Drafting and Negotiating the Optimal Power Purchase Agreement

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Drafting and Negotiating the Optimal Power Purchase Agreement - Presentation Transcript

    1. Drafting and Negotiating the Optimal Power Purchase Agreement Presented by: Sophie A. Akins, Esq.
    2. Experience • Since 2007, worked on about 15% of California public agency solar projects. • Clients include private companies, non-profits, school districts, cities, counties, and special districts, such as, water districts, joint powers authorities.
    3. Solar Project Delivery Methods • Traditional Approaches (Design/Bid/Build, Design-Build etc.) • Power Purchase Agreements
    4. Power Purchase Agreements (“PPAs”) Lease or license ground or roof space to 3rd party Solar Company
    5. PPAs (cont.) • Company Constructs/Owns/Maintains Solar Project • Company receives federal tax credit (cash grant), State rebate and depreciates equipment • Company sells electricity at negotiated rate (with or w/o escalator) • 20 or 25 year term
    6. Public Agency Contracting Government Code provides flexibility to local agencies to procure PPAs – Section 4217 et seq. requires: • Board findings (usually in a Board Resolution) • 2 weeks notice of Board meeting – Section 53091: Qualifying Facilities Exempt From City/County Permitting
    7. PPA Case Study # 1: Valley Center Municipal Water District
    8. PPA Case Study # 1: Valley Center Municipal Water District • 1.2 mW Project by Solar Power Partners. • 25 year term. • $.093/kWh with 3% annual escalation rate; 2.5% escalation rate beginning on the 21st year. • Construction Bond / Letter of Credit. • VCMWD owns Renewable Energy Credits. • Option to purchase System at end of term. • System removed if not purchased at the end of term. • Financial penalty if system underperforms. • Project provides about 20% of the VCMWD electrical load at Betsworth Pump Station. • District saves about $40,000 per year, at least $1 Million dollars over 25 years.
    9. PPA Case Study # 2: Padre Dam Municipal Water District
    10. PPA Case Study # 2: Padre Dam Municipal Water District • 861 kW Project (3 different meters) by SunEdison. • Shade structures over RV storage lot allow District to increase storage fees. • $.1835/kWh with 4% escalation rate. • 20 year term with renewal option. • Option to Purchase System after 6th year following Commercial Operation Date. • SunEdison owns Renewable Energy Credits. • Financial penalty if system underperforms. • System (but not Mounting/Shade Structures) removed if not purchased at the end of term.
    11. PPA Case Study # 3: Rancho California Water District
    12. PPA Case Study # 3: Rancho California Water District • 1.12 mW Project by SunPower. • 20 year term with 5 year extension option. • $.1115 cents per kWh w/ no escalator. • Option to purchase System after 6th year following Commercial Operation Date. • District owns Renewable Energy Credits. • System removed if not purchased at the end of term. • Project provides about 30% of the electrical load at the Santa Rosa Water Reclamation Facility. • District saves about $152,000 per year, $6.7 Million over 20 years.
    13. PPA Case Study # 4: Dixon Unified School District
    14. PPA Case Study # 4: Dixon Unified School District • 820 kW Project by Honeywell (constructed by SPG Solar). • 20 year term with 5, 1-year extension options. • $0.135/kwh, 3.5% escalator; $0.197/kwh cap. • Honeywell reimbursed District for legal fees and consulting costs incurred by the District under the PPA. • Option to purchase System after 6th year following Commercial Operation Date. • Honeywell owns Renewable Energy Credits. • System removed if not purchased at the end of term. • Project provides about 80% of the high school’s electricity needs; saves about $1 Million over the next 20 years. • Educational tool (Website monitoring of System performance)
    15. PPA Case Study #5: Worst Case Scenario • PPA price and escalation rate above industry standard. • Ownership of Renewable Energy Credits is not addressed/negotiated. • No deadline/penalties for completion. • Technology/materials not clearly specified. • Requires agency to pay for “estimates” of energy produced. • No penalty/default for underperformance of System. • Public agency payment of insurance or other costs triggers prevailing wages. • Completion of CEQA not addressed. • Requires agency to purchase System at end of term at pre-determined price.
    16. Ensuring Your Project’s Success: Enforcing Performance Goals • Allocating Risk – Environmental Compliance (CEQA) – Completion Timing – Bonds/Letter of Credit – Insurance – Buyout Clause – Underperformance • Monetary Penalty • Breach / Default
    17. QUESTIONS? Contact Information Sophie A. Akins, Esq. Solar Attorney, Best Best & Krieger LLP sophie.akins@bbklaw.com 619-525-1332
    SlideShare Zeitgeist 2009

    + California Center for Sustainable EnergyCalifornia Center for Sustainable Energy Nominate

    custom

    243 views, 0 favs, 1 embeds more stats

    Presenter: Sophie Akins, Best Best and Krieger

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 243
      • 212 on SlideShare
      • 31 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 10
    Most viewed embeds
    • 31 views on http://energycenter.org

    more

    All embeds
    • 31 views on http://energycenter.org

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories