13, 2008

Edison International Says Solar is the Great Untapped Resource

Cleantech Blog had a conversation last year with Stuart Hemphill, now the newly appointed Vice President for Renewables and Alternative Energy at Southern California Edison, a subsidiary of Edison International (NYSE:EIX), one of the largest purchasers of renewable power in the US. We caught up with him again today in a lively discussion around his predictions for the renewable sector.

Today they are announcing their sixth competitive solicitation for renewable energy. On peak delivery from the Tehachapi region is preferred, as they are currently building a massive transmission line to tap into the 4,500 MW of wind potential. But wind produces only 35% of the time. This major pipeline needs to be balanced. So they are looking for creative proposals from developers to fill up the rest of that transmission line with on peak power deliveries.

Renewable and alternative energy are still top goals for Edison. Stuart says his promotion is part a reflection of the business’ expanding interest in leadership in renewables in the US.

Prediction Number 1 - The next 10 years are going to be a wild, wild west in the solar industry. Companies around the globe are exploring new solar technologies of every variety. Stuart thinks it’s way too early to tell which ones are going to be successful. But he considers solar to be the great untapped resource in California and elsewhere.

So I asked him if by that he meant solar thermal or photovoltaics. The answer is “Yes”. Stuart responded that in the past couple of years we have seen incredible amounts of venture capital investment going into solar firms, and PV is only part of that equation.

When I pushed Stuart to predict a winner between conventional solar parabolic trough and other types of solar thermal technologies, Stuart refused, suggesting that it is still too early to tell which technologies will be the winners. That’s what makes it exciting to watch, in his opinion. As an example, he stated that we are now seeing renewed interest power tower technologies with pretty high efficiencies. The challenge is to see which ones get done.

When it comes to what’s important to SoCal Edison itself, it is really important that they sign PPA contracts with viable companies and viable technologies. He sees a wide spectrum of proposals in terms of viability, and is always looking for at least some sort of demonstration plant to prove it up and a significant level of backing for the companies before they can get involved.

Prediction Number 2 - I did ask him what his take on run of river hydro is. He responded that he hopes to be wrong, as he likes run of river hydro, but doesn’t see any major increases in the resource coming in California. Hydro in California in general has a very a limited resource potential left to be developed and lots of stakeholder concerns to be addressed in each case, so while he is hopeful, he is not predicting any great increases.

Prediction Number 3 - US Offshore Wind – We will not see much from offshore wind in California, as the limitations both from physical layout of shoreline as well as policy and consumer concerns.

We then switched to what the industry challenges are. Stuart nailed two big ones, transmission and interconnection.

He believes that transmission is getting even more challenging than last time we spoke. What’s interesting to Stuart is that most people agree and are in support of renewables in California, but very few people support the way that the goals need to be attained, ie, significantly increase transmission infrastructure. There tends to be lots of local opposition, or federal agencies that aren’t always in support of particular local goals. This makes sense, as transmission by its nature always touches a lot of different land and communities in its path, meaning lots of different stakeholders need to be involved.

Interconnection queue bottlenecks are the real next challenge in California and in the Midwest according to Stuart. This is a challenge that is addressable and there are proposals into FERC to do so. But currently it is a first come first serve system, and easy to get into the queue. Getting in the queue starts a study process based on FERC rules, including a feasibility study, then a system impact study and a facility study. The bottleneck arises because according to the current rules, if your facility is further back in the queue, your studies assume that the facilities ahead of you are up and running, but if at any point in time someone ahead of you drops out, your studies need to be effectively redone. Because it is relatively easy to get into the queue, nonviable projects that do not end up coming online as planned have been upsetting the applecart, causing all the projects behind them to go back to the drawing board as far as the study process is concerned. Since 2002, we’ve seen a steep ramp up to a level that is just unmanageable given that dynamic. CAL ISO has a proposal in with FERC to change this, so Stuart believes a solution is coming, just not here yet.

As usual, SoCal Edison is pushing forward aggressively on renewables, and we were excited to see the new solicitation and changes they are making. As we have said before, let’s just get it done.

Neal Dikeman is a founding partner at Jane Capital Partners LLC, a boutique merchant bank advising strategic investors and startups in cleantech. He is founding contributor of Cleantech Blog, a Contributing Editor to Alt Energy Stocks, Chairman of Cleantech.org, and a blogger for CNET's Cleantech blog.

September 30, 2007

A Solar Technology for Every Application

Acciona's financing of Nevada Solar One, and a recent series of a financing, a prominent hire, and a big announcement from Concentrating Linear Fresnel Reflector (CLFR) developer Ausra has been keeping long-underappreciated Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) technology in the news recently.  I consider this great news, because the potential for cheap thermal storage of CSP and the gigantic size of the available resource means that CSP is likely to provide the backbone of reliability for any future decarbonized electric grid [Word Doc] where the clear skies which it requires to operate properly and sufficient transmission are available.

But CSP is only one of a broad range of Solar technologies, and here I will outline the framework which helps me understand and predict which ones are likely to be most successful.

To understand the future of any technology, you first need to understand its applications, which will lead to an understanding of the characteristics necessary to meet them.  Broadly, solar power is used to produce heat for climate control and process heat, and for electricity, both on the grid and off.

Daylighting

The oldest solar application is daylighting, the use of windows and other means allowing indirect sunlight to provide effective internal illumination inside buildings.  For individual homes, window and skylights are usually sufficient for the job, but there also exist architectural features such as light shelves and even active sun tracking systems which combine with fiber optics or mirrors [pdf]  to provide light to the interior of large buildings.  Such systems can provide significant energy and maintenance cost savings, as well as increase worker productivity.  They are particularly popular in schools because of studies which show enhanced student learning under natural light.

Thermal Applications

Solar thermal, when used for space heating is needed mostly in the winter in cold and temperate climates.  Because of the fact that it is only useful for part of the year, it needs to be simple and inexpensive to be practical.  Here, passive solar design and proper orientation of buildings is the hands down winner, because passive solar measures are inexpensive to free, with one of the most expensive steps being adding extra thermal mass, something which greatly enhances performance where daily temperature swings are large, and tends to remain fairly inexpensive given its low tech nature.   Passive solar design is almost certain to be a long term winner, although it is unlikely to be a big winner for investors because it does not require special products or materials.   Active solar thermal systems are typically too expensive to economically be used for only the part of the year when the heat is necessary, although when the heat from the system can be switched between multiple applications, such as domestic hot water or electricity generation, it can be economic for an active solar thermal system for at least part of a building's space heating load.  

For process heat, which includes solar domestic hot water, as well as heat for industrial processes [pdf], the active solar thermal systems shine because year round usage can make these still relatively inexpensive systems easily economic.  These systems tend to be either flat plate collector systems, which circulate a working fluid under a black heat collector, or evacuated tube systems, which are somewhat more expensive, but can reach higher temperatures because the heat collector is a solid wire, which avoids problems with boiling the working fluid.  Solar parabolic trough systems are also sometimes used in large scale, high temperature industrial applications.

Electricity Generation

With electricity generation, both time and location become important.   Electric transmission is constrained by infrastructure, and and electric storage is often more expensive than the power being stored, leading to large price premiums for power delivered where and when it's needed most.

The right place

For off-grid applications flat plate photovoltaic (PV) panels, which can be either thin-film or the more traditional crystalline silicon with a battery backup tend to be suitable despite the relatively high cost of power because of the scalability, relative simplicity, lack of moving parts, and low maintenance of the systems.  Concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) is seldome used in off grid homes to reduce up-front costs, because it tends not to work as well as flat plate collectors when there are clouds, and the need for a solar tracking system adds to maintenance costs which can be especially critical in the remote locations where off grid power is usually needed. Another form of practical off grid application is small scale power for lighting or equipment in areas where the grid is available but where the savings from avoided wiring make an investment in PV and a battery pack economical.  A common example of this are the now ubiquitous solar garden lights.

Photovoltaic technologies also have an advantage in distributed generation: placing the power source at the point of use.  The main advantage here is in their simplicity (which allows for low maintenance) and scalability, allowing the sizing of the power source to fit the need.  For instance, an electric utility might place west-facing PV on a transmission base station which is near capacity during times of peak load, thereby meeting a portion of that load and avoiding an expensive upgrade to the base station.

The right time

Since electricity typically requires expensive batteries for storage, technologies which can have inexpensive, built in storage have a cost advantage over ones that only produce power when the sun is shining.  Most solar electric technologies conveniently produce power on sunny summer afternoons, a time which normally corresponds to peak load in climates where air conditioning drives peak load.  This effect can often be enhanced by orienting the panels towards the west or southwest so that they are producing their greatest output in the afternoon.  This produces intermediate power, which is available when electric demand is high, but is also often available at non peak times, such as during the day in the winter.  Although such power is more valuable than other forms of intermittent power generation, which often have no correlation with the load profile, they also cannot be relied on to be available when needed, and are less valued by utilities which are responsible for providing power whenever customers want it. 

Dispatchable power is the most valuable form of generation (per kWh) on the electric grid, because the utility can use it only when demand is high and cannot be met with cheaper resources, while utilities also value base load power, which is almost always available and can be relied on at any time.  Since the sun is not always shining, these forms of power require some form of storage, and this means that they are best met with Concentrating Solar Power, which can be built with thermal storage, a much less expensive way to store power than batteries and other forms of electric storage (with the possible exception of Pumped Hydro, which is limited in its available capacity and location.)

Thin film vs. CPV

The incumbent photovoltaic technology, crystalline silicon is typically very expensive per watt, and there are two approaches currently being taken to cut costs: thin film and concentrating PV.  Thin film is another form of flat plate PV that requires much less and less specialized materials but typically has lower conversion efficiencies and durability than crystalline PV, which makes it inappropriate for applications that require a large amount of power generation in a small area, while concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) uses lenses or mirrors in to focus sunlight on small but very high efficiency cells to generate power at a lower cost.  CPV usually requires the ability to track the sun and few clouds, which means that it is unlikely to be as economic in distributed applications, although some companies are working to overcome these limitations.

Central Power Generation

For central power generation, the main factor in choosing between technologies is cost.  Here, the concentrating technologies (CSP and Concentrating PV) tend to have the advantage, and the ability to use transmission to bring the power to the point of use means that the generation can be placed in areas with a lot of sun and very few clouds where these technologies perform best.  The need for additional maintenance for solar trackers is less of an issue at a central solar plant, and this also give and advantage to the concentrating technologies.

Concentrating Parabolic Trough plants, Solar Tower, and Concentrating Linear Fresnel Reflector generators need large scale (in the hundreds of megawatts) to achieve their superior economics, while Dish Stirling and Concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) technologies achieve their economies of scale at less than a megawatt.  The superior scalability of Dish Stirling and CPV is largely negated by the cheap thermal storage (referenced earlier) available with the first three technologies which is not available with Dish Stirling or CPV.

Conclusions

Whenever a company announces a new technology with higher efficiency, lower cost, or better storage, it's easy to get carried away and think that that one technology is destined to win out over all the others.  I hope you now appreciate that there are as many or more applications as there are technologies, and which technology has the upper hand will depend on the intended use.  When evaluating companies, it's most important to consider the target market, and compare the technology to its true competitors.  This article and the following tables should provide a useful cheat-sheet when you do so.

National Solar Tour LogoIf You Want to See it in Action

Next Saturday (October 6) is the National Solar Tour in the US.  Click here to find a tour near you and see many of these technologies in people's homes.

Application Table

Application Category Dominant/Best Technology Other Technologies
Daylighting Lighting Windows, Skylights Light Shelves, Active systems
Space Heating Thermal Passive Solar Design Active solar thermal, especially if also used for other applications such as water heating.
Process heat/ Water heating Thermal Active Solar Thermal flat plate or evacuated tube
Distributed generation Electric Photovoltaic technologies   
Off Grid Electric Non-tracking PV with battery backup  
Central Power Generation Electric Concentrating Solar Power Concentrating PV, Flat plate PV
Dispatchable Power Electric CSP with thermal storage Others w/ battery backup
Intermediate Generation Electric All technologies, should be tracking or west-facing to make production align most closely to peak load.
Base load Generation Electric CSP with thermal storage Others w/ Battery backup

Electric Generation Technology Table

Technology Best uses Strengths Weaknesses
Photovoltaic      
    Flat Plate Distributed, off grid Simplicity, Scalability Cost
       Crystalline Distributed Low maintenance, high durability Cost
       Thin Film Distributed, off grid Low cost; scalability  Low efficiency
    Concentrating PV Sunny areas, Central installations Low cost Higher maintenance
Concentrating Solar Power (CSP)      
     Solar Trough, CLFR, Solar tower Central Generation; peaking and intermediate power; base load capable. Thermal Storage, Cost Large Scale
     Dish Stirling Sunny areas, Central installations Low cost; can be hybridized with natural gas; Scalability Higher maintenance

DISCLAIMER: The information and trades provided here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

March 20, 2007

Solar Power on Wallstrip

TheStreet.com is running a video segment on solar power as part of its Wallstrip series. The segment's date is 03/20/2007.

If you're a long-term solar follower you definitely won't learn too much here. Nevertheless, the vid does a good job of outlining governmental efforts to boost the growth of solar in the US. Short and interesting.

The segment is especially positive on: FirstSolar [NASDAQ:FSLR] and Trina Solar [NYSE:TSL].

Positive on: Canadian Solar [NASDAQ:CSIQ], Ascent Solar [NASDAQ:ASTI] and Suntech Power [NYSE:STP].

Negative on: Sunpower Corp [NASDAQ:SPWR].


February 05, 2007

A Great Day For Solar Stocks, But Beware The Volatility!

Is it the unprecedented amount of media attention climate change is currently getting? Is it the State of the Union Address? Is it the price of oil? Or is it a combination of factors? In the end, it doesn't really matter; it's this time of year again and the value of the solar sector is heading north.

Today was a great day for solar stocks, while the market as a whole was mainly flat.


I remember this period last year very well. I was long Suntech Power [NYSE:STP] and Energy Conversion Devices [NASDAQ:ENER], acquired respectively for $22.25 on December 21, 2005, and $28 and change on August 23, 2005.

I got out of STP at $35.65 on March 17, 2006 (I've since re-entered and partly re-exited it). As for ENER, I exited it on January 12, 2006, at $50, and never bought it again. In both cases, the stocks were trading at very high multiples, driven mostly by speculation.

The point of this little tale is to highlight the fact that several solar stocks experienced big runs at around this time of year last year, followed by equally big falls as momentum investors moved on. Let's look at a few token solar stocks that were publicly-traded at the time.






Sure, much of the market corrected somewhat during the same period that these stocks did - but for this asset class, the fall from grace was quite pronounced.

Last year should serve as a cautionary tale going into this year: most of the companies in the solar sector are not yet profitable, solar is not yet competitive with conventional electricity generation technologies without government support, and the sector remains very volatile.

If you were able to scoop up some of those solar stocks before they began rising again in the late fall/early winter, it might be a good a idea to take some off the table soon. I purchased part of my current STP position (long) on June 15 at $24.29, as I found the valuation pretty attractive at that level. I got out of the June 15 portion of my position this past Friday at $36, after the company updated its Q4 guidance with weaker-than-expected results for the MSK side of the business (although they revised overall results upwards). Turns out I did that a tad too hastily...but I'm not too concerned - 48% over a 7.5-month period is fine with me.

Suntech Power is a solid long-term story, as are some of its sector peers like Energy Conversion Devices and Sunpower. But beware the volatility! I'm still long STP, but will not hesitate to liquidate all of my position if the price is right (or wrong, depending on how you look at it).

As much as I have faith in STP (and other solar stocks) in the long run, I have no doubt that when the market corrects - and it will eventually correct - this sector's value will deflate appreciably. Look out for good buying opportunities then!


DISCLOSURE: I am long STP.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

December 15, 2006

Solar Stocks and the Tax Credit Extension

The US Congress voted on Monday December 11 to extend, by 1 year, a 30% tax credit for the solar industry. This federal incentive is essential in allowing solar to be competitive with conventional energy sources.

How have investors reacted to this announcement so far? Let’s have a quick look at 5 high-profile solar stocks to see whether this news has impacted the trading patterns of solar investors. The stocks are: Suntech Power [NYSE:STP], Energy Conversion Devices [NASDAQ:ENER], DayStar Tech [NASDAQ:DSTI], Evergreen
Solar
[NASDAQ:ESLR], SunPower Corp [NASDAQ:SPWR].


The results are not especially conclusive, to say the least. SunPower and Energy Conversion Devices both had nice pops on the news but, by the end of Thursday, both stocks had shed some of the gain. Evergreen has effectively gone nowhere since mid-August and this did nothing rectify the situation. SunTech actually began correcting half-way through Monday after enjoying a 23% run to the upside over the previous 30 days, probably on profit taking. By the end of Tuesday, Suntech was down 8% on its Friday closing price – its steepest 2-day slump in over a month. Finally, DayStar Tech, unhindered by the announcement, continued its long journey south from its 52-week high of $15.75 to close at $4.27 on Thursday, flirting with its 52-week low of $4.25.

The announcement likely had no lasting effect on solar stocks because the extension is for 1 year. The only 2 companies turning a profit so far are Suntech Power and SunPower, and this is the 1st year SunPower does so. Most investors and project financiers’ time horizons are longer than 1 year, especially for capital-intensive endeavors like solar farms, and it is thus far from clear whether this decision on its own will spur any significant investment in the solar space if there is a risk that the tax credit isn’t renewed in 2007.

To be sure, the prospects for solar being able to compete with other energy sources without government support are improving rapidly. Too many uncertainties, however, remain, and it is highly improbable that this industry will be able to thrive on its own in the next couple of years, thus calls by industry insiders for 5 or even 10-year tax credits.

(DISCLOSURE: The author owns Suntech Power)

October 18, 2006

Google and Solar Power

Yesterday, I came across an article about Google planning to intsall the largest corporate solar project.

Here is a summary:

  • 9,200 solar panels will be placed on six buildings at its Mountain View headquarters by next spring
  • this will produce up to 1.6 megawatts of electricity - enough to supply 30 percent of the campus' electricity on a hot summer day
  • a company spokesman said that concern about the environment as well as the rising price of electricity motivated the company to go solar
  • company spokesman also made the comment: "'If we can dispel the myth along the way that you can't be green and profitable at the same time, that's another benefit.'
  • The company has also installed motion sensors in rooms to turn lights on and off; serves only organic foods in its cafeterias and provides a commuter shuttle that removes hundreds of cars from the road each day

    I applaud this move and think this is great. I believe Google is doing this to help the enviroment and of course, the perception that they are doing something on this front never hurts. The article ends on an intersting note:

    "Radcliffe declined to say how much the solar installation would cost, but added that the energy would pay for itself after 10 years"

    I am glad they are doing this but a 10 year pay-back period suggests to me this is more about doing the right thing than the economical thing.

  • June 08, 2006

    Hoku Scientific Announces Plan to Enter Into Solar Module and Polysilicon Markets

    hoku_logo.gifHoku Scientific, Inc. (HOKU) announced that it plans to diversify its product offerings by manufacturing and selling solar modules, in addition to manufacturing polysilicon, a key material used in the production of solar modules. Hoku anticipates that the costs to establish such facilities will be approximately $250 million, which the company will seek to fund through the issuance of debt and from potential customers' cash down payments for future supply of polysilicon and modules. Hoku will explore basing these manufacturing operations in Singapore. [ more ]

    May 26, 2006

    Xantrex solar inverters to be installed in 450-unit housing development

    Xantrex Technology Inc. (XTX.TO) will install 450 Xantrex GT Series inverters in conjunction with its SunTile solar electric panels to support the electrical needs of the homes. The solar electrical systems will offer homeowners a solution to reduce electrical costs and at the same time reduce emissions from fossil fuel electrical generation.

    Developers are seeing an increase in demand for renewable power solutions and are responding by seamlessly integrating solar power systems when building new homes. Home owners can now move into a new home with an established solar power solution eligible for applicable federal and state incentives, to make this clean power system more cost effective. [ more ]

    May 23, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Signs Contracts Worth $160,540 for Residential Solar Systems in New Jersey and California

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of contracts with homeowners in New Jersey and California to build photovoltaic solar electric systems to power their residences in parallel with their present electric utility company. The contract value of the systems in New Jersey and California is $160,540. [ more ]

    May 19, 2006

    GiraSolar Group Completes Cell Delivery to German Industry Partner and Completes First Shipment to Spain

    GIRASOLAR INC (GRSR.PK) is pleased to announce its subsidiary DutchSolar BV has completed a 1MWp cells supply obligation to a major German solar industry partner. DutchSolar BV overachieved on its projected supply of 1MWp with 16% in surplus of its obligations. Supply had initially begun with delays in December 05 and was expected to take well into H2 of 2006. The revenue value now exceeds well over 3M$ and payments have been received in full. It is expected that DutchSolar will continue the supply of cells to German counterparts and further cooperation will be sought.

    DutchSolar BV has also completed the first supply of two containers with solar products to Spain, following a previously announced supply contract with a strategic Spanish solar industry partner. The revenue value of this first supply equals approximately 10% of the total contract value of 6M$. The supply of materials to this project will continue as planned by DutchSolar BV. [ more ]

    May 17, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Awarded $4.9 Million Contract to Build Solar Systems for Hightstown, New Jersey

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of a contract with the Borough of Hightstown in Central New Jersey to build two solar power systems on water facilities, subject to financing. One installation will serve a water treatment plant and public works garage, while the other will power a wastewater treatment facility. Construction value of the complete project is $4.9 million. [ more ]

    May 12, 2006

    SatCon Announces Delivery of 100 kW Solar Inverter for the European Market

    satcon_logo.gifSatCon Technology Corporation (SATC) nnounced the completion and delivery of the 100 kW solar inverter for the European market. The significance of this delivery is that SatCon is well positioned to participate in the largest market for solar inverters.

    SatCon has delivered over 17MW of commercial grade inverters over the past two years and is poised for significant growth as indicated by the pending solar projects in California on the Pacific Gas and Electric website. [ more ]

    May 11, 2006

    XsunX Under Pressure

    xsnx_logo.gifShares of XSUNX Inc. (XSNX) are currently under pressure and are currently down over 50% since the start of the month. The stock is now accelerating down this morning and the shares are currently down another 13% this morning. There was some nice support at the $1 level and the stock is currently trading down below this level.

    xxunx_20060611.png

    There may be many causes for this sharp decline. It could be the general market weakness is causing people to look for ways to take profits. This stock has been up more than 200% in the past year and I personally sold half of my position several months ago. There also maybe something fundamentally wrong with the company. There have been many questioning the validity of this company.

    XsunX is still an early stage company that still hasn't produced any revenues and has a product that is still very much in beta. I knew this when I purchased the stock back in November of '05. I figured the company would be dead money until they actually started to produce some products and get sales. The sharp rise of the stock over the past year was a nice suprise, but I fully expected it to come back down to reality. I would not be suprised if the stock traded back down to the $0.50 range in the near future. I think the company is fairly valued at that price and I'm still planning on holding onto my remaining shares.

    Update: I'm not able to type this post fast enough for the markets, the stock is now currently down more than 15% at 10AM.

    Update 2: At 10:20AM the stock seems to have found some support at $0.94.

    xxunx_20060611a.png

    Update 3: Shares of XsunX have now turned positive at mid-day and the bounce off the support of $0.94 seems to have taken hold.

    xxunx_20060611b.png

    Update 4: What a day in XsunX. From the low today to the close represents a 30% move and a nice bounce off the $0.94 level.

    xxunx_20060611c.png

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

    May 05, 2006

    SatCon Announces 3.2 Megawatts in Orders for Photovoltaic Inverters

    satcon_logo.gifSatCon Technology Corporation (SATC) announced that it has received multiple purchase orders from four new customers for 13 commercial grade inverters equaling 2.3 megawatts (MW), including an order from one of the largest photovoltaic integrators in North America. In addition, a customer that has been operating a trial unit issued a follow-on purchase order for 3 commercial grade inverters totaling 0.9 MW. These photovoltaic inverters trade named PowerGate(TM) are scheduled for delivery prior to the end of the current fiscal year. [ more ]

    Spire Offers Gallium Arsenide Concentrator Solar Cells

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that Bandwidth Semiconductor LLC, its wholly owned subsidiary, now offers custom gallium arsenide (GaAs) concentrator solar cells for terrestrial applications.

    These GaAs-based solar cells are based on Spire's space and terrestrial solar cell technology developed over 25 years, during which record high cell efficiencies for terrestrial applications were produced. Higher efficiency means lower cost of electricity. [ more ]

    May 04, 2006

    Spire Commissions Photovoltaic Module Manufacturing Line for Unison in Korea

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that it has completed installation and commissioning of a SPI-Line(TM) turnkey photovoltaic (PV) module assembly line for Unison Co., Ltd. (Unison) of Chonan-City, Korea.

    Spire's advanced PV module manufacturing equipment and process technology will enable Unison to manufacture state-of-the-art PV modules from solar cells to address the growing Korean and Asian solar PV market. [ more ]

    May 01, 2006

    Ormat Technologies Announces Completion of First US Solar Trough Power Plant in Arizona Using Ormat(R) Energy Converter

    Ormat Technologies (ORA) announced that they have completed the construction of a 1 MW rated Ormat® Energy Converter (OEC) for the APS Saguaro Solar Facility. Arizona Public Service Company (APS) is Arizona's largest and longest-serving electric utility, serves more than one million customers in 11 of the state's 15 counties. [ more ]

    The plant's process consists of the sun's energy being concentrated by parabolic mirrors in a trough formation to receivers. This concentrated solar energy heats up thermal oil, which then transfers its heat to the OEC power unit working fluid. Use of Organic Rankine Cycle technology facilitates generation of power even with fluctuating and low temperature heat.

    WorldWater & Power Corp. and Saint Joseph of the Palisades High School Sign Contract for $1.3 Million Rooftop Solar System

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that Saint Joseph of the Palisades High School of West New York, N.J., part of the Archdiocese of Newark, has contracted with WorldWater to purchase electrical energy for 10 years generated by a solar electric system. The solar panel array will be installed on the school's roof. Under WorldWater's Alternative Clean Energy Services (ACES) plan, St. Joseph's will not incur any start-up costs for the installation and the school will receives a 10% discount on their cost for power compared to their electric rate. The installation of the solar energy system at the school guarantees that the school will save money on electric costs immediately and on a long-term basis. The construction value of the project is $1.3 million. [ more ]

    April 27, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Corp. Signs Contract with Eagle Academy for Solar Power Installation for Arboretum Enhancement Project

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of a contract with the Eagle Academy of Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey. The contract calls for WorldWater to provide engineering, materials and supervision to assist at-risk youths in building a solar powered water pump to supply drinking water and irrigation at a 14-acre arboretum preservation site in Egg Harbor Township. This project is being funded by a grant from the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, which provides grants for solar energy projects in New Jersey. [ more ]

    Magnetek Establishes Solar Power Distribution Network in Emerging Italian and Spanish Markets

    MAG_logo.gifMagnetek Inc. (MAG) announced that it has secured distribution agreements for its Aurora(TM) solar photovoltaic (PV) power inverters with channel partners in Italy and Spain valued at more than $3 million in sales during calendar 2006, subject to demand and availability. Italy and Spain each have adopted aggressive incentive programs aimed at installing up to 100-megawatts (MW) of new solar capacity, thus emerging as the fourth and fifth largest potential solar power markets in the world. [ more ]

    Evergreen Solar Begins Volume Shipments From New Plant in Germany

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) announced that the new EverQ manufacturing plant in Thalheim, Germany, has begun making volume shipments of finished solar modules to the Company's customers.

    The Thalheim plant manufactures Evergreen Solar's new, more powerful Spruce Line(TM) of photovoltaic panels. The Spruce line includes panels up to 190W. Products fabricated at the EverQ plant use Evergreen Solar's patented String Ribbon manufacturing process. String Ribbon is substantially more efficient in the use of silicon than conventional sliced crystalline technologies. [ more ]

    XsunX Power Glass Developer Begins Marketing Phase

    xsnx_logo.gifXSUNX Inc. (XSNX) will present the benefits of the company's thin-film solar technology systems for use in the development and delivery of an array of new power sources this week in Washington, D.C. at the 2006 National Energy Restructuring Conference sponsored by the National Energy Marketers Association. During the conference, which will take place April 25th and 26th at the Marriott at Metro Center, XsunX Chief Operating Officer Mr. Joseph Grimes will provide potential licensees information about the company's flexible thin-film photovoltaic capabilities, including Power Glass(tm), an innovative thin-film solar technology that is intended to allow glass windows to produce electricity from the power of the sun. [ more ]

    April 25, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Corp. Signs $295,000 Contract to Provide Solar Technology to Voorhees Township Public Schools

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of a $295,301 contract to provide design, engineering and solar equipment for the Voorhees Township Public Schools in Voorhees, New Jersey. The primary contractor for the project is Ray Angelini, Inc. (RAI) of Sewell, New Jersey. Construction will begin immediately for the installation of photovoltaic panel array on the roof of the Voorhees Middle School on Hollyoak Drive. WorldWater's patented electronics will automatically control power delivery to the school and manage the net metering of surplus electricity back to the utility to earn renewable energy credits. [ more ]

    April 24, 2006

    Magnetek Aurora(TM) Inverters Complete Manhattan's Largest Building Integrated Solar Power System

    MAG_logo.gifMagnetek Inc. (MAG) announced that Manhattan's largest functioning Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) power system recently began harvesting energy from the sun. [ more ]

    April 19, 2006

    Spire to Provide Prisolartec GmbH with Solar Module Production Line

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that it has entered into a contract with J.v.G. Thoma GmbH, Spire's sales and service representative in Germany, to provide Prisolartec GmbH of Perleberg, Germany, with Spire's multi-megawatt entry level, turnkey photovoltaic (PV) module manufacturing production line. The production line includes equipment for solar cell stringing and lay-up, lamination, framing, and module testing. Prisolartec selected Spire Corporation as their equipment supplier based on Spire's superior experience, the quality of its equipment, Spire's competitive offering, and its proven ability to provide training assistance to establish their operations. [ more ]

    April 18, 2006

    Suntech Power Chosen to Provide Solar Energy System for Beijing Olympics

    Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. (STP) announced an exclusive contract to supply a 130KW solar energy system for Beijing's Bird's Nest Stadium, the main stadium for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. The world-class solar energy system will be installed at 12 entrances of the Bird's Nest Stadium. [ more ]

    MEMC Announces LOI for $1.6 Billion Solar Wafer Supply Agreement

    MEMC Electronic Materials Inc. (WFR) announced that it has signed a non-binding Letter of Intent ("LOI") with Motech Industries, one of the top producers of solar cells in the world today, for the supply of solar wafers to Motech.

    Under the terms outlined in the LOI, MEMC will supply solar wafers to Motech over an 8-year period, with pre-determined pricing, on a take or pay basis. Sales of the wafers over the 8-year period would generate at least $1.6 billion in revenue to MEMC. [ more ]

    Shares of WFR are trading up over 4% in pre-market activity. I have been looking to add this stock to my portfolio and have been waiting for a pullback to enter the stock. It looks like that pullback is not going to materialize anytime soon.

    EPOD to Build Five Megawatt Solar Panel Factory

    EPOD INTL INC (EPOI.OB) announced that they intend to construct a solar panel manufacturing facility in Kelowna, B.C. An estimated two megawatts of production capacity is anticipated to be available within six months, with the annual capacity of the plant projected to be five megawatts upon completion. [ more ]

    April 12, 2006

    FPL Selects Sarasota Location For Largest Solar Facility in Florida

    fpl_logo.gifFPL Group Inc (FPL) announced that through its Sunshine Energy® program it has selected Rothenbach Park in Sarasota as the site for its first solar array.

    The 250-kilowatt (kW) solar array will be known as the FPL Solar Array at Rothenbach Park. The new solar facility will be the largest solar array in Florida and one of the largest in the southeast. The solar project is part of FPL's commitment to develop new solar facilities as a result of customer participation in the Sunshine Energy program. The facility at Rothenbach Park is the first solar project to be announced as a result of the Sunshine Energy program. [ more ]

    WorldWater & Power to Build Solar Electric System for California's Valley Car Wash

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that it has obtained requisite financing and all applicable rebates for the solar electric system to be installed at Valley Car Wash, Inc. of Van Nuys, California.

    Construction will begin within weeks on the $676,000 project. Located on Van Nuys Boulevard in the heart of the San Fernando Valley, the rooftop photovoltaic (PV) installation will substantially reduce the car wash's electrical costs. Valley recently received approval of a 42% rebate of the full installation cost by Southern California Gas Company through the California Public Utilities Commission's Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP). [ more ]

    April 10, 2006

    Spire Manufactures BIPV Modules for Kyocera

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that the Company is using its own SPI-LINE(TM) photovoltaic module production line to fabricate large-format, building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) modules for Kyocera Solar, Inc., demonstrating the capabilities of Spire's versatile manufacturing equipment. In 2005, Spire produced BIPV modules for Kyocera's Solar Grove installation in San Diego, California. [ more ]

    April 03, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Corp. Wins $1.9 Million Bid from Liberty Science Center for Two Solar Electric Systems

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that it has won a $1.9 million dollar bid award to design and install two solar electric systems at the Liberty Science Center, the most visited science museum in New Jersey.

    One photovoltaic installation, a 122 kW unit, is to be mounted on the roof of the newly expanded Liberty Science Center facility and will face the Statue of Liberty as a symbol of clean, renewable energy. The other, a 105 kW installation, is a "Solar Walkway" that will lead from the bus parking lot to the center's main entrance. Here, overhead solar panels will serve double-duty as a canopy to protect visitors from the elements while generating electric power from the sun. Both units are expected to substantially reduce the Liberty Science Center's utility costs. [ more ]

    March 30, 2006

    GiraSolar Receives Sales Contract for $9 Million

    Legend Investment Corp. (LVCP.PK) announced that it has received a sales contract and partial payment for approximately $9 million worth of solar modules. The company has confirmed an order for 2MW of modules.

    The modules will be supplied to the customer from Q2/06 into Q4/06. The solar modules are part of a large grid-connected solar energy system which will generate returns from high feed-in tariffs for solar electricity. The system is located in Spain. [ more ]

    March 28, 2006

    Spire to Provide $6.75 Million Solar Cell Production Line

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that on March 16, 2006, Spire entered into a Turn-Key Project Agreement to provide a privately owned solar firm, located in Europe, a commercially sized, multi-megawatt, turn-key Photovoltaic Cell Manufacturing Line for $6.75 million. The new cell line will be integrated with an existing production line. Solar cells are one of the key components used in manufacturing solar modules. [ more ]

    March 24, 2006

    ECD Ovonics Selects Site for Its 50-Megawatt Solar Cell Manufacturing Plant

    ecd_logo.gifEnergy Conversion Devices Inc (ENER) has announced plans to build a third solar cell manufacturing plant to be located in Greenville, Michigan.

    In February the comapny approved plans to expand United Solar Ovonic's module manufacturing capacity to 300 megawatts (MW) by 2010. The first phase of the expansion plan includes the construction of the Greenville manufacturing facility with an annual capacity of 50MW, which is expected to be operational in calendar year 2007. United Solar Ovonic's existing 25MW production facility is located in Auburn Hills, Mich. In July 2005, United Solar Ovonic broke ground for a second 25MW production facility also located in Auburn Hills. [ more ]

    March 22, 2006

    GiraSolar Secures Contract Estimated at $65m and Approves Forward Stock Split

    Legend Investment Corp. (LVCP.PK) announced that it has secured a four-year supply contract for critical components allowing the company to sell an additional $16.5 million of GiraSolar branded modules based on current pricing in each of the next four years.

    This contract with a major European cell manufacturer represents an anticipated total revenue value of approximately $65 million for the company over the contract period which extends from Q4 2006 into Q4 2010 and should enable the group to market almost 4MWp per year extra of its own GiraSolar brand of modules. The total revenue of $65M represents yearly revenue of approximately 16.5M$ per year for a period of 4 consecutive years starting in October 2006. [ more ]

    The board also announced a reverse 5 for 2 stock split that will be implemented as soon as possible.

    Spire Corporation Reports Increased Revenues Driven By Strong Solar Equipment Sales

    Spire Corp (SPIR) reported revenues for the year ended December 31, 2005 of $22,422,000, a 30% increase from $17,278,000 for 2004, not including $6,320,000 and $3,000,000, respectively, of gains recorded in 2005 and 2004 from the sales of licenses. Net income for 2005, including the gain on the sales of licenses in both 2005 and 2004, was $44,000 or $0.01 per share, compared with a net loss of $4,120,000 or $0.60 per share for 2004. [ more ]

    Evergreen Solar Silicon Supply Woes

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) shares were down 9% on Monday after their primary supplier of raw materials pulled out of a contract.

    Evergreen Solar relies on granular silicon to make cells for solar panels. This silicon was supplied in part by MEMC Electronic Materials Inc. (WFR). MEMC previously agreed to supply Evergreen with 90 metric tons of granular silicon, but in January said it did not intend to ship most of the remaining balance of 53 metric tons. Evergreen plans to used its own crush chunks of silicon, but said it has not fully tested the process at commercial scale. [ more ]

    WorldWater & Power Announces Significant Construction Milestone for California Project

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that a major solar project had received inspection approval to begin generating full solar electric power - one of two irrigation systems being installed at a tree farm in Borrego Springs, California.

    The tree farm project uses the patented AquaMax(TM) variable frequency drive (VFD) to power a 250 horsepower well pump. A second irrigation system, scheduled to be completed by the end of March, will drive a similar pump. Once fully operational, the entire $1.8 million project is expected to save an estimated 70% of the farm's electrical bills. [ more ]

    March 16, 2006

    Is XsunX (XSNX) Being Manipulated?

    xsnx_logo.gifHans Deuel at Clearfish Research presents some very good concerns about the possible manipulation of the shares of XSUNX Inc. (XSNX).

    I've received a number of comments about XsunX, all from the same person. I decided to look into them. They are working on transparent solar cells, have a weird history, and a weird structure. The only technological information I can find on them is all paid advertising (from IPODesktop and others) masquerading as research. Each of their press releases are misleading. They offer one key statement, and then go on about intentions. For example, the latest one has the phrase "...has begun the construction of a mass production system...". That seems to imply, and is likely intended to give the impression, that commercialization and mass production is around the corner. But all that it really says is that they broke ground on a new building or something. They made some statements in 2004 about technological developments (4% conversion efficiency), but nothing technological since then. By the way, what they claim to mean by "4% efficiency" is "4...Watts of direct current...per square foot of PowerGlass film" [here, page 5], which is not the definition of efficiency, which is always a measure of power out versus power in. [ more ]

    If you are a current investor in XSUNX you would be well served to read Han's blog entry and consider his research as part of your buy/hold/sell decisions about this company.

    Back on November 11th I purchased shares of XSUNX for my personal portfolio. At that time I wrote the following entry.

    XsunX is a development stage company that I have profiled in the past. Since I started following this company I have seen many other people pick up on their story as well. This stock is a penny stock and we will not see some serious stock appreciation until they finish the development of Power Glass. You should consider this one highly risky if you want to add it to your own portfolio. I see the purchase of this stock as a nice gamble for a long term hold. The big win is once they finish development of Power Glass and either go into production or are acquired by a larger company. I don’t see this happening for several years. [ more ]

    As I said when I purchased shares, this company (and stock) is highly risky. Penny stocks have a habit of going bad quickly so you need to be careful.

    Since then my holdings are now up over 500%. I sold half of my holdings at the 200% gain mark so right now all I have left in this company is the house money.

    I was fully expecting this stock to be dead money until they start producing some products. However, the stock has been moving steadily higher on the promise of what is to come. As Hans states, this is risky territory. I will continue to hold for now.

    March 15, 2006

    Evergreen Solar Announces $125 Million Distribution Agreement With Donauer Solartechnik

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) announced that it has entered into a multi-year supply contract with Donauer Solartechnik, a German-based solar power distributor. The agreement calls for Evergreen Solar to ship approximately $125 million of photovoltaic modules to Donauer over the next four years, based on current exchange rates. [ more ]

    The German solar market is currently the largest market in the world and these types of partnerships are critical to getting a foothold into that marketplace. The shares of ESLR are currently trading up over 3% today on the news.

    NAI Global and WorldWater & Power Team to Provide Building Owners with Cost-Saving Solar Energy Services

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) and NAI Global have signed an agreement to introduce their solar energy technology to the NAI Global network of commercial property managers and clients.

    NAI Global will work with WorldWater & Power to identify prospects for the purchase of equipment, electric power or services from WorldWater & Power, a developer and marketer of proprietary high-powered solar systems. In addition, NAI Global may aid in purchase negotiations and governmental approvals necessary for the construction of projects. [ more ]

    Spire's solar cell manufacturing line rolling for Italian firm

    Spire Corp (SPIR) announced that it has delivered and installed a multi-megawatt, turnkey photovoltaic (PV) module assembly line for PA. SOL Italia S.p.A. of Varallo Pombia, Italy. The assembly line has been commissioned and is now producing PV modules.

    The advanced PV module manufacturing production line from Spire includes automated equipment for solar cell stringing and lay-up, lamination, and module testing. [ more ]

    March 06, 2006

    Worldwater & Power Corp. to Provide Solar Electric System for Richard Stockton College of New Jersey

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of an agreement to install a solar electric power system on the campus of Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in Pomona.

    The project involves the installation of the photovoltaic system on the roof of a new building that houses faculty offices and academic space. The project is a collaborative effort between WorldWater & Power Corp. and Eastern Energy Services of Southampton, N.J. WorldWater & Power will provide engineering, materials and equipment required to complete the project in accordance with the proposal. [ more ]

    EPOD Announces 100 Kilowatt Solar Install Has Begun

    EPOD INTL INC (EPOI.OB) announces that construction of the 100-kilowatt solar power installation previously announced on September 13, 2005, has begun. Phase-One of the turn-key, solar power system for a German agricultural client is projected to be completed within the next two weeks. The system will begin generating renewable energy for sale to the local electric utility under a 20-year power purchase agreement immediately upon completion, and has an estimated lifespan of a minimum of 40 years. The power purchase agreement is part of a federal government energy program whereby residential, commercial, and industrial power users are encouraged to utilize renewable energy to reduce, and ultimately eliminate, Germany's dependence on fossil fuel-based and non-renewable power. As both electric power demand and prices continue to increase, it is Management's opinion that demand for EPOD's solar power systems will grow correspondingly. [ more ]

    February 27, 2006

    WorldWater & Power and NAI Global Sign Agreement for Solar Energy Services

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the signing of an agreement to introduce WorldWater & Power's solar energy and technology to the NAI Global network of commercial property managers and clients.

    According to the terms of the agreement, NAI will help to identify prospects for the purchase of equipment, electric power or services from WorldWater & Power. In addition, NAI may assist in negotiating such purchases and in obtaining governmental approvals necessary for the construction of projects designed by WorldWater & Power that NAI has been instrumental in arranging. [ more ]

    February 22, 2006

    E.On Launches $34.72B All-Cash Endesa Bid

    German utility E.On AG launched a 29.1 billion euro ($34.72 billion) all-cash bid for ENDESA (ELE) on Tuesday, topping a previous offer from Gas Natural by more than 30 percent and threatening to disrupt carefully laid plans for Spanish power-market consolidation.

    Endesa said in a statement that the E.On offer was "clearly" the better of the two, but added that it still did not adequately reflect Endesa's true value. [ more ]

    Shares of Endesa were up 15% in yesterday's trading.

    EMCORE Corporation Awarded DARPA Very High Efficiency Solar Cell Program Subcontract

    EMCORE Corp. (EMKR) announced that it has signed a subcontract to participate in the Defense Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Very High Efficiency Solar Cell (VHSEC) program to more than double the efficiency of terrestrial solar cells within the next 50 months. EMCORE's Photovoltaic division was selected by the University of Delaware, the prime contractor for the DARPA VHSEC program, to develop advanced III-V multi-junction solar cells in Phase I of the program effort. In later phases, EMCORE expects to develop a technology roadmap for enabling significantly lower fabrication costs for the very high efficiency solar cells. [ more ]

    Evergreen Solar Announces $100 Million Sales Agreement with S.A.G. Solarstrom AG

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) announced that it has entered into a four-year supply contract with S.A.G. Solarstrom AG (S.A.G.), based in Freiburg, Germany. The agreement calls for Evergreen Solar to ship approximately $100 million of photovoltaic modules to S.A.G. over the next four years.

    S.A.G. builds and operates solar power stations, and sells the generated energy to corporations and utility companies. S.A.G. plans to use Evergreen Solar's products to help satisfy the growing demand from those organizations. These products will be manufactured at Evergreen Solar's plant in Massachusetts and at EverQ's new 30-megawatt facility in Thalheim, Germany. EverQ is a strategic partnership between Evergreen Solar, Q-Cells AG of Germany and Renewable Energy Corporation ASA (REC) of Norway. [ more ]

    February 07, 2006

    Active Power Receives Order from Leading Solar Energy Company

    acwp_logo.gifActive Power Inc (ACPW) announced that it has received an order for its new CoolAir DC product from one of the leading producers of photovoltaic modules in Europe.

    CoolAir DC uses thermal energy and compressed air to provide power, can be cycled regularly without a loss in performance and is environmentally friendly. By using solar energy to heat the thermal storage unit (TSU) and compress air in the storage tanks, energy can be captured and used at a later time. [ more ]

    The share price of ACPW has recently retested the trendline and I will be adding to my position in the Marketocracy mutual fund this morning.

    acpw_20060207.png

    February 03, 2006

    SatCon Technology Corporation Announces Order from Sun Edison

    satcon_logo.gifSatCon Technology Corporation (SATC) nnounced that it has entered into a strategic supply agreement and has received a purchase order from New Vision Technologies, an affiliate of Sun Edison, LLC, to initially deliver up to 10 megawatts of PowerGate(TM) photovoltaic inverters through the end of the year. Sun Edison has multiple photovoltaic projects around the U.S. already under contract and the 500kW inverter, recently unveiled by SatCon, is a particularly good fit to meet their demands for high efficiency power conversion. [ more ]

    Solarworld Buys Solar Power Unit From Shell

    Solarworld AG (SWV.DE) will buy businesses from Shell to take over as the top maker of solar power equipment in the United States. The news prompted a leap in Solarworld shares, already buoyed by President Bush's pledge to promote new technology to make the United States less dependent on imported oil.

    The agreement covered Shell factories in Germany and the U.S. and sales operations in Germany, Singapore and South Africa. The price of the deal was not released and is still waiting for regulatory approval. [ more ]

    February 01, 2006

    Bush's State of the Union

    "America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world"

    Thanks to Mr. Bush's state of the union address last night, we should see some nice gains across the board in the Alternative Energy sector.

    Some of the big winners may be the Ethanol companies like Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) and Pacific Ethanol, Inc. (PEIX).

    The EnergyStockBlog.com has a nice write up on the potential for ADM. [ more ]

    GreenCarCongress.com has a nice summary of the important parts of the speech.

    In his State of the Union 2006 address, President Bush announced the Advanced Energy Initiative�a 22% increase in clean-energy research at the Department of Energy (DOE).

    The Initiative is intended to focus on providing breakthroughs in two areas: power for homes and businesses; and transportation. [ more ]

    Update: Well the market is now open and shares of ADM and PEIX are trading down. But shares of Fuel Cells and Solar companies are up.

    Aqua Dyne To Test Solar Powered Water Desalination

    Aqua Dyne Inc. (AQDY.OB) and the Australian, Commonwealth Scientific and Industry Research Organisation (CSIRO), the Federal Government's Premier Research Organisation will be advancing the study and use of Solar Energy in thermal water desalination for the Coal Mining Industry.

    Aqua Dyne has received approval to deploy component modules of the JetWater Thermal Desalination system to a site adjacent to Lake Liddell in the Upper Hunter region of New South Wales, Australia. The JetWater Thermal module will be tested and monitored over a three month trial program. The module will be connected to a solar energy system developed and supplied by Solar Heat & Power Pty Ltd of Singleton, NSW Australia. [ more ]

    Aqua Dyne is an interesting company and I have been following it on my other stock blog. I haven't officially launched this new webiste yet, but I guess I'm giving you a Beta look at it now :-)

    So if your interested in stocks that track Water, please check out my other stock blog: WaterStockBlog.com

    January 27, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Corp. Signs Contract to Provide Solar Power to Quest Environmental Facility

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that it has signed a $109,824 contract to build and install a solar electric power generation system for Quest Environmental & Engineering Services, headquartered in Clinton, New Jersey. The photovoltaic (PV) system will provide electricity for the company, and is expected to substantially reduce electrical usage costs for the facility. [ more ]

    January 26, 2006

    SunPower Narrows 4Q Loss, Shares Jump

    spwr_logo.gifSunPower Corp. (SPWR) announced that revenue for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2005, was $29.3 million, up 34% from the prior quarter's revenue of $21.9 million and up 523% from the year-ago fourth quarter combined(1) revenue of $4.7 million. The Company's fiscal 2005 revenue was $78.7 million. [ more ]

    These 4th quarter earnings have narrowed the companies losses and they expect significant quarter-on-quarter top line revenue increases to between $38 - $40 million. The stock gapped up 8% this morning on the news and is starting to give back most of these gains. It is currently trading with a gain of 3.8%.

    Update: Shares of SunPower closed the day with a nice 17% gain. Ya gotta love that.

    January 25, 2006

    Penn State Titania Nanotube Arrays Harness Solar Energy

    Penn State researchers are finding new ways to harness the power of the sun using highly-ordered arrays of titania nanotubes for hydrogen production and increased solar cell efficiency. [ more ]

    Nanotubes.jpg

    January 20, 2006

    Tyler's Elk Conference Call Notes

    Tyler at Clean Break was able to listen in on the Elk Corp (ELK) earnings conference call this morning. Elk has had a multiple year partnership with ATS Automation (ATA.TO) solar division Spheral Solar. The two companies have been planning a commercial release of solar-integrated roofing and building material products.

    Elk Roofing chairman and CEO Tom Karol, responding to questions from MacMurray Whale from Sprott Securities, said the Spheral Solar roofing product is still in alpha testing but the company hopes to move into beta testing -- i.e. put it on real rooftops in the marketplace -- in about 60 days. After the results of the beta are analysed, and assuming all goes well, the product will be fully commercialized in the first quarter of 2007.

    Read more at Tyler's site. [ more ]

    January 18, 2006

    Universal Communication Systems, Inc. Announces Formation of New PV Solar Business Segment

    Universal Communication Systems Inc (UCSY) announced that the company is set to make a major new investment and plans to open a new office in Los Angeles, California from which to market PV Solar Panels and PV Solar Energy Systems throughout the state. This follows the recent announcement by the State of California that it was to enact a Major Incentive Program which is the largest solar energy policy ever enacted in the United States: an 11-year, $3.2 billion incentive program aimed at spurring installation of PV Solar Panels / Systems. [ more ]

    SatCon Launches Largest Photovoltaic Inverter in the Industry

    satcon_logo.gifSatCon Technology Corporation (SATC) announced that it has successfully launched its 500kW PowerGate(TM) inverter. The release of the PowerGate(TM) 500kW inverter was one of SatCon's major R&D milestones for 2006, and positions SatCon as the leading provider of high efficiency inverters for the rapidly growing solar markets.

    The 500kW AE-500-60-PV-A utility-grade PV inverter was successfully listed to the UL 1741 Standard and also received approval from the California Energy Commission (CEC). The acceptance of this inverter by the various agencies not only gives SatCon the largest commercial PV inverter in North America, it also gives SatCon the broadest product line in the commercial photovoltaic inverter market - ranging from 30kW to 500kW - with 13 designs now approved and listed by the CEC. [ more ]

    January 17, 2006

    WorldWater & Power Corp.'s Quantum Energy Group Completes 400 Kw California Solar Project

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced the completion and commissioning of a nearly 400 kilowatt photovoltaic system project by Quantum Energy Group, the construction and engineering subsidiary it acquired in 2005. The new photovoltaic (PV) system provides solar power to offset electric utility consumption at a complex of four tenant-occupied buildings in Menlo Park, California, south of San Francisco. [ more ]

    Solar Tech Companies Up on California Solar-Power Measure

    Shares of solar-energy technology companies rose sharply Thursday, with several chalking up 52-week highs, as California regulators approved a solar-energy package. The plan is the largest solar energy policy ever enacted in the United States: an 11-year, $3.2 billion incentive program aimed at spurring installation of solar panels. [ more ]

    January 11, 2006

    XsunX Begins Manufacture of Mass Production System

    xsnx_logo.gifXSUNX Inc. (XSNX) announced that it has begun the construction of a mass production system for the manufacture of the Company's proprietary thin film solar cell designs.

    As the manufacture of this first system and its thin films development evolves, the Company anticipates that it may begin marketing efforts of this system as early as this coming spring. [ more ]

    January 06, 2006

    Evergreen Solar Introduces Higher-Power Solar Panel

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) introduced the new EC-120 is the latest in Evergreen Solar's Cedar Line(TM) of photovoltaic panels. With the same physical dimensions as the Company's current 110-watt and 115-watt panels, the new product delivers increased power from the same area. Through its patented String Ribbon technology, Evergreen Solar produces its panels using significantly less silicon than conventional production methods. [ more ]

    December 27, 2005

    Solar and the long tail

    Rob Day over at Cleantech Investing has started a series of "Year End Thoughts" on various cleantech investing topics. His first one deals with Solar and is great read. [ more ]

    December 22, 2005

    Shares of Carmanah Purchased

    Wouldn't you know it, right after I posted about this company and complained that I couldn't buy it, I checked my brokerage account to see if there was any movement to my open market order. Well the IntraWeb gods must have been smiling on me, I got a partial fill in my personal account.

    So I now have a small stake in Carmanah Tech Corp (CMH.V) at a price of $3.0525.

    Maybe I should post my complaints more often :-)

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

    Carmanah Awarded $1 Million Contract to Build Canada's Largest Solar Power System

    Carmanah Tech Corp (CMH.V) announced that the Company has received a letter of intent confirming a forth-coming contract in the amount of $1,000,196 from the City of Toronto for a 100 kW solar power system to be installed on the roof of the Horse Palace at Exhibition Place.

    Carmanah will install a state-of-the-art 100 kW solar power system on Exhibition Place that is tied to the conventional electricity grid. The system uses high efficiency solar modules and a unique penetrationless racking system. An educational display in the lobby will show the public how much power is being produced, environmental conditions as well as historical system performance data. It is estimated this system will reduce the annual carbon dioxide emissions of this facility by approximately 94.7 tonnes per year. [ more ]

    Tyler at Clean Break was able to interview the company for a Toronto Star article and has more details at his website. [ more ]

    When you read Tyler's post you will notice he loves this company. What's not to love when you find a small company like this that is making money and showing profits. I would love to own this company as well.

    I have been trying off and on for a couple of months to buy the stock here in the US. The stock trades locally as a pink sheet ( CMHXF.PK ) but has zero volume. I have called my broker and they will be willing to purchase the stock via the Vancouver exchange, but at a cost that is prohibitive.

    The good news is that the company is making plans to move to a major Canadian exchange soon which may help increase the ability to purchase the stock.

    WorldWater & Power Corp. Signs $1.145 Million Contract to Provide Solar Power for California Embroidery Plant

    Worldwater Corp (WWAT) announced that it has signed a $1,145,800 contract to build and install a solar electric power generation system for Quality Embroidery in Los Angeles, California. The photovoltaic (PV) system will provide electricity for the company, and is expected to substantially reduce electrical usage costs for the facility.

    With the signing of this contract, on top of its earlier announced 2005 contract backlog of $23 million, the Company issued Revenue Guidance for 2006, projecting Revenue of $25 million to $35 million. [ more ]

    I have tracked World Water for a while and I recently received a question about my thoughts on this company. The good about this company is that I like the businesses they are in (both Water and Solar.) They have created a nice niche for themselves in selling solar powered pumps to the agricultural industries. They are also trying to branch out into pure solar installations as well, as referenced in the press release above. Another plus is that they appear to be a fully SEC reporting company. This helps a great deal when your doing due diligence on these small companies.

    This company should be considered very risky and is a true penny stock. They have a very negative trend when it comes to profits and the losses have been growing each year. A quick check of the insider transactions shows that there is nothing but selling. This is never a good sign.

    The biggest problem I have with this company is that its very popular with many of the penny stock pump-n-dumpers. You will frequently see this name on various spam e-mails touting the stock when it gets down into the 10-20 cent range. It will quickly rise up and then sell off again.

    If you are a trader, this maybe one of those times that you can play this stock since it is at the lower end of this cycle.

    Like I said, I like the business model but for me personally, I'm staying away from this company until they change their loosing direction.

    wwat_20051222.png

    December 20, 2005

    Honda to mass-produce solar cells

    honda_logo.gifHonda Motor Co (HMC) plans to start mass-producing solar cells in 2007, eyeing growing demand for environmentally friendly energy sources. They will build a new factory for thin-film solar cells on the site of a car plant in Kumamoto. The company aims to generate annual sales of $40 million to $70 million from solar cells once the factory's output reaches full annual capacity of 27.5 megawatts, enough to power about 8,000 households. [ more ] &mdash via Clean Break

    December 16, 2005

    SunPower Announces $330 Million Global Solar Supply Agreement with PowerLight

    SunPower Corporation (SPWR) announced its largest ever product supply contract. The supply agreement with PowerLight Corp., a global solar systems provider, calls for the delivery of $330 million of solar panels from 2005 through 2009. SunPower's industry-leading products will be incorporated into PowerLight's advanced solar power systems for commercial, government and new home residential customers worldwide. [ more ]

    SunPower is trading up over 6% today on the news.

    December 15, 2005

    Suntech Power Holdings IPO Starts Trading

    Shares of Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. (STP) started trading yesterday and the stock closed with a 34% gain on the day. Suntech is a solar PV manufacture based in China's Jiangsu Province. They plan on using this cash infusion to expand manufacturing capacity and to research ways of lowering the cost of producing silicon solar cells.

    This stock is one way to purchase shares in two hot areas right now (Solar and China.)

    I'm not able to purchase shares in this company yet for the mutual fund since Marketocracy doesn't list this company yet. I'm currently heavily weighted in solar shares in my personal portfolio and I am holding off on purchasing this company for now.

    December 14, 2005

    FPL Group in Talks to Buy Constellation Energy Group

    fpl_logo.gifFPL Group Inc (FPL) is currently in the advanced stages of negotiations to acquire Constellation Energy Group (CEG). An FPL-Constellation merger would create a giant East Coast-based utility with a market capitalization, based on Tuesday's closing stock prices, of $26.97 billion - $16.93 billion for FPL and $10.04 billion for Constellation.

    Constellation Energy Group is based out of Baltimore Maryland and is the holding company for Baltimore Gas and Electric. They also have an extensive presence in the wholesale power supply and generation business. The Power Generation Division currently uses 4.6% alternative sources for power generation.

    piechart_fuels.gif

    FPL has a strong commitment to alternative energy generation and is one of the largest utilities in the US utilizing extensive wind farms. CEG has a large footprint in Nuclear power generation and the combination of these two companies would make a top-tier producer of power generation for the East coast markets and a potential of 30,000 megawatts of power generation. CEG also gives FPL the ability to enter the wholesale supply side of the power generation business.

    Typically you would see shares of the acquiring company down and shares of the acquired company up with this type of announcement. The market is liking this potential merger and CEG is up over 7% and FPL is also trading up 0.6% this morning.

    December 13, 2005

    XsunX, Inc. Secures $5 Million Financing

    xsnx_logo.gifXSUNX Inc. (XSNX) announced that it has accepted $5,000,000 in financing from Cornell Capital Partners, LP to help drive the continued development and growth of the Company.

    Under the terms of the new financing, the Company would begin receiving the influx of growth capital immediately allowing for a more rapid acceleration of R&D and the initiation of business development efforts. [ more ]

    December 05, 2005

    United Solar Ovonic to Supply Solar Products for the World's Largest Solar-Powered Residential Community

    ecd_logo.gifEnergy Conversion Devices Inc (ENER) announced that it has signed an agreement with Actus Lend Lease to supply 7MW of photovoltaic (PV) products. The solar network will pump clean energy into the Army's power grid and is designed to reduce dependence on fossil fuels by 30 percent for the entire complex of 7,894 new and renovated homes that Actus Lend Lease plans for Army families on Oahu. The captured energy also will help power 11 community centers and maintenance offices that will be built among the new and renovated homes. [ more ]

    The stock is trading up over 5% today on this news.

    December 02, 2005

    XsunX Adds New Manufacturers to Products Development Program

    xsnx_logo.gifXSUNX Inc. (XSNX) is working with current manufactures of glass and thin-film products so that they can incorporate their PowerGlass technology into future R&D plans for the manufactures.

    The Company is providing these manufacturers with samples of Power Glass thin films and plans to adapt the on-going results of these working relationships into its manufacturing process line to meet the needs of its future licensees. [ more ]

    XsunX has been getting a great deal of press recently and it looks like the PR engine is going full steam. They are also featured in a Business 2.0 article about their technology. [ more ]

    What we are not seeing is news about the next phase of development, or even news of prototype production. This is why the stock is still sitting at its current price range. I still think the stock is fairly priced at this level and may consider adding a second third down here.

    November 30, 2005

    Evergreen Solar Shares Dip on Partnership

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) shares were down yesterday since an SG Cowen analyst said that the Evergreen partnership deal announced this week will reduce the expected profits for 2006. The analyst diluted his estimates for per-share losses in 2006 by a penny to 18 cents and reduced his 2007 earnings estimate by 6 cents to 19 cents per share. Many of the analysts still think this partnership deal is very positive for the company, they just expect that it will postpone profitability out another year.

    The stock was down over 5% yesterday and it is trading lower this morning in pre-market trading. I have been looking for a good entry point to start a position in this stock and it looks I will be getting there soon. This is where patience is key when your trying to get a good entry price on a stock.

    The stock has been a strong mover up for the last couple of months and when you look at the RSI indicator, it is still showing a slight over-bought condition. I fully expect that this downward pressure will take the stock down to the $10 level soon and roughly a 50 on the RSI. I would be a buyer of an initial position in the stock at this level. A move down to the firm support at $8 is also possible and the RSI would definitely be in an oversold position. I would load up on this stock if it got to these levels.

    eslr_20051129.png

    November 28, 2005

    Evergreen Solar and Q-Cells Announce Partnership with REC

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) and Q-Cells AG (QCE.DE), the world's largest independent manufacturer of crystalline silicon solar cells, today announced a partnership with Renewable Energy Corporation ASA (REC), based in Hovik, Norway. The world's largest manufacturer of solar-grade silicon and multicrystalline wafers, REC is joining EverQ, a strategic partnership between Evergreen Solar and Q-Cells that is currently building a 30-megawatt solar wafer, cell and module manufacturing plant in Thalheim, Germany. [ more ]

    This is another piece of good news and the market seems to think so as well. Shares of ESLR are trading up almost 3% this morning compared to the market which is trading down on the day. I have been waiting to purchase Evergreen for the mutual fund on any sign of a pullback. That pullback just hasn't materialized and now I'm thinking I should just jump on board with a 1/3 position.

    November 22, 2005

    Xantrex receives funding from NREL for high power solar inverter development

    Xantrex Technology Inc. (XTX.TO) has been awarded US $873,000 from the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) under its Photovoltaics Manufacturing Research and Development Initiative. Xantrex will match the funding from NREL during the course of the project for a total budget of $1.74 Million. This program will take place at the Xantrex facility in Livermore, California.

    Xantrex PV inverters are America's leading choice for large-scale solar installations. Presently, utility-interactive, three-phase inverters are available in models ranging from 10 kW to 225 kW, and multiple inverters can be paralleled for larger power installations. [ more ]

    Xantrex is one of my favorite companies in the power inverter space. The stock is also acting very well right now and is close to what technicians call a "Golden Cross" with the 50 day MA crossing over the 200 day MA. This is typically a very bullish stock pattern. I would be a buyer of this stock now, but I'm not able to purchase the stock since in only trades on the Toronto exchange.

    xtx.to_20051122.png

    SatCon's Powergate(R) Inverters Power New Jersey 502 KW Ground Mounted Solar Electric Power System

    satcon_logo.gifSatCon Technology Corporation (SATC) announced that two of its utility grade Powergate® solar inverters are being utilized as the power conditioning units for the new 502-kilowatt solar electric system installed at New Jersey American Water's Canal Road Water Treatment Plant located in Somerset, NJ. [ more ]

    I have been taking a close look at SatCon recently for a possible addition to my portfolio. The stock price has been under pressure recently and seems to be retesting the lows of the last six months. The news of some sales and installations above and also some recent work they are doing with the Navy on propulsion are giving me an indication that they might be ready to bounce off this low.

    satc_20051122.gif

    November 18, 2005

    Shares of Sun Power Purchased

    SPWR_20051117.jpgAs I mentioned yesterday I had a limit order to purchase SunPower Corporation (SPWR). The stock was scheduled to start the day at $18 and I expected that the stock would be up big in the morning, so I set a limit order at $20. Well when the stock started trading it opened up at over $27. Mid-day the stock seemed to rest around the $25 level and that is when I entered the stock with a 1/3 position in my personal portfolio at a price of $25.70. The stock is not available for purchase at Marketocracy, so it will have to wait to be added to the mutual fund.

    Sunpower is the solar division of Cypress Semiconductor. Cypress still owns 52% of the new Sunpower stock. They plan to use up to $55 million of the new IPO money to triple their manufacturing capacity and will still have plenty of cash left over to fund R&D and continue operations.

    I also mentioned yesterday that I was feeling under the weather. I'm on the mend today fueled by Diet Coke and decongestants.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

    November 17, 2005

    Sunpower Corp IPO Prices at $18

    SunPower Corporation (SPWR) announced its initial public offering of 7,700,000 shares of its Common Stock at $18 per share and the stock will begin trading today. I currently have a limit order sitting in my personal account waiting for the stock to open. I will not be able to buy the stock in the mutual fund since Marketocracy doesn't list the stock yet.

    Right now I'm staying home sick waiting for the stock to open, once I get a fill, I'm heading back to bed.

    November 16, 2005

    Endesa Reports 52 Percent Rise in Profit

    ENDESA (ELE) reported a 52 percent increase in third-quarter profit Wednesday and said it will distribute almost 2.12 billion euros ($2.48 million) in dividends for the year. The company said it will pay out nearly 2 euros ($2.34) a share in dividends for 2005. [ more ]

    The increased dividend is an attempt to ward off a hostile takeover attempt by Gas Natural. The stock way paying an almost 4% dividend yield and this move takes the divendend up near 12% with the special payout.

    Today I purchased the second third of my planned holdings for ELE in the mutual fund.

    November 15, 2005

    SunPower raises IPO price to $16-$18 per share

    Solar power equipment maker SunPower Corp., a unit of Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (CY) raised the expected price of its planned initial public offering to between $16 and $18 per share from a previous range of $12 to $14. The company expects to list its stock on the Nasdaq under the symbol "SPWR" sometime this week.

    I have always found the IPOHome.com website helpful tracking this type of information down. [ more ]

    You can also find a great deal of info at NASDAQ.com as well for new IPO's. [ more ]

    November 11, 2005

    Shares in XsunX Inc. Purchased

    xsnx_logo.gifYou may have noticed that I'm starting to buy again. Well I also purchased shares in XSUNX Inc. (XSNX) this morning for my personal portfolio. Marketocracy will not allow me to purchase this stock in the mutual fund since it trades over the counter as a penny stock. The stock has been a strong mover since early September and I have been waiting for a pull back that has never materialized. I decided to purchase a 1/3 position here at this point.

    XsunX is a development stage company that I have profiled in the past. Since I started following this company I have seen many other people pick up on their story as well. This stock is a penny stock and we will not see some serious stock appreciation until they finish the development of Power Glass. You should consider this one highly risky if you want to add it to your own portfolio. I see the purchase of this stock as a nice gamble for a long term hold. The big win is once they finish development of Power Glass and either go into production or are acquired by a larger company. I don’t see this happening for several years.

    Shares were purchased for my personal portfolio at an average price of $0.38.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

    Shares in Altair Nanotechnologies Purchased

    I purchased shares in
    Altair Nanomaterials (ALTI) this morning for both my personal portfolio and also the mutual fund. ALTI is a holding company that specializes in nanomaterials and also contains a life sciences division. The materials company has research in high performance batteries, fuel cells, and photovoltaics.

    Altair announced earnings today and the stock is up on the morning trading.

    Revenue Increases 68 Percent for Third Quarter and 230 Percent for Nine-Month Period
    "An increase in revenue of 230 percent for the first three quarters of 2005 is representative of the significant progress Altair has made over the last nine months," said Altair Nanotechnologies Chief Executive Officer and President Alan J. Gotcher, Ph.D. "We are experiencing solid business development progress and opportunities in both our Performance Material and Life Sciences divisions in several target markets. We expect these opportunities to mature and to produce recurring and sustainable revenues." [ more ]

    Today they reported a net loss of $0.04 which is compared to a net loss of $0.03 for the comparable quarter. The increase in this loss is attributed to an increase in investments for new contract R&D projects. The company has been performing well and the number of these new R&D contracts has been increasing.

    I started a 1/3 position in ALTI today with an average purchase price of $2.54.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not a registered investment advisor. The information and trades that I provide here are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation to buy or sell any of these securities. Investing involves substantial risk and you should evaluate your own risk levels before you make any investment. Past results are not an indication of future performance. Please take the time to read the full disclaimer here.

    November 10, 2005

    Congress to Fund $2.5 Million in Energy and Water Development Appropriations for Altair Nanotechnologies' Nanoscience Research

    Altair Nanomaterials (ALTI) has been designated to receive an additional $2.5 million in Federal grant funding during 2006-2007 for the continued development of nanotechnology, nanosensors, and nanomaterials research, development and deployment. The $2.5 million funding was included in the Congressional Energy and Water Development Appropriation for Fiscal Year 2006, which was passed by the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives on November 8, 2005. We anticipate the appropriation will be signed by the President within the next week. [ more ]

    ALTI had a nice 10% jump in the price yesterday on this news.

    November 04, 2005

    Evergreen Solar Announces $70 Million Sales Agreement with PowerLight Corporation

    evergreen_logo.gifEvergreen Solar Inc (ESLR) announced its largest sales agreement to date. Evergreen Solar and PowerLight Corporation have entered into a definitive agreement for a guaranteed contract which calls for Evergreen Solar to ship a minimum of $70 million of photovoltaic (PV) modules to PowerLight over the next four years. There are defined options which could increase the value of the shipments in the contract to approximately $170 million. Shipments to PowerLight are scheduled to commence during the first half of 2006. [ more ]

    The stock has gapped up over 14% this morning on this news. Cramer from CNBC has been talking about this stock recently as well, which has also generated some interest in the stock. I spent sometime preparing for the trading day today and took a quick glance at this stock last night. It has a solid uptrend but I felt that it was reaching the top of the current trading range so decided to hold off and wait for it to cycle near the trading range lows to enter the stock.

    eslr_20051104.gif

    Today's news has completely blown past that trading range top. So I will just have to see if it’s too late to jump into this name. The RSI is telling me it’s not currently overbought, but with todays large up move, we are certainly heading into overbought territory.

    Evergreen will also be announcing their quarterly earnings today at 10AM. You can hear the announcement via the conference call page.

    Update: ESLR reports a net loss of $0.07 per share, compared with a net loss of $0.10 per share for the third quarter of 2004.

    October 26, 2005

    DayStar Technologies Receives Technology Innovation of the Year Award in the CIGS Photovoltaic Cells Market

    DayStar Technologies Inc (DSTI) was awared the 2005 Technology Innovation of the Year Award in the field of copper-indium-gallium-diselenide (CIGS) photovoltaic cells.

    Each year this Award is given to a company that has carried out new research, which has resulted in innovations that have brought, or are expected to bring, significant contributions to the industry in terms of adoption, change and competitive posture. This Award recognizes the quality and depth of a company's research and development program along with vision and risk-taking efforts that enabled it to undertake such an endeavor. [ more ]

    It's nice to see that the stock has been holding up here and is now back above $10 again and above the 200 day moving average. I'm seriously considering adding more of DSTI to the mutual fund at this level. I don't think the stock is going to be running away to the upside at this point due to general market weakness, so I'm not going to be jumping in right now. I will watch it carefully over the next couple of days.

    For those that are interested in the general market trends, you may want to take a look at one person I trust and often agree with.

    BillCara.com: Lock and Load

    October 25, 2005

    XsunX Developing New Nano-Crystalline Opaque Solar Cell

    xsnx_logo.gifXSUNX Inc. (XSNX) announced that it has expanded its business opportunities to include the product development of a new opaque solar cell device. This unique four-terminal solar cell design uses a combination of thin film transparent cell technology, derived from the company's Power Glass initiative, with that of a nano-crystalline solar cell. XsunX believes that the combination of these two technologies into a single device holds a promising opportunity to deliver low cost, high efficiency, flexible, and light weight solar cells providing performance characteristics commonly found only in various forms of expensive crystalline wafer technologies.

    The decision to diversify the company's product base to include opaque solar cell designs was fueled by what the company sees as explosive international growth in the demand for opaque solar cell products and applications. In countries such as China, Japan, Germany, and in the U.S., there is a growing trend supporting the increased use of green building designs promoting the use of integrated solar technologies within building materials. XsunX anticipates that the development of a stable, high-efficiency, thin film solar cell could provide building material manufacturers with a preferred alternative to the use of lower efficiency multi-junction thin films and the more costly multi-crystalline solutions. [ more ]

    October 17, 2005

    Growth of Solar

    Here are some additional notes I took from the Solar Energy conference. I was meaning to post this one earlier, but life and time got away from me. This session dealt with the Growth of Solar. It was not one of the more interesting sessions, but some of the people on the roundtable were very interesting.

    The first person to speak was Edwin Hill, President of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

    His major focus for the reason why he and the IBEW was attending the conference is to state that they want to be a partner in the Solar industry. There were a few rolled eyes in the audience and I don't have a full understanding of the complete back story. I understand that most Union and Business relations tend to be strained. There was also a mention that the IBEW may have been one of the major factors in killing the "Million Solar Roofs" initiative in California. So with all that background he had to make a compelling case as to why he was there and why the IBEW should be part of the solar industry.

    Here were some highlighted notes from his presentation:

    The union shares the commitment for renewable energy and they wants to be part of the solution. They have already formed an excellent partnership with the Sharp Solar manufacturing facility in Tennessee and are proud to be part of their success story. They are prepared to forge this type of relationship with the other manufactures.

    The IBEW can also provide their expertise with all the various coding standards for the various jurisdictions. They have already made a substatial commitment to alternative energy technologies and have taken the steps to encourage the IBEW members to gain additional training and certification in solar technologies. The new International headquarters has also installed solar panels on the roof of the building. Many of their local union offices have also taken the step to install solar and wind turbines to supply energy to those buildings as well. A key asset they can also bring to the solar industry is a long history of political action. They have a significant voice in the energy issues discussed in the public policy debate. They have already started to encourage the politicians to look at net metering and also increased rebates for alternative energy installations.

    He understands that the IBEW was painted as the villain with regard to the fate of SB1 in California. The prevailing wage issues are often brought up as the cause to the demise of this bill. However, our stance on the prevailing wage rate was dropped. The major sticking point is the requirement for licensed electricians only are able to get the solar work. Now is the time to resolve the differences so they can work together in the future. They want growth and feel that they can be an ally to the industry. Work with us. Talk with us. This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

    There were a few laughs at that last statement by Mr. Hill. Since I'm not in the industry, I don't know the entire history of that relationship. But I get the distinct impression there is History.

    The next speaker was Edward Mazaria, a founding partner with Mazria Odems Dzurec. He was there representing the architecture and building community.

    His presentation dealt mainly with green house gases, global warming argument, and the reason why we need to seek carbon neutral solutions to provide our energy needs. He had a very extensive slide presentation and the notes and data are too numerous to mention here. I will be receiving the powerpoint slides sometime in November and I will see if I can reproduce that data here for those that are interested.

    The most interesting aspect of his presentation is one that is not commonly presented when you discuss green house gas emissions. Many people look at the transportation industry as a way to combat green house emissions. However, his focus as being an architect is that the largest portion of green house gases generated is used to produce energy for all the millions of homes and buildings in the world. If energy efficiency was a mandated part of all new and reconstruction, we can make a serious dent in the power required for these buildings. In the next 30 years, over 50% of all the buildings in the United States will be turned over either to new construction or renovation. If there was a government standard that all of these buildings be made to fit a zero emissions standard of being carbon neutral by 2030, global warming will be history. He also feels that we should start to train the future students of construction and architecture now to meet this goal.

    The next presenter was Kathleen McGinty, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

    Hands down, I felt she was the most engaged and motivating speaker of the entire conference. She was highly energetic and actually got me excited about the plans that PA has with regards to alternative energy. I only live about an hour south of the PA border and have visited that state frequently. I may just have to visit some more. Here are the notes from this session.

    The reality has changed for Pennsylvania. It is not the first place you think of when you think of clean energy. It is always thought of as the dirty steel industry and coal state. PA was also the home of the first commercial oil well. I'm here to tell you that we are thinking differently and to tell everyone in the green energy business that Pennsylvania is open for business. In the last 2.5 years in office here is what has happened. PA is now second to California in the number of LEED certified green buildings. 2 of the 6 mining offices are now LEED gold certified and are powered by solar and wind. The recycling industry has also become a $23 billion business in PA.

    PA also has the largest farmland preservation program in the US. They also host the largest deployment of wind farms East of the Mississippi. They also have a very large interest in the fuel cell industry and Hydrogen generation. PA was the dirtiest and their goal is to become the cleanest.

    The first question everyone here may want to know, what are we doing with solar in PA? We have a wonderful success with Abera Solar. They are reclaiming abandoned brown fields for mixed zone use to make walkable communities. Half of the homes will we zero energy emissions and make extensive use of solar. They are also making solar a cornerstone in homeland security preparedness. They are taking a intensive look at the energy component of government continuance. This aspect is often overlooked in many disaster plans.

    The big new thing for PA is an extensive alternative energy portfolio standard. They have create a market set aside specific for solar guarantees. Currently they have 1 megawatt of solar installed. With the new law they need to have 680 megawatts of solar installed in PA. It is now a law and they have a mission to fulfill this requirement. PA is almost 2 months away from net metering rules at the state level. There is also a great deal of money set aside to meet their green goals. PA is committed to green technologies and is putting their money to good use with tax free bond investments, a $1 billion setaside for clean energy, numerous grants and loan guarantee all totaling an additional $80 million. There is also a $100 million set aside created by the Governor that will be used for farmers that want to make clean energy investments for solar, wind, etc.

    They are also willing to think out of the box. They are willing to take risks and are willing to be a partner in a real way. They will even be a co-signer to your loan. That is how committed they are. Last week they had a waste coal cleanup company that could not get funding without a customer. The state of PA stepped up and guaranteed the company a 10 year contract and they were able to receive their funding.

    They have establish many great policies. These policies are needed not to meet a goal. It is a requirement and they are willing to work with you. The DEALS are OPEN in the Commonwealth of PA. Come and see us.


    The next presenter was US Senator Lamar Alexander. He was instrumental in crafting and eventually passing the largest federal tax incentive with the 2005 Energy Bill.

    There was a standing ovation when he came to the podium. He was also given an award by the Solar Energy Industry.

    Here are my notes from his presentation:

    Today is all about carbon free energy and conservation. There has been