世界各国のリアルタイムなデータ・インテリジェンスで皆様をお手伝い

サマリー

こ の調査レポートは、再生可能エネルギー設備設置の促進を目的とした米国の優遇ローンプログラム「PACE」(Property Assessed Clean Energy)の将来性について調査し、個人所有の商業ビル向け再生可能エネルギーとエネルギー高効率化への改良プロジェクトの問題点について議論してい ます。

In the commercial building sector, energy efficiency retrofits are a highly effective approach for reducing energy consumption and costs while also mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. However, the energy retrofit market in privately owned buildings is limited by capital constraints, short planning horizons for property owners, and split incentives between owners and tenants. The market is also highly fragmented: in addition to the variety of commercial building size, use, age, and energy intensity, financial incentives for energy retrofits vary by location and time.

Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing is emerging as an important tool to overcome these barriers in the market for commercial building retrofits. PACE programs create voluntary tax liens on private property, to secure financing for energy efficiency retrofits. The liens are paid off over 5 to 20 years, usually on the property tax bills. According to Pike Research’s analysis, retrofits would create neutral or positive cash flow for the majority of commercial buildings, making PACE a very promising financing mechanism. Recent legislation has authorized municipal PACE programs in almost 20 states, accounting for 60% of the energy cost in commercial buildings nationally. A few municipal programs are already running. More will launch this year, some with ARRA EECBG and Retrofit Ramp-up funding, and others with nonfederal funding.

This Pike Research report explores the potential for PACE programs to address many of the critical barriers in the market for renewable energy and energy efficiency retrofit projects in privately owned commercial buildings. This report includes two five-year market forecast scenarios, with an analysis of the national, state and local politics and the marketing/sales challenges that will influence which scenario is realized.

Key questions addressed:

• Which barriers in the energy retrofit market does PACE address, and how?
• Given that some PACE programs and policies focus on residential single family homes, how can commercial buildings be addressed?
• What types of commercial buildings (analyzed by ownership, use and location) will be PACE early adopters?
• What will drive or block PACE adoption in various sectors?
• Where, when, and how much PACE financing will be available for commercial energy retrofits?
• How many green jobs could PACE create in commercial energy retrofits, and what is needed to make this happen?

Who needs this report?

• Energy service companies
• Building systems vendors
• Commercial building owners
• Federal, state, and local government agencies
• Energy regulators and policy makers
• Utilities
• Investor community
• Industry associations

目次

1. Executive Summary

1.1 PACE Overview
1.2 Overview of the Energy Retrofit Industry
1.3 Recent PACE Developments
1.3.1 Federal Retrofit Ramp-Up Award Winners
1.4 Policy Recommendations
1.4.1 Primary Recommendations
1.4.2 Additional Recommendations

2. Business and Policy Issues

2.1 PACE Financing Steps
2.2 Energy Savings are Technically Feasible
2.3 Existing Support for Energy Efficiency
2.3.1 Ratepayer-Supported Energy Incentive Programs
2.3.1.1 Market Drivers for Energy Retrofits
2.3.1.1.1 Decoupling
2.3.1.1.2 Least Cost Procurement
2.3.1.2 Market Barriers
2.3.1.2.1 Lack of Financial Scale and Leverage
2.3.1.2.2 Preference for High-Cost Energy Sources vs. Low-Cost Energy Efficiency
2.3.2 Energy Service Companies
2.3.2.1 Overview
2.3.3 Performance Contracting
2.3.4 Barriers for Energy Retrofits in Private Commercial Buildings
2.3.4.1 Financial
2.3.4.2 Lack of Awareness
2.3.5 Green Building Commercial Construction
2.3.5.1 ENERGY STAR for Commercial Buildings
2.3.5.2 USGBC and LEED
2.4 How PACE Bonds Address Industry Barriers
2.5 PACE Drivers
2.5.1 Federal Policy
2.5.2 State Policy
2.5.3 Deferred Maintenance Solution
2.5.4 Split Incentive Solution
2.5.5 Short Time Horizon Solution
2.5.6 Green Building Certification for Occupancy & Productivity
2.5.7 Economic Downturn
2.5.8 Popularity of Solar Photovoltaics
2.5.9 Neutral or Positive Cash Flow
2.5.10 Monetizing Energy Efficiency Credits
2.6 PACE Barriers
2.6.1 Politics
2.6.2 Lien or Loan?
2.6.3 Building Owner Awareness and Demand
2.6.4 Tax Lien Seniority and Acceleration
2.6.5 Bond Market Liquidity, Credit Guarantees, and Scale
2.6.6 Market Conditions and Commercial Equity
2.6.7 Top-Line Revenue vs. Bottom-Line Cost Savings
2.6.8 Commercial Time Horizon
2.6.9 Tax Lien Persistence
2.6.10 Utility Ownership and Flexibility
2.7 Program Administration
2.7.1 Outsourced
2.7.2 In-House
2.7.3 Financing: Microbonds, Pooled Bonds, and Interim Financing

3. Industry Landscape

3.1 Public Sector
3.1.1 Federal Government
3.1.1.1 EECBG and Retrofit Ramp-Up
3.1.2 States
3.1.2.1 California
3.1.2.2 New York
3.1.2.3 Texas
3.1.2.4 Florida
3.1.3 Municipalities: Examples of PACE Programs
3.1.3.1 Current PACE Programs, Commercial
3.1.3.1.1 Sonoma County Energy Independence Program (SCEIP)
3.1.3.1.2 City of Palm Desert, California Energy Independence Program
3.1.3.2 Current PACE Programs, Residential
3.1.3.2.1 Boulder County, Colorado ClimateSmart Loan Program
3.1.3.2.2 Babylon, New York Long Island Green Homes Program
3.1.3.3 Pending PACE Programs
3.1.3.3.1 San Francisco
3.1.3.3.2 San Diego
3.1.3.3.3 Los Angeles
3.1.3.3.4 CaliforniaFIRST
3.1.3.3.5 New York City, PlaNYC 2030 Greener Greater Buildings Plan
3.1.3.4 Future PACE Initiatives
3.1.3.4.1 Clinton Climate Initiative
3.1.3.4.2 Washington, D.C.
3.1.3.5 Overview of Program Features
3.1.4 Policy Issues
3.1.4.1 National
3.1.4.2 State
3.2 Private Sector
3.2.1 Equipment Manufacturers
3.2.2 Service Providers
3.2.2.1 Retrofit Installation
3.2.2.2 Program Design
3.2.2.2.1 Renewable Funding
3.2.2.2.2 ConoverBrown
3.2.2.2.3 Blue Tree Strategies
3.2.2.3 Municipal Bond Administration
3.2.2.4 Innovative Market Aggregators
3.2.2.4.1 Lime Energy
3.2.2.4.2 1 Block Off the Grid (1BOG)
3.2.3 Nonprofits
3.2.3.1 PACENOW.org
3.2.3.2 ACEEE
3.2.3.3 ICLEI
3.2.3.4 USGBC
3.2.3.5 NAESCO
3.2.3.6 ASES
3.2.3.7 SEIA
3.3 Onsite Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency, and Net Zero Energy
3.3.1 Net Zero Energy
3.3.2 Renewable Energy
3.3.3 Verification: Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
3.4 Size of Buildings and Projects
3.5 Building Uses
3.5.1 Overview
3.5.2 Office Space
3.5.3 Food Sales and Services
3.5.4 Healthcare
3.5.5 Lodging
3.5.6 Retail
3.5.7 Warehouse and Storage
3.5.8 Education
3.5.9 Data Centers

4. Market Forecasts

4.1 Addressable Building Stock
4.1.1 States with PACE-Enabling Legislation
4.1.2 Addressable Buildings by Type and Size
4.2 Portfolio Manager and LEED EBOM
4.3 PACE in Commercial Buildings in the United States: 2010-2015
4.3.1 Baseline Scenario
4.3.2 Aggressive Scenario
4.4 Job Creation and GHG Reduction
4.4.1 Baseline Scenario
4.4.2 Aggressive Scenario
4.4.3 Context

5. Company Directory
6. Acronym and Abbreviation List
7. Table of Contents
8. Table of Charts and Figures
9. Scope of Study, Sources and Methodology, Notes

Table of Charts and Figures

• ESCO Revenue History: 1990-2010
• ESCO Industry Market Share by Segment, United States: 2006
• Total Public and Private Space by Sector: ENERGY STAR Rated versus Not Rated
• Annual Energy Expenditure in Commercial Buildings in Each of the States with PACE-Enabling Legislation
• Total Area of Private Commercial Buildings by Size Category
• Number of Private Commercial Buildings by Size Category (Thousands)
• Percent Energy Used by Each Building Activity in Private Commercial Buildings
• Portfolio Manager Registration and LEED EBOM Certification of Commercial Space in Existing Buildings: 2010-2020
• PACE Financing for Commercial Buildings, Baseline Scenario: 2010-2015
• PACE Financing for Commercial Buildings, Aggressive Scenario: 2010-2015
• PACE Financing for Commercial Buildings, Aggressive Scenario: 2010-2020
• Energy Programs by State
• States with Decoupling Legislation
• Energy Efficiency Resource Standards, 19 States
• Renewable Portfolio Standards, 29 States + D.C.

List of Tables

• Websites with PACE Information
• Key Financial Statistics for Commercial Building Energy Efficiency
• Commercial Building Space Statistics, United States
• Federal Retrofit Ramp-Up Awards
• PACE Financing Steps
• PACE Legislation by State
• Sonoma County, California PACE Applications
• Cost of Energy Retrofits with Various Energy Savings
• Food Sales and Services Centralization

米国の商用ビル優遇ローンPACEは2015年に25億ドルに達するだろう

2010年6月21日
商業ビルのセクターで、旧弊なエネルギー効率の改善は、エネルギー消費とコストの大きな削減につながり、温室効果ガス(GHG)の排出を緩和することができる。しかし、個人が所有している商業ビルのエネルギー効率化のための改築市場は、資金の問題から限定的であり、所有者の計画は短期的で、所有者とテナントの利害関係が阻害要因となっている。PACEプログラム(Property Assessed Clean Energy)の優遇ローンは、商業ビルの改築市場におけるこれらの阻害要因を取り除く重要なツールである。PACEプログラムは、私財を自発的な出資の約束に変えることができる。このような支払いは5-20年で、通常は固定資産税の請求と相殺される。

米国の環境エネルギーなどの地球環境保護に関するクリーン技術関連市場の専門調査会社パイクリサーチ社の調査レポート「米国のPACE調査:商業ビルのエネルギー効率向上と再生可能エネルギー化のための優遇ローンの将来性、地球温暖化ガスの削減、雇用創出 ー PACE Financing for Commercial Buildings:Property Assessed Clean Energy Financing for Energy Efficiency Retrofits and Renewable Energy: Market Opportunity, GHG Reduction, and Job Creation」は、PACEプログラムは米国で増加し続け、通常の予測シナリオでも、2015年までにPACEプログラムによる商用ビルへの投資は、年額総計25億ドルに達するだろうと報告している。この投資レベルなら、新規雇用を5万人創出でき、800万トン(メトリックトン)の二酸化炭素(CO2)排出を削減し、1年間に170万台の車をなくすのと同等の効果がある。PACEに対して州や連邦の強力な後押しがあると考えるより積極的なシナリオに沿った予測なら、PACEに関連する投資などの効果は3倍にもなるだろう。

「PACEプログラムは国内で大きな効果を挙げ、既存の商業ビルの改築によるエネルギー効率化における多くの問題点を克服する道筋を示すことができるだろう。多くの商業ビルは、その他の環境的にも社会的な投資にも中立的から積極的なキャッシュフローをふりむけ、エネルギー効率化の改築によって大きな利点をみいだすだろう」と常務のClint Wheelock氏は語る。
(後略)

(原文)
PACE Financing for Commercial Buildings to Reach $2.5 Billion Annually by 2015