Long-shelved capital-intensive green-energy projects could be dusted off for construction to begin—if everything goes right
3 min
If the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates in the coming weeks, a friendlier borrowing environment could make all the difference for some mothballed renewable-energy projects.
The returns generated by such projects once they are up and running are often predictable and modest, but because they require a large upfront expenditure, frequently funded in part by debt, they are sensitive to interest-rate fluctuations.
With recent economic data suggesting the Fed has plenty of room to cut, some investors say now is the time to get moving on renewable plans.
Thomas Byrne, chief executive at solar investor CleanCapital, said a drop in interest rates would affect a “not inconsequential amount” of solar developments under consideration. “We have had projects on hold that simply don’t make economic sense for us anymore because the borrowing cost was too high. So those projects will immediately unlock,” he said.
Byrne estimates some of these projects could begin construction by the end of the year and start generating energy next summer.
Solar and wind energy in particular stand to gain from lower borrowing costs, said Srinivasan Santhakumar, principal research analyst with the research firm Wood Mackenzie. “Higher interest rates have disproportionately affected the economics of wind and solar projects,” he said.
An interest-rate increase of 2 percentage points could result in a 20% jump in the cost of producing energy for utility-scale solar power over the life cycle of a project, according to a Wood Mackenzie analysis released in April. In comparison, the same increase might boost the cost of producing energy from gas by 10% to 12%.
Some developers may wait to see a steeper drop before making moves. “It’s definitely a phenomenon, particularly for the more sophisticated, more longer-standing developers who’ve had a history of surfing the ups and downs of the interest-rate spectrum and are also aware of the consequences for their own balance sheet of a long-term interest rate rise,” said Katherine Mogg, managing director at the New York Green Bank, a state-sponsored investment fund that focuses on filling gaps in energy transition financing. Mogg said she expects to see a modest uptick in requests for proposals in the coming months.
The Federal Reserve has signalled a rate cut at its next meeting in September, and most futures investors expect a quarter-percentage-point reduction, according to CME FedWatch. More than three quarters of investors expect the Fed to lower its benchmark rate, now in a range between 5.25% and 5.5%, by at least a full percentage point by year-end.
While a cut in interest rates is a positive for renewables financing, a durable boost for green projects may require a Goldilocks economic scenario in which a cut to borrowing costs don’t coincide with rising fears of a global recession, which could in turn drive investors away from the U.S., said Ron Erlichman, partner at the law firm Linklaters.
“There are a lot of different factors, like the old cliché of ‘headwinds,’ that affect transactions,” he said, adding that large-scale projects such as offshore wind, hydrogen and carbon capture frequently rely on foreign investment.
Fears of unchecked inflation and rampant increases in the cost of materials have cooled down somewhat in the past year, he said, but the looming U.S. election brings a fresh element of uncertainty . While many see a low probability of a full rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act, the legislation that provides game-changing tax breaks for renewables, an executive branch hostile to green energy could slow project permitting or otherwise “nibble at the fringes” of the landmark legislation, as Byrne put it.
“Having done this awhile and seen the cycles in the market, I still remain incredibly optimistic about renewables and energy transition in the United States,” Erlichman said.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
What a quarter-million dollars gets you in the western capital.
Alexandre de Betak and his wife are focusing on their most personal project yet.
Multinationals like Starbucks and Marriott are taking a hard look at their Chinese operations—and tempering their outlooks.
4 min
For years, global companies showcased their Chinese operations as a source of robust growth. A burgeoning middle class, a stream of people moving to cities, and the creation of new services to cater to them—along with the promise of the further opening of the world’s second-largest economy—drew companies eager to tap into the action.
Then Covid hit, isolating China from much of the world. Chinese leader Xi Jinping tightened control of the economy, and U.S.-China relations hit a nadir. After decades of rapid growth, China’s economy is stuck in a rut, with increasing concerns about what will drive the next phase of its growth.
Though Chinese officials have acknowledged the sputtering economy, they have been reluctant to take more than incremental steps to reverse the trend. Making matters worse, government crackdowns on internet companies and measures to burst the country’s property bubble left households and businesses scarred.
Now, multinational companies are taking a hard look at their Chinese operations and tempering their outlooks. Marriott International narrowed its global revenue per available room growth rate to 3% to 4%, citing continued weakness in China and expectations that demand could weaken further in the third quarter. Paris-based Kering , home to brands Gucci and Saint Laurent, posted a 22% decline in sales in the Asia-Pacific region, excluding Japan, in the first half amid weaker demand in Greater China, which includes Hong Kong and Macau.
Pricing pressure and deflation were common themes in quarterly results. Starbucks , which helped build a coffee culture in China over the past 25 years, described it as one of its most notable international challenges as it posted a 14% decline in sales from that business. As Chinese consumers reconsidered whether to spend money on Starbucks lattes, competitors such as Luckin Coffee increased pressure on the Seattle company. Starbucks executives said in their quarterly earnings call that “unprecedented store expansion” by rivals and a price war hurt profits and caused “significant disruptions” to the operating environment.
Executive anxiety extends beyond consumer companies. Elevator maker Otis Worldwide saw new-equipment orders in China fall by double digits in the second quarter, forcing it to cut its outlook for growth out of Asia. CEO Judy Marks told analysts on a quarterly earnings call that prices in China were down roughly 10% year over year, and she doesn’t see the pricing pressure abating. The company is turning to productivity improvements and cost cutting to blunt the hit.
Add in the uncertainty created by deteriorating U.S.-China relations, and many investors are steering clear. The iShares MSCI China exchange-traded fund has lost half its value since March 2021. Recovery attempts have been short-lived. undefined undefined And now some of those concerns are creeping into the U.S. market. “A decade ago China exposure [for a global company] was a way to add revenue growth to our portfolio,” says Margaret Vitrano, co-manager of large-cap growth strategies at ClearBridge Investments in New York. Today, she notes, “we now want to manage the risk of the China exposure.”
Vitrano expects improvement in 2025, but cautions it will be slow. Uncertainty over who will win the U.S. presidential election and the prospect of higher tariffs pose additional risks for global companies.
For now, China is inching along at roughly 5% economic growth—down from a peak of 14% in 2007 and an average of about 8% in the 10 years before the pandemic. Chinese consumers hit by job losses and continued declines in property values are rethinking spending habits. Businesses worried about policy uncertainty are reluctant to invest and hire.
The trouble goes beyond frugal consumers. Xi is changing the economy’s growth model, relying less on the infrastructure and real estate market that fueled earlier growth. That means investing aggressively in manufacturing and exports as China looks to become more self-reliant and guard against geopolitical tensions.
The shift is hurting western multinationals, with deflationary forces amid burgeoning production capacity. “We have seen the investment community mark down expectations for these companies because they will have to change tack with lower-cost products and services,” says Joseph Quinlan, head of market strategy for the chief investment office at Merrill and Bank of America Private Bank.
Another challenge for multinationals outside of China is stiffened competition as Chinese companies innovate and expand—often with the backing of the government. Local rivals are upping the ante across sectors by building on their knowledge of local consumer preferences and the ability to produce higher-quality products.
Some global multinationals are having a hard time keeping up with homegrown innovation. Auto makers including General Motors have seen sales tumble and struggled to turn profitable as Chinese car shoppers increasingly opt for electric vehicles from BYD or NIO that are similar in price to internal-combustion-engine cars from foreign auto makers.
“China’s electric-vehicle makers have by leaps and bounds surpassed the capabilities of foreign brands who have a tie to the profit pool of internal combustible engines that they don’t want to disrupt,” says Christine Phillpotts, a fund manager for Ariel Investments’ emerging markets strategies.
Chinese companies are often faster than global rivals to market with new products or tweaks. “The cycle can be half of what it is for a global multinational with subsidiaries that need to check with headquarters, do an analysis, and then refresh,” Phillpotts says.
For many companies and investors, next year remains a question mark. Ashland CEO Guillermo Novo said in an August call with analysts that the chemical company was seeing a “big change” in China, with activity slowing and competition on pricing becoming more aggressive. The company, he said, was still trying to grasp the repercussions as it has created uncertainty in its 2025 outlook.
Few companies are giving up. Executives at big global consumer and retail companies show no signs of reducing investment, with most still describing China as a long-term growth market, says Dana Telsey, CEO of Telsey Advisory Group.
Starbucks executives described the long-term opportunity as “significant,” with higher growth and margin opportunities in the future as China’s population continues to move from rural to suburban areas. But they also noted that their approach is evolving and they are in the early stages of exploring strategic partnerships.
Walmart sold its stake in August in Chinese e-commerce giant JD.com for $3.6 billion after an eight-year noncompete agreement expired. Analysts expect it to pump the money into its own Sam’s Club and Walmart China operation, which have benefited from the trend toward trading down in China.
“The story isn’t over for the global companies,” Phillpotts says. “It just means the effort and investment will be greater to compete.”
Corrections & Amplifications
Joseph Quinlan is head of market strategy for the chief investment office at Merrill and Bank of America Private Bank. An earlier version of this article incorrectly used his old title.
