• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Infrastructure Project Equity Financing
 

Infrastructure Project Equity Financing

on

  • 1,692 views

The demand for and cost of electricity is growing and is expected to do so for the foreseeable future. ...

The demand for and cost of electricity is growing and is expected to do so for the foreseeable future.
There is general interest in building renewable energy infrastructure projects to help meet that
demand. Climate Action Projects depend on increased use of renewable energy to lower
environmental impact and also include provisions for infrastructure to support electric vehicles.
Municipalities are experiencing severe financial hardship and in many cases, are overwhelmed by
debt while under pressure to execute their climate action goals. These fiscal challenges are
preventing municipalities from using new bond issuances to financing infrastructure projects.
An alternative method to support the development of new infrastructure projects is proposed and
relies on public private partnerships financed with equity rather than debt. Such alternatives can
allow projects to move forward in the current economic situation.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,692
Views on SlideShare
1,687
Embed Views
5

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0

1 Embed 5

http://www.linkedin.com 5

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Infrastructure Project Equity Financing Infrastructure Project Equity Financing Document Transcript

    • Running Head: Infrastructure Project Equity Financing                       Presidio  Graduate  School   Capital  Markets  SUS6175_S12_SP11     May  12 ,  2011  
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing Table  of  Contents    1.  Executive  Summary ................................................................................................................. 3  2.  History .................................................................................................................................... 3  2.1  Challenges  around  raising  funding/bond  issues ........................................................................................................ 5  3.  Capital  Markets  and  Sustainability .......................................................................................... 5  4.  Analysis................................................................................................................................... 7  4.1  Alternatives: ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7   4.1.1  REIT ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7   4.1.2  S-­Corp  and  C-­Corp................................................................................................................................................................. 9   4.1.3  Master  Limited  Partnership  (MLP) ............................................................................................................................... 9  4.2  Comparison  of  Corporate  Structures............................................................................................................................... 9  5.  Recommendation .................................................................................................................. 11  5.1  Assessment  of  MLPs  and  S  &  C  corporations .............................................................................................................11  5.2  Next  Generation  REITs  Show  Great  Promise .............................................................................................................12  5.3  IRS  recognition  &  Congressional  Approval  of  Next  Generation  REITs ...........................................................12  5.4  Next  Steps  for  Local  Governments..................................................................................................................................13  6.  References ............................................................................................................................ 14     2
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing1.  Executive  Summary  The demand for and cost of electricity is growing and is expected to do so for the foreseeable future.There is general interest in building renewable energy infrastructure projects to help meet thatdemand. Climate Action Projects depend on increased use of renewable energy to lowerenvironmental impact and also include provisions for infrastructure to support electric vehicles.Municipalities are experiencing severe financial hardship and in many cases, are overwhelmed bydebt while under pressure to execute their climate action goals. These fiscal challenges arepreventing municipalities from using new bond issuances to financing infrastructure projects.An alternative method to support the development of new infrastructure projects is proposed andrelies on public private partnerships financed with equity rather than debt. Such alternatives canallow projects to move forward in the current economic situation.Several recommendations are offered; the most preferred involving an adaptation of the existingReal Estate Investment Trust (REIT) vehicle to allow it to better meet renewable energyinfrastructure project requirements. Other options, which do not require such adaptation, arerecommended as alternatives.2.  History  Traditionally, funding for municipal infrastructure projects has been raised through municipalbonds, also called “munis.” These bonds are divided into two primary categories, generalobligation bonds which are repaid out of the municipality’s budget and revenue bonds, which arerepaid based on revenues earned by the infrastructure project, such as bridge tolls and fees for useof mass transit. Muni bonds have historically been attractive due to perceived low risk coupled withtax benefits that exempt their interest payments from federal taxes.Recently, there has been a reversal in the popularity of munis with many cities defaulting onrepayment as they file for bankruptcy. As a consequence of the increasing perceived risk, munibond debt has become expensive for a city to repay. Currently, a 10-year muni bond from a AArated municipality would pay interest of up to 5.64%. In contrast, a similarly rated corporate bondwould pay just 4.9%, but would not offer the same tax incentives, thus resulting in an even lowereffective rate of return. A few currently trading muni bonds have yields as high as 8%. Investorshave flocked to safer investments such as U.S. Treasury Bonds and Bank CDs even though their 3
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financingreturns are lower with ten-year treasuriesyielding just 3.46% and two-year notesyielding a fraction of one percent.Launching infrastructure projects hasbecome increasingly challenging as statefunding has declined and basicinfrastructure, such as roads, have remainedunder funded causing infrastructure tocrumble and decay. San Francisco, forexample, is estimated to have a backlog of$440 million dollars of street maintenanceprojects alone. Similar problems exist Figure 1 - U.S. Total Electricity Consumptionthroughout California and across the UnitedStates.As these problems persist, others brew in thebackground. Demand for electricity is growing(see Figure 1) and that growth is expected tocontinue for the foreseeable future. At the sametime, the cost of purchasing energy is increasing(see Figure 2). Climate action plans have begunto put pressure on cleaning up the generation ofenergy. Municipalities don’t have the luxury ofputting these projects on hold until existinginfrastructure projects are addressed. Figure 2 - PG&E Average Commercial RatePower Purchase Agreements can be part of thesolution. These projects can produce immediatereturns by guaranteeing a price for energy that islower than the municipality currently pays (seeFigure 3). The benefit will increase over time asthe cost of energy rises. Additional revenueopportunities exist for projects that includeelectric vehicle charging infrastructure, which cancharge a premium rate for convenient access tocharging, while still saving consumers comparedto the price of fossil fuels. This however, doesn’taddress the problem of how to raise neededmonies. Figure 3 –Cost Benefit of Using a Solar Power Purchase Agreement 4
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing2.1  Challenges  around  raising  funding/bond  issues  Federal stimulus money is being used to meet immediate needs such as filling potholes and helpingto rebuild crumbling infrastructure. Cities are mired in debt. Oakland, CA for example, a city thatstruggles with one of the highest crime rates in the U.S., laid-off police officers last year to balanceits budget. This year it has threatened to lay off over 500 teachers. Raising funds for renewableenergy or electric vehicle projects would normally be completed through revenue bonds, which, dueto current fiscal challenges, are not an option. (Personal Communication, Garrett Fitzgerald,Sustainability Director, City of Oakland).While interest rates remain low, banks are hesitant to lend, especially to municipalities withdowngraded credit ratings. The state and federal government continue to struggle with their ownbudget challenges and are in no position to assist. Municipalities need an alternative means to raiseneeded funds, preferably without creating new debt.3.  Capital  Markets  and  Sustainability  In capital markets today, investors can choose from a number of different vehicles (e.g. mortgagebacked securities, bonds) that offer a steady stream of payments over a fixed period of time.However, investors who want to invest directly in public sector infrastructure development have alimited number of options. They could purchase shares of the companies involved withimplementing and/or managing of such a project. This investment, though, would be indirect: anypotential appreciation in share price would be subject to market sentiment and conditions as muchas the overall profitability of the company (let alone the project itself). Alternatively, investorscould purchase general obligation or revenue bonds, assuming they were issues specifically for theproject. In the case of revenue bonds, the investor would be entitled to a portion of the revenuestream generated by the project. In general, this option is best suited to secure investors ininfrastructure projects, however bond issuances are still not easily approved given current economicand budgetary conditions. That being said, infrastructure installations that promise to generateprofits (and eventually returns for its investors) would likely generate interest amongst individualslooking to share in those returns.Given the general need for liquidity, and the varying investment horizons of the market, investorswould require both: a convenient method of buying in (e.g. shares) and a market that would allowtrading of shares (or equivalent investment vehicle). Project sponsors could accomplish the firstobjective by creating a legally compliant business entity (e.g. REIT or C-Corp) that was funded, at 5
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financingleast in part with equity shares. Equity ownership structure would make it easier for investors tocompare the opportunity to other currently traded alternatives. Project sponsors would also need toensure that individuals could freely buy and sell these shares, ideally in a public marketplace. If theshares could be listed on an existing exchange (see Figure 4), it would significantly increase thevisibility of the shares and likelihood of finding interested individuals. Being exchange-listedwould help assure interested parties that shares would be subject to the same oversight and legalenforcement (e.g. SEC regulations) as are their existing investments. Listing shares on a publiclytraded exchange would provide access to the largest pool of potential investment dollars. Figure 4 – Listing Shares of an Equity Financed Project on Major ExchangeThis approach to funding could be used to spur the development of any revenue generatinginfrastructure project. It could be used to further the development of the United States’ renewableenergy infrastructure. However, as discussed earlier, most infrastructure development efforts aresubject to municipal or state budgetary constraints. Alternative means of funding projects couldtherefore break the logjam amidst cost cutting efforts by legislators. Additionally, twenty-ninestates have already set renewable electricity standards (RES) that require a minimum percentage ofelectric utilities’ generated energy to come from renewable sources within the next 10-20 years(Slabaugh, 2011). In order for the public and private sectors to meet these numbers, they will needto fund both large and small initiatives. Funding big projects will likely require outside help, e.g. 6
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financingthe Energy Department’s $3.7B in loan guarantees (Hull, 2011) made in April of this year for solarthermal projects in CA. Smaller initiatives, though, could be made possible with budgetnegotiations & appropriations or even more creative funding approaches.Using an equity model could also help promote local ownership & involvement within thecommunity. At face value, the idea of infrastructure that generates renewable energy for thecommunity while turning a profit for its investors would seem like an easy sell. The localgovernment could benefit even more by positioning the project as an opportunity for citizens toinvest in the community’s long term well being. Assuming regulations and/or incentives wereutilized to encourage residential ownership, more people could be directly connected with theglobal sustainability efforts underway.4.  Analysis  4.1  Alternatives:  Efforts have been made to develop alternative solutions to raising capital for infrastructure projects.We researched a number of different solutions including Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs), S-Corporations and traditional corporations (C-Corps), as well as Master Limited Partnerships(MLPS). Each of these offer interesting advantages along with their own challenges. All but the C-Corp are good contenders for the initial formation of an entity and are discussed in more detailbelow:4.1.1  REIT  A number of these alternatives have revolved around modifications to an existing investmentvehicle: the Real Estate Investment Trust. REITs were created to allow individual investors theability to invest in real estate. They generally trade as publically as stocks and thus have greaterliquidity then direct real estate investments. REIT’s are a type of corporation and have many of thebenefits of a C-Corp, without the burden of double taxation. REITs can also be held in retirementaccounts that offer tax deferral.REITs must conform to a number of guidelines: ● 90% of taxable income needs to be distributed to the shareholders ● No more than 50% of the shares can be held by five or fewer individuals during the last half of each taxable year (5/50 rule) ● Excise taxes are levied on annual profits that are not distributed 7
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing ● Cash can be invested in government securities or other REITs, or can invest in propertyRenewable energy infrastructure projects have a difficult time conforming to all of thesestipulations, yet the REIT is attractive due to significant tax and liquidity advantages. The IRS hasrecently extended REITs to allow for investment in gas and electric distribution systems (Deloitte2010), taking it closer to being a fit for renewable energy infrastructure projects. Additionally,several efforts to offer alternatives types of REITS are underway. These alternatives include the S-REIT and the Infrastructure REIT.4.1.1.1  S-­‐REIT  (Solar  REIT)  Joshua Sturtevant of the George Washington University Solar Institute has proposed an amendmentto current tax codes to treat revenue generated by power purchase agreements as rent. Such anamendment would allow the benefit of REITs to be extended to solar power generation projects andwould offer a number of benefits including: increased liquidity, increased opportunity forparticipation by individual investors, and the avoidance of the double taxation inherent with C-Corps.4.1.1.2  Infrastructure  REIT  The Infrastructure REIT is an alternative that has been proposed by several backers includingDeloitte. Under this proposal, REIT benefits would be extended to public private partnerships (P3s)by counting all revenues as qualifying income, regardless of whether the revenue is generated byreal estate.It may be possible to use a REIT in its current form, but doing so will pose significant challenges.Failing to succeed in approval for any of the aforementioned alternatives with leave a number ofother less ideal alternatives, including S-Corps and possibly MLPs. 8
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing4.1.2  S-­‐Corp  and  C-­‐Corp  S-Corporations are treated similarly to partnerships and like REITS, avoid the cost of doubletaxation. The S-Corp could be offered through a Direct Public Offering (DPO) on a limited scale,but in order for a true public offering to occur, it would first need to be converted to a C-Corporation.C-Corporations are traditional corporations. They have the advantage of being able to offer stock ona scale limited only by the corporation itself. They have the undesirable characteristic of double-taxation, causing the corporation to be taxed and the owners to be taxed as well.  4.1.3  Master  Limited  Partnership  (MLP)  Master Limited Partnerships (MLPs) offer the tax benefits of a limited partnership along with theability to trade on a public exchange. MLPs are generally limited to very specific businesses, suchas those related to oil, natural gas, or coal. There are also MLPs for the finance sector, other naturalresources and real estate. There are groups that are advocating for IRS changes that would allowMLPs to be used for renewable energy (Zweibel, 2010). It does not seem like it would be a big stepto add that allowance.MLPs have some key differences from REITs, even though their benefits are quite similar at a firstglance. REITs are better understood by investors as they have been available for a greater period oftime. Taxable obligations are reported on a 1099 form, something most investors are alreadyfamiliar with. They offer the advantage of passing through earnings and losses, a significant benefitin periods where there are losses, for example, in the early years of a newly launched business.Tax-wise, the IRS treats dividends from an MLP more favorably as they reduce the cost basis ofinvestment. Taxes on dividends are not paid until the holding is sold. Another difference is that anMLP is not a corporation and thus is not a separate legal entity as is a REIT. Partners who own theMLP are personally liable and could be called on to repay any capital they receive. Likewise,partners are personally liable for any loans received by the partnership.  4.2  Comparison  of  Corporate  Structures   MLP REIT S-Corp C-CorpCorporate Structure A Master Limited May be Treated as Exist as an entity Partnership is a structured as a c- partnerships for separate from their partnership that is corporation, tax purposes owners and pay taxes able to trade assets, trust, or while having as such an entity. similar to stocks, association some of the Managed by majority on stock exchanges advantages of a owner. C-Corp in terms 9
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing of liability. Managed by majority owner.Ability to trade stock MLPs are able to Trade on May have only May have multiple trade “units” which exchanges in a one class of stock, classes of stock, no perform similarly manner May not have limit in the number of to stock equivalent to more than 100 stockholders, stocks shareholders. shareholders may be Shareholders must U.S. or foreign be U.S. Citizens, citizens or entitiesOwnership Owners are Must be jointly May not have Owned by partners in the firm owned by 100 or more than 100 shareholders, with more individuals shareholders. largest powers of ownership going to the majority owner. There is no maximum number of owners.Liability Partners are Shareholders do Offers Limited Shareholders do not personally liable to not have Liability have personal liability creditors. This personal liability Protection from liability can extend creditors to shareholdersTaxation Treated as Treated as Treated as Double taxation: Net partnership partnership partnership income is taxed at the corporate level before it’s distributed to shareholders, who must also pay tax on income.Dividends Payouts are called Pay dividends of S corporation is Dividends are taxed distributions rather at least 90% of not eligible for a at the preferential than dividends and the REITs dividends 15% rate. Is eligible they reduce the taxable income received for a dividends equity owned Not taxed at the deduction. received deduction. causing a tax preferred 15% advantage. but instead are taxed at 35%Losses Passed through to Not passed Passed through to Not passed through to shareholders through to shareholders shareholders shareholdersIncome Limitations N/A Must earn 75% Unlike a C Subject to the 10 of more of its corporation, an S percent of taxable gross income corporation is not income limitation from rents or subject to the 10 applicable to mortgage interest percent of taxable charitable income limitation contribution applicable to deductions. 10
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing charitable contribution deductions.Other Disadvantages No more than 20% of its assets may consist of stocks in taxable REIT subsidiaries. At most 50% of the shares can be held by five or less individuals during the last half of each taxable year (5/50 rule)Management Partners Board of Partners Board of Directors Directors5.  Recommendation  5.1  Assessment  of  MLPs  and  S  &  C  corporations  C and S corporations are well defined and understood company structures that can be used forequity financed infrastructure initiatives. Whereas S-Corps receive more favorable tax treatmentthan C type entities, their capped number of total shareholders and additional liability exposure limitthe scope of projects that they can be used for. S corporations would be best utilized for small, localinitiatives with relatively low risk of default and a small number of potential investors. Ccorporations, on the other hand, do address the two limitations of S type entities described above.However, they are subject to a 39% national corporate tax rate (Hodge, 2008) and double taxationrules that significantly impact the returns to investors. C corporations are therefore not ideal forsuch projects unless they expect to grow significantly over time (justifying the associated overhead)and offer robust returns to compensate for tax expenses.MLPs are liquid and receive favorable tax treatment and pass through abilities; attributes whichmake them attractive for infrastructure project sponsors to consider. However, the risk exposed topartners may limit investor participation. A means to reduce risk and relaxation of rules by IRS toallow their use in renewable energy infrastructure projects would both be needed to make them aviable option. 11
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing5.2  Next  Generation  REITs  Show  Great  Promise  Project sponsors utilizing a REIT structure would reap benefits similar to those offered by MLPsand S-Corps. Given a REIT’s composition and revenue distribution requirements, though, themajority of renewable energy infrastructure projects do not fit within current guidelines. Disparateefforts have been proposed to redefine REITs to make them more suitable for such projects.Sponsors would be best served by the creation of a next generation REIT designed specifically forthis purpose: a Renewable Energy Infrastructure Trust (hereafter called REIT-2G).Fundamentally, a REIT-2G would differ from a traditional REIT with respect to the source ofincome requirements. The REIT-2G model would require a project to certify that the overwhelmingmajority (if not all) of the energy they generate comes from renewable sources.(This would essentially be a further extension of the IRS’ decision to allow gas and electricdistribution projects to qualify for REIT status.) Similar to the modifications proposed with S-REITs and Infrastructure REITs, the definition of approved income sources should be broadened toencompass the different types of projects being considered today. If a project were able to meetthese qualifications, it would then enjoy the tax and liability benefits of a traditional REIT.Making the REIT-2G a reality can only occur if either (a) the current interpretation of REIT taxcode was broadened via an IRS private letter ruling or (b) changes were made to the U.S. tax codeto allow for a new such entity. Given the information and feedback collected thus far, a privateletter ruling seems unlikely. As such, this initiative would need to be sponsored by individuals whohave the authority to change the tax code – the United States Congress.5.3  IRS  recognition  &  Congressional  Approval  of  Next  Generation  REITs  Getting the REIT-2G added to the federal tax code would require lobbying Congress with severalgroups of interested parties. Ideally, representatives from PPA organizations (e.g. Tioga Energy,Solar City) should be brought in to testify how much more successful their renewable energyinfrastructure ventures would be (or could have been) with the proposed legislation changes. Inaddition, key NGOs with financial resources and lobbying power (e.g. EDF, NRDC, Sierra Club)should be brought on board ask key sponsors of the initiative. Their support (and that of the groups’members) could go a long way in lending legitimacy to the effort. Lastly, city and state legislatorsshould collaborate to inform their federal counterparts about the benefits that the tax code changeswould bring to the state.Within Congress itself, REIT-2G should be ideally championed by legislators either pushing forrenewable energy infrastructure projects and/or changes to the tax code that promote job growth and 12
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financingenergy independence. Getting their buy-in and commitment would require a fair amount of efforton the part of the aforementioned groups, but ultimately would offer the best chance for success.5.4  Next  Steps  for  Local  Governments      While awaiting legislative changes to occur the federal level, municipalities can (and should)explore alternative project funding approaches. (For example, the city of Berkeley, CA could leaseroof space on buildings to a company for the purpose of operating and maintaining a renewableenergy installation.) For such initiatives, the city would be best served by collaborating with privatesector technology/business partner(s) to conduct a feasibility and impact assessment of the proposedproject. These joint discussions should drive the completion of a joint RFP which includedpreferences for equity based ownership structures. The city could then, through an RFP process,green light the project once a profitable business model and technology partner were identified.Assuming the newly formed entity chose to issue equity shares of the project (perhaps through aDirect Public Offering), the city could work with them to promote the initiative within theregion/state and beyond. 13
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing6.  References  Hodge, Scott A. (2008, March 18). U.S. States Lead the World in High Corporate Taxes. Retrieved from: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/22917.html.Hull, Dana. (2011, April 18). Energy Department announces $2.1 billion loan guarantee for Mojave Desert solar project. San Jose Mercury News. Retrieved from: http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_17875239Slabaugh, Seth. (2011, April 10). Wind industry feeling a little more welcome. The Star Press. Retrieved from: http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20110411/NEWS01/104110315/0/ENTERTAINMENT03 /Wind-industry-feeling-little-more-welcome“1st energy infrastructure REIT being created - Pensions & Investments,” http://www.pionline.com/article/20101130/DAILYREG/101139999.“BlawgConomics: The Solar REIT: A Vision for the Future of German Solar Development,” http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2010/11/solar-reit-vision-for-future-of-german.html.“Country’s First Green Energy REIT Launches in New York City | Green Real Estate Law Journal,” http://www.greenrealestatelaw.com/2011/03/countrys-first-green-energy-reit-launches-in- new-york-city/.Deloitte, 2010, REITs and infrastructure projects The next investment frontier? Retrieved from: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom- UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/MA/us_ma_Infrastructure%20REITS_040210.pdf“EIA - Short-Term Energy Outlook,” http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo/#Electricity_Markets.“Ellensburg Community Solar Project — Community Renewable Energy,” http://nwcommunityenergy.org/solar/solar-case-studies/chelan-pud.“Envision, ACE unveil new Solar Tree carports and leasing option  : Solar Energy - Clean Energy Authority,” http://www.cleanenergyauthority.com/solar-energy-news/solar-carport-leasing- and-electric-car-charging-022211/.“Federal Energy Management Program: Energy Savings Performance Contracts,” http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/espcs.html.“FT.com / Capital Markets - Debate rages over muni bond defaults,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/96cefa8a-1dac-11e0-aa88-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Hr4aQpyo. 14
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing“FT.com / Capital Markets - Moody’s forecasts ‘distress’ for US muni markets,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/01c136f6-3d2d-11e0-bbff-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Hr4aQpyo.“FT.com / Capital Markets - Muni woes could sour appetite for bonds,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8d596ba2-f732-11df-9b06-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Hr4aQpyo.“FT.com / Capital Markets - Record amounts withdrawn from US muni funds,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0aae4f6a-24ff-11e0-895d-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Hr4aQpyo.“FT.com / Capital Markets - Sell-off in US local debt rattles investors,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/81b169e4-f27d-11df-a2f3-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Hr4aQpyo.“FT.com / Reports - Municipal bonds: Spotlight falls on US cities’ fundraising,” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9b92bb96-273f-11e0-80d7- 00144feab49a,s01=1.html#axzz1G0HReYFi.“Guidelines for Financing Municipal Energy Efficiency Projects.”“Innovative $2.1B Energy Infrastructure REIT Launched -- DALLAS, Nov. 29, 2010 /PRNewswire/ --,” http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/innovative-21b-energy- infrastructure-reit-launched-110977879.html.“Law Firm Of Pepper Hamilton LLP | REITs: Looking to the Rooftops,” http://www.pepperlaw.com/publications_update.aspx?ArticleKey=1345.“Power Purchase Agreements,” http://syndicatedsolar.com/Financial-Resources/Power-Purchase- Agreement.php.“Public-Private Partnerships -- The Silver Lining for Solar | Renewable Energy News Article,” http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2009/07/public-private-partnerships- the-silver-lining-for-solar.“REITS are Poised to Finance an Independent and Modern Grid - POWERGRID International/Electric Light & Power,” http://www.elp.com/index/display/article- display/302307/articles/electric-light-power/volume-85/issue-4/columns/taking-it-into- account/reits-are-poised-to-finance-an-independent-and-modern-grid.html.“Solar Power Purchase Agreements | Green Power Partnership | US EPA,” http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/buygp/solarpower.htm.“SOLAR TODAY: Exclusive: Financing Large-Scale Solar Projects,” http://www.ases.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1034&Itemid=23.Zweibel, Ken, (2010, May, 15), “Solar for ‘Everyman’” The Solar Review, Retrieved from: http://thesolarreview.org/2010/05/15/solar-for-everyman/. 15
    • Infrastructure Project Equity Financing 16