How Micro-Securitizations Can Bridge the Clean Tech Funding Gap
We’ve lived in a fairy tale world of easy energy all our lives.
Our utilities and regulators have worked hard to provide us with nearly unlimited energy at stable, low prices. They’ve shielded us from volatile fuel prices, protected us from the dramatic swings of wildcatting for oil and gas, and softened the escalating cost of building new generators. No wonder the average American spends just eight minutes a year thinking about energy!
But this fairy tale world is coming to an end.
In their efforts to protect consumers from higher capital costs, utilities have racked up more and more debt and weakened their credit. Storms, wildfires, record heat waves, and cold fronts are pushing our electricity grids to the limit. The general public is demanding a wholesale shift to zero carbon energy to stop climate change. Meanwhile, new technologies are starting to erode the utilities’ traditional monopolies.
Experts tell us that we’re headed to a world of distributed energy: solar, wind, storage batteries, smart energy management systems installed “behind the meter” at homes and buildings. When we go out there to make this happen, though, we often run into the Problem of Bob and Bob.
Two problems arise because business and residential customers are still living in that fairy tale world of cheap, easy energy.
First, they’re not used to thinking about energy. Energy was something they always took for granted, and energy must continue to be easy for them. For new energy technologies to gain mass adoption, they must protect their customers from risks just like utilities and regulators do, even if the new risks are how often the sun will shine or the wind will blow.
Second, somebody else has to pay for it. It’s not going to be the consumer. They’re used to getting as much energy as they need without ever investing in energy production. It probably won’t be the utilities either: not only has their creditworthiness weakened over the years, but the sheer amount of capital required dwarfs the size of the utilities industry.
Fortunately, there is a tool that has been able to help reduce risks while providing capital at scale: securitization. Around since the 1970’s, securitization raises capital at scale by aggregating large numbers of similar assets together and creating liquidity for potential investors. At the same time, it can shield most of those investors from risks they don’t understand by splitting the cash flows of the assets into multiple tiers of securities.
This combination has opened up previously illiquid and poorly understood assets to a broad universe of investors. Those investors have, in turn, rewarded borrowers with lower rates, flexible terms, and access to virtually unlimited capital. From its beginnings with residential mortgages, securitization has now become the preferred way to raise capital for most consumer loans, mortgages, and commercial mortgages, and it’s even used to fund cell phone receivables, timeshares, and RV’s.
The challenge for securitizing clean energy assets is that most of the technologies are new, so there is a lack of data to help investors understand the potential risks. This then creates a chicken and egg problem: until we bring enough assets together, investors would not be incentivized to learn about their risk and return profiles. But until we have access to capital, new and innovative clean energy technologies would not scale to sufficient volumes needed for investors to learn them.
New technologies based on the blockchain could solve this problem. Blockchain’s combination of smart contracts and tokens could allow us to perform all the tasks of securitization, but at smaller scales — think mini, micro, and nano-securitizations. We could go down as far as each individual installation for solar, wind, storage, energy efficiency, or grid services and split up the risks. Then we could aggregate the senior or enhanced classes from all these different assets, with their specific technology and project risks removed, back up into one master structure and fund it in the securitized debt markets to get the best rates.
Here’s how securization of renewable energy assets could work:
- We get device level data, for example from smart meters, inverters, or building automation systems (BAS).
- An M&V process proves that the technology produced value, in the form of energy generated or energy saved. This process could include an escrow period during which parties in the contract could request a manual review.
- At the end of the M&V process, pay out is automatically made into the tokens on the blockchain.
- A smart contract on the blockchain exchanges the tokens from the energy technology for two new tokens, a class A senior token and class B subordinated token. The smart contract will automatically allocate all the value from the energy technology to the class A senior token first, and will only allocate value to the class B subordinated token afterwards.
- The senior class A token could be combined into a securitization pool and sold to debt investors, raising capital at favorable rates.
- The subordinated or credit enhancement class B token could be retained by the technology service provider or split with the owner as a shared incentive. Eventually they too could be sold to specialty investors seeking high returns to raise more capital.
The result is to remove energy risk and provide capital for consumers, so they could continue to enjoy low-cost, risk-free access to energy. At the same time, we could aggregate projects from different energy technologies, locations, and customers together in a pool large enough for securitization. As long as the sizing of the subordinated class B tokens are large enough, these investors are effectively shielded from technology, site, or project specific risks.
From a macro level, such a financing structure provides capital at scale for clean tech companies to offer energy as a service, just like the utilities have done. Their micro utilities could overcome Bob and Bob’s objections, and deliver efficient clean energy, thanks to a combination of new energy technologies, the blockchain, and micro-securitization. The future of distributed energy would then finally be within sight.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
It is increasingly clear that climate resilience cannot, and should not, be divorced from economic resilience. The siloed sectors that have worked to solve environmental problems in the past will not be enough to tackle our existential climate change challenges, which are intertwined with our racial and economic inequality. In Seattle, the team is supporting the development of a community-governed entity that will direct and leverage public, philanthropic, and private investments to create climate justice and economic opportunity while mitigating displacement. They are already advancing a pipeline of projects, including parks, housing, and neighborhood facilities, that will serve as a proof of concept for following a different process that centers community priorities.
Cities that are serious about reducing carbon pollution from transportation need to promote walking and biking, expand transit and micro-mobility services, manage development, and use pricing to reduce traffic and parking congestion.
Many of these steps are designed to reduce the use of single occupancy cars. At the same time, though, cities will also need to electrify everything that moves, including those passenger cars. Just as our approach to solid waste requires a “reduce, reuse, recycle” approach, city transportation policy needs to pursue a “both-and” strategy. Making it easier to use an electric car does not conflict with encouraging alternative transportation options, any more than making it easier to recycle conflicts with discouraging single-use packaging.
An interview with Matt Cole, conducted before his departure as the President of Cubic Transportation Systems. Interviewed by Gordon Feller, Founder: Meeting of the Minds.
There are multiple definitions out there of “mobility-as-a-service.” These range from some of the early-stage approaches, which focused on subscription plans and pricing, and not necessarily the outcomes. But, in my own view, that approach to “MaaS” was trying to promote all sorts of things that needed to exist in order to enable mobility. My own view is this: we’re working to enable mobility networks in cities and regions that promote journey choices. The emphasis is on journey choices that can range from the most affordable to the most efficient, or the most environmentally sustainable. But the aim is to enable all of the possible journey choices for all of the possible travelers. That means addressing the needs of every customer segment that needs to travel within a given city or region. We’re trying to enable those choices for everyone.