Thomas Weisel Partners - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 44
About This Presentation
Title:

Thomas Weisel Partners

Description:

– PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:170
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 45
Provided by: sre70
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Thomas Weisel Partners


1
Thomas Weisel Partners
  • Alternative Energy

Sector Weighting Market Weight
Jeff Osborne 212 271-3577 josborne_at_tweisel.com
2
No Silver Bullet Solution to Worlds Energy Crisis
Source Greentech Media
3
Alternative Energy Investability Matrix
  • Solar
  • Profitability along entire supply chain, though
    rapid commoditization driving margin contraction.
  • Global market cap gt 200bn, though several
    emerging privately held players.
  • Cumulative installed capacity 9GW as of 2007
  • Addressable market for solar PV could be
    100-200bn between 2008-10, based on 5-10/watt
    installed cost while addressable market for
    equipment manufacturers could be 15-20bn based
    on capacity projections.
  • Several technologies exist, no silver bullet
    solution. Cost per watt is key. Solar generated
    power currently costs 0.15-0.45/kWh.
  • Of late, competition heating up in thin film
    solar, while solar thermal and concentrated PV
    gaining momentum, though few if any public
    participants.
  • Traditional PV cells/modules
  • -Sharp
  • -Q-Cells
  • -Suntech
  • Traditional PV vertically integrated
  • -REC
  • -SunPower
  • Thin Film PV
  • -Energy Conversion Devices
  • -First Solar
  • Polysilicon
  • Wind
  • Highly profitable.
  • Global market cap gt 500bn, driven by large
    diversified industrials like GE, Siemens, etc.
  • Lack of domestically traded pure-plays lowers
    investability.
  • Largest pure play producers not traded in US.
  • Cumulative installed capacity 90GW as of 2007
  • Addressable market for wind could be 175-250bn
    between 2008-2010 based on 2.00-2.50/watt
    installed cost.
  • Key variable in cost is raw materials such as
    steel for turbines and towers.
  • Wind-generated power costs as little as 0.05/kWh
    but distribution and transmission becoming more
    important.
  • Pure play wind energy players
  • Gamesa
  • Vestas
  • Enercon
  • Suzlon
  • Clipper
  • Diversified industrials
  • GE Wind
  • Mitsubishi Heavy
  • Siemens
  • Bioproducts
  • Biofuels and bio-products linked to volatile
    input and output prices currently with minimal
    IP lowering investability.
  • Large potential market for products substitute
    for petrol in many applications such as plastics,
    motor fuel, cleaners, solvents, etc.
  • Market cap 100bn domestically and much larger
    internationally extremely diverse encompassing
    technology, agri business, fuels, etc.
  • Highly dependent on government subsidies and
    support public support is beginning to wane as
    corn agricultural prices climb.
  • Promise of cellulosic ethanol Improvements in
    enzyme tech are required to meet long term
    ethanol production targets. Developers of these
    enzymes should have strong intellectual property
    position and therefore minimal commodity risk but
    are a long way from viable commercial production
    (Most are private companies)
  • Ethanol producers
  • -Archer Daniels Midland
  • -Aventine
  • -Pacific Ethanol
  • -Panda
  • -Verasun/US BioEnergy
  • -Cosan
  • Other bioproducts
  • -Metabolix
  • -Nova Biosource
  • -Verenium
  • -Xethanol
  • Smart Grid/ Energy Efficiency
  • Attractive opportunity for investors over next
    3-5 years. Grid upgrade process will be
    evolutionary rather than revolutionary, so
    long-term investment horizon is must.
  • Market cap is small (20bn domestic) but
    growing still low market cap limits investabilty
  • Selling into highly regulated utility industry
    drives lumpy sales
  • Demand response aggregation opportunity alone
    could be 8bn annually in 5-10 years. Smart
    meters/AMI could be 8bn over the next few years,
    while hardware for demand response within AMI
    rollouts could be another 800mn. Addressable
    market for efficient HIF lighting retrofits in
    CI is over 9bn.
  • Energy Management/ Efficiency
  • -Comverge
  • -EnerNOC
  • -Microfield
  • -Orion Energy Systems
  • -PowerSecure
  • AMI Vendors
  • -Badger
  • -Cooper
  • -Echelon
  • -Itron
  • Clean Coal/ Environmental Consulting
  • An attractive opportunity created by regulations
    regarding CO2, SOx and NOx reductions both in the
    U.S. and in developing countries..
  • Domestic market cap lt 20bn which limits
    investabilty
  • Addressable market is over 10bn globally for
    NOx/SOx reduction. Utility boiler efficiency
    improvement market through specialty chemicals is
    3-5bn globally.
  • Companies in the space are profitable and often,
    products offered pay for themselves without
    government incentives.
  • Clean coal players
  • -ADA-ES
  • -CECO Environmental--Evergreen Energy
  • -Foster Wheeler
  • -Fuel Tech
  • -Headwaters
  • -Peerless Mfg
  • -Rentech
  • Energy Storage
  • Battery/storage technology has remained
    relatively stagnant over the last 20 years. The
    lack of a reliable and economical high-energy
    density energy storage device has limited
    somewhat the potential of renewable energies such
    as wind and solar which generate electricity only
    during certain periods of the day, and fully
    electric vehicles.
  • Market cap lt 10bn domestically limiting
    investability
  • Current development efforts focus on high energy
    density Li Ion batteries that do not catch fire,
    new nanotechnology-based solutions and ultra
    capacitors.
  • Energy storage players
  • -Advanced Battery Technologies
  • -China BAK Battery
  • -Exide
  • -Lithium Technology
  • -Ultralife Batteries
  • Fuel Cells
  • Still a long way from commercialization and
    profitability. Efficient production of H2 still
    needed.
  • Valuation is difficult due to small order
    volumes, negative profits and lack of cash flow,
    small market caps
  • Current opportunities include materials handling
    (6bn), portable electronics (4.2bn), backup
    (2bn) and residential cogeneration (1bn).
    Automotive (90bn) still several years away from
    being a reality.
  • Fuel Cell Producers
  • Ballard Power Systems
  • -FuelCell Energy
  • -Hydrogenics
  • -Plug Power

Investability
4
TWP Alternative Energy Coverage
Small Cap (lt 1 Bil)
Mid Cap (1-10 Bil)
Large Cap (gt10 Bil)
Overweight
Market Weight
Underweight
5
Table of Contents
  • Solar
  • Demand Response / Energy Efficiency
  • Clean Fuels/Products Industry
  • Clean Coal
  • Fuel Cells

6
Summary of Opinions
  • Solar Best way to invest in alternative energy
  • Fast growing, profitable but eventually will be a
    very commoditized product
  • Focus on low cost producers (Asian or niche
    technology) in a declining price environment
  • Tight credit conditions not just in the U.S. but
    globally are pushing out project timelines, a
    majority of which are financed by debt. At the
    same time internal hurdle rates for system owners
    are increasing as appetite for risk decreases.
  • FSLR is our top pick in a tough market for solar
    stocks with lowest cost and committed output at
    pre-determined pricing. Long term winner best
    positioned to tap the U.S. utility scale market
    see upside in late 2009-2010
  • BTUI is a microcap play on next generation cell
    lines rolling out strong momentum with STP and
    FSLR.
  • SOLR is a mid cap play on aggressive polysilicon
    and wafer capacity coming out of China industry
    leading backlog of 1.5bn.
  • Energy Efficiency / Demand Response - Attractive
    long-term secular trend
  • We see an attractive opportunity over the next
    three to five years to invest in companies that
    are saving energy as opposed to generating it and
    enabling the transformation of the power grid
    from 1960s technology to a modern, smart grid.
  • We expect this upgrade process to be evolutionary
    rather then revolutionary. As such, we think
    investors need to take a long term view when
    evaluating the sector
  • We believe demand response alone could be as
    large as 8 billion annually in the next 510
    years
  • In this industry, we favor companies offering
    fully integrated energy solutions that are able
    to prove their cost effectiveness, while
    improving the product they are replacing.
  • Clean Coal
  • Increasing regulation forcing coal plant to clean
    up their act
  • The US has the largest reserves of coal in the
    world so we find it unlikely the generation
    source will be replaced anytime soon.
  • We view solutions that provide extra value in the
    form of greater plant efficiency, safer
    operations, and less downtime as winners.

7
Solar High Risk, High Return Market
Source Matt Wuerker
Source Good Energies
8
Solar Industry
Solar The best way to invest in alternative
energy
  • Key Points
  • Demand in 2008 will be high, but investors are
    extrapolating near term trends for the long term
    view of the PV sector. My crystal ball is very
    fuzzy for 2009, so why should multiples expand?
  • We are concerned about a potential oversupply as
    early as 2009 the top 10 cell producers of 2007
    alone plan for production of greater than our 5GW
    demand estimate.
  • Tight credit conditions are pushing out project
    timelines, a majority of which are funded by
    debt. Also as appetite for risk declines,
    internal hurdle rates for system owners are
    increasing.
  • Long term polysilicon prices will be higher than
    you think.
  • New polysilicon entrants in China are running
    behind, are not funded, and do not know what they
    are doing.
  • Upcoming regulatory changes in key markets create
    demand and pricing uncertainty exiting 2008
  • UMG is a stop gap solution. The economics dont
    make much sense with sub-70 poly as best we can
    see it.
  • Rapid Commoditization will make low cost and high
    quality key integrated business models likely to
    come out on top in short run.
  • The long term key investment opportunity lies
    with the solar capital equipment sector those
    that are enabling the commoditization. If PV
    players beat each other up on price, capex
    budgets will go up more than 2x to 3x between now
    and 2010. We would also expect to see an upgrade
    cycle of lower quality early cycle equipment as
    well.

Near Term Market Running on Rails We Are Nervous
on 2009 as Demand Profile Unclear
2008 Firm markets dominated by German demand
pull in (EEG Effect), Spain Bonanza (1 Year
Grandfather Clause for approved projects), and
Southern EU. U.S. market driven by state
subsidies (CA, NJ,) but pricing is tough due to
FX movement and excess competition. Average ASPs
for the industry in the 3.95-4.40 range. 2009
Spain will more than halve in 2009 with lower cap
compounded with FIT drop which will lead to lower
IRRs, therefore we expect deceleration of the
market. SunPower and QCells are highlighting
Italy as the next Spain, but politics and
bureaucracy have plagued PV thus far. If the ITC
passes in the Energy Bill, US demand could pick
up, but ASPs will be challenged. If ITC is
delayed, we could see a very soft start to 2009.
Likely average ASPs in the 3.50-4.00 range.
2010 US likely a leading market, China and
India?, Thin Film more pervasive. Emergence of
the solar service provider (SunEdison, etc.),
oversupply could be more pronounced
9
Our View from the Capital Markets What is on
Investors Minds?
  • Main investor concerns
  • Commodity Risk Solar is rapidly commoditizing
    with several new entrants offering an
    undifferentiated product. When will the price of
    polysilicon fall and what will the ultimate
    clearing price be?
  • Demand Risk The last 2 years have been driven
    by favorable subsidies by Spain and Germany with
    those markets expected to slow who will fuel the
    growth in 2009?
  • Supply Risk Excess returns created by favorable
    government programs and tight supply of
    polysilicon have pushed many new players into the
    solar field, especially in China. When these
    players are no longer restricted by the
    polysilicon shortage how much will they produce?
    Will think film startups hit their aggressive
    goals? Where will all the supply go? At what
    price?
  • Cloudy profit picture Unstable polysilicon
    prices and uncertain module prices coupled with
    relatively short operating history leave
    investors guessing as to the long run business
    models in the solar space.
  • Credit Risk Tight credit markets are pushing
    out project timelines and internal hurdle rates
    for system owners are increasing as appetite for
    risk decreases. LIBOR has increased gt200bps from
    end of August, prompting further fears of module
    price erosion to make up for increased borrowing
    costs.

10
Solar Cheat Sheet
11
Solar Supply Chain Overview
More of a matter of when than if, we believe
when more polysilicon comes into the market the
commoditization of the solar module will
accelerate, compressing margins in the middle of
the supply chain while benefiting the integrators
and installers with scale and brand recognition
and the equipment producers which enable more
efficient production at the cell and module
level.
Source SunPower and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
Limited Players High Barriers to Entry Capex
Intensive - 500 mil - 1 bn High margins
Numerous Players Low Barriers to Entry lt50
million gets you into business
  • Most loss of polysilicon occurs in the sawing
    process to make wafers known as kerf loss.
  • Polysilicon, Ingot, and Wafer is becoming
    vertically integrated.
  • RD focus surrounding less polysilicon
    consumption via thinner wafers and greater
    efficiencies.
  • Multiple Players Suntech and SunPower as well
    as 100 others
  • 45 of the COGS of a solar module is in the
    polysilicon.
  • High barriers to entry, rising prices and
    margins.
  • Limited Players MEMC, Wacker, REC, DC Chemical
    and Hemlock

12
Composition of Total Installed Cost per Watt
U.S. Residential/Small CI
Source Wall Street Journal and Thomas Weisel
Partners LLC estimates
13
Polysilicon continues to be main bottleneck
  • We estimate Polysilicon will make up 45 of the
    cost of a traditional solar cell in 2008.
    Investors have been focused on if and when new
    supplies will come online to reduce overall
    module cost and what the implications of that
    will be.
  • Spot market prices have been reported as high as
    400/kg recently.
  • New polysilicon entrants need to price at an
    average of 60 or more to make up cost of
    capital so silicon prices will remain well above
    long-term equilibrium levels.
  • Worries in polysilicon have moved to thin film
    production before full scale production has begun
    as investors question availability of Indium and
    Tellurium.

Source Company reports and Thomas Weisel
Partners Estimates
14
Polysilicon Supply
Source Solarbuzz, Photon International, company
reports, and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
15
Polysilicon Supply Who Are These New Entrants?
16
Metallurgical Silicon Part of the Mix but Higher
Long-term Cost Structure As Polysilicon Prices
Ease Below 70 per kg
  • Cons
  • Both CSIQ and QCE are using custom ingot machines
    crystallization technique is not standard given
    high parts per million of boron and phosphorous.
    Expensive custom equipment is not what we need
    for an effective mass produced industry striving
    for low costs.
  • Efficiencies by Timminco are reported in the
    11-14 range, QCells is indicating 15.
  • Carrier lifetime does anyone know how long
    these cells will really last?
  • Pros
  • Cheap to add capacity 10 to 20 of the cost of
    polysilicon.
  • Production costs are half of polysilicon less
    energy intensive.

17
Major Plans for Poly Production Announced, But
Where Will All The Funding Come From? Do They
Know What They Are Doing?
  • The last 12-18 months large numbers of capacity
    announcements, especially from China.
  • Chinese government giving free or nearly free
    electricity to many polysilicon producers, saving
    8-12 per kg of cost.
  • Key risk is where and when TCS production will
    ramp up. Siberians are keeping more of it for
    themselves Hoku admitted defeat and asked
    Suntech to bring their own.
  • There are 60 proposed polysilicon plants, of
    which 25-30 have broken ground.
  • A conservative estimate of announced new Chinese
    capacity coming online by 2010 is 100,000 metric
    tons this implies capex of about 8-10bn.
  • New entrants are shooting for an avg. price of
    about 60-65 per kg.
  • Some choosing flat rate pricing (Hoku).
  • Most choosing aggressive slope downward
    (Chinese).

Quote from New Chinese Polysilicon Producer
Polysilicon production is half art, half
science. We have no artists.
18
Polysilicon Production Process
  • What Do I Need To Manufacture My Own Polysilicon?
  • Investment Capital - 100,000 per MT Typically
    100 million to 600 million per plant.
  • Feedstock Gas Extraordinary high purity levels
    demands high level of technology and
    construction experience.
  • Reactor Technology Decompose gas to solid,
    while maintaining purity levels needs tight
    operational controls.
  • May are trying, the question is how many will
    succeed. There have been no new entrants in the
    market since 1985.
  • Fluidized Bed Reactor (FBR) process has 3 major
    advantages
  • Low cost of production 25 vs. 30-35 per kg due
    to less energy use. Production process gets up
    to 1,600 C in Siemens and 600 C in FBR.
  • Higher purity levels less boron and phosphorous
  • Smaller size allows for maximization of crucible

Source GT Solar
MEMC is about 75 FBR and 25 Siemens, REC and
Wacker are trying to enter the FBR market. REC
recently acknowledged that costs for FBR plant
are running over budget.
19
Thomas Weisel PV Supply/Demand Model
Oversupply likely to happen in 2009 but likely
to be priced in much sooner as high growth and
lofty multiples force investors to look further
into the future
Source Solarbuzz, Photon International, company
reports, and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
20
Upcoming regulatory changes in key markets create
demand and pricing uncertainty exiting 2008
  • Germany
  • 40 of the market, slow start to 2008 though
    because all modules are flowing into Spain.
  • Strong demand expected to year-end as customers
    are rushing to connect PV systems to the grid
    before 2009 reductions.
  • Lower house of parliament in June 2008 approved
    8 FIT decline for rooftop installations in 2009
    and 2010. For ground mount, the FIT decline is
    10 in 2009 and 2010. From 2011, degression for
    all systems is 9 /- 1. Existing 0.05/kWh
    bonus for BIPV eliminated. Final vote in upper
    parliament is pending.
  • Module pricing would need to come down by 9-10
    to maintain IRRs.
  • Spain
  • Spain was the story of 2007 and 2008, emerging
    from the woodwork with improved legislation that
    included a very rich FIT of 44 cents per kWh
    enabling IRRs in the region of 15. Over 1500
    MW currently hooked up to the grid today.
  • Bonanza of demand ahead of September 29th
    deadline before new FIT 29-31 cents for ground
    mount kicks in. On track to complete over 1200MW
    in 2008.
  • Spain is set to more than halve in 2009 with new
    500MW cap.
  • Module pricing would need to come in by 45-50 to
    maintain current IRRs of 15. However, we
    believe a 15-20 decline in pricing is more
    reasonable, bringing down systems IRRs to a more
    normalized 10.
  • United States
  • The U.S. does not follow a performance-based FIT
    system like Europe, rather provides a one-time
    federal tax incentive of 30 of installed cost,
    uncapped for commercial installations and capped
    at 2,000 for residential.
  • The federal tax credit is scheduled to expire on
    Dec 31, 2008. An extension of the credit
    financed by the roll back of tax breaks to oil
    companies has already been vetoed by the
    President.
  • Commercial installations financed by PPAs have
    been driven primarily by tax credit hungry
    investors with the expiration of the credit fast
    approaching we are seeing a slowdown in activity.
  • California (gt70 of domestic market) with its own
    solar subsidy program is also slowing as state
    performance-based incentives decline in step with
    cumulative installations approved.

21
Overview of Solar Subsidy Programs
  • Solar demand is artificially created due to
    government subsidies. The most popular
    government inducement is called a feed-in
    tariff, in which investors and consumers are
    paid to sell power generated to the local
    electric utility at predetermined rates per watt.
  • We are most excited about Spain, Greece, and
    Italy. We note that Spains annual cap is very
    low and will need to be lifted in the next 12-18
    months for the industry to continue to succeed
    there.

Source Schott Solar
22
Where Will All The Demand Come From?
Source Thomas Weisel Partners Estimates
23
In the U.S. State Renewable Portfolio Standards
(RPS) Help Drive Renewable Energy Adoption In
Addition To Federal Tax Incentives
Source Interstate Renewable Energy Council
24
March to Grid Parity Solar Already At Grid
Parity Depending on Definition of Grid Parity and
Seasonal and Time of Use Rates
Grid Parity On a Levelized Cost of Energy Basis
Source Thomas Weisel Partners LLC estimates
So What is the Cost of Each Type of Generation
For New Generating Assets?
25
East Coast and West Coast Showing Greatest Energy
Cost Increases Future Key Markets for Solar
Evolving
Source Electric Power Monthly, DOE/EIA-0226 and
Electric Power Annual, DOE/EIA-0346
26
Solar is Already Cost Competitive in Some States
Today, And Will Be in More as Energy Prices
Increase Nationwide
  • Applying conservative 4.7 inflationary rate
    (same as increase in national retail rates from
    2002-07 per EIA), average US electricity prices
    will reach 16 c/kWh by 2015
  • Rates in some states will be higher, with CT
    electricity prices forecast to reach 27 c/kWh in
    2015 by the same logic

c/kWh
Year
Estimates
27
2007 U.S. Residential PV and Electricity Price
Differences (with existing incentives)
Currently PV is financially competitive where
there is some combination of high electricity
prices, excellent sunshine and/or state/local
incentives.
28
Power Generation Continues to Get More Expensive
Recent Rate Increases California 39 since
2000 Colorado 20 in 2007 Connecticut 50
since 2004 Delaware 59 increase in 2006 Hawaii
100 since 2002 Maryland 85 through
2008 Massachusetts 40 since 2004 Nevada
25 since 2003 New Jersey 35 in 2007 New
York 44 since 2001 Texas 75 since
2000 Virginia 30 increase in 2006 Source
SunEdison
Increases in the price and volatility of fossil
fuels continue to force utilities to raise rates
29
PPA driving commercial installations in U.S., but
expiry of federal tax credit a near-term overhang
  • Buy solar power, not the system PPAs remove the
    risk of installing a complicated, capital and
    time intensive solar system and the risk to the
    end user of actual power generated being less
    than expected. We expect the majority of
    commercial systems in the US to be installed in
    the future under some type of PPA.
  • In a PPA, a third party institutional investor
    group driven by an appetite for tax credits as
    well as IRR, finances the solar installation and
    maintenance and sells the power generated under a
    long-term, fixed price contract (pricing is
    generally competitive with grid power). The
    purchaser of power simply agrees to the use of
    their rooftop or land to host the solar system.
  • The PPA (power purchase agreement) financing
    model generally applied to traditional sources of
    energy, presents an alternative to direct
    ownership of a solar installation, and has caught
    on in a big way in the U.S, driven by the federal
    investment tax credit (30 of installed cost for
    CI). Eg SunPower has secured a 190mn credit
    facility from Morgan Stanley to finance future
    installations.
  • Equity investors are typically looking for IRRs
    in the 8-12 range while debt investors are
    looking for a solid credit profile and yields in
    the LIBOR2.75-3.75 range.
  • Sweet spot of market is big box retailers.
    Publicized announcements include Costco, Kohls,
    Macys, Safeway, Staples, Wal-Mart.
  • Expiration of investment tax credit at the end of
    the year poses a significant risk to commercial
    installations in the U.S. driven by PPAs. We are
    already seeing signs of a slowdown.

30
PV Cell Manufacturers Multiple Players,
Utilization Rates Low
  • Barriers to entry in cell manufacturing business
    are low, resulting in a more segmented market.
  • Number of competing firms has been increasing
    rapidly, as capital requirements are not
    prohibitive and financing for companies leveraged
    to the solar industry is abundant.
  • Any time companies that currently make 6-8 gross
    margins (Taiwanese PCB makers) enter your market
    and capital equipment is cheap and easy to add.
  • Equipment utilization rates are running at
    alarmingly low levels due to low barriers to
    entry and the silicon shortage.

Source PV News, Solarbuzz, and Thomas Weisel
Partners LLC
Source Solarbuzz and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
31
Rapid Commoditization Low Cost and High Quality
Key Cell/Module Makers Get Squeezed
  • The solar panel is going the way of mass produced
    electronics equipment (DRAM, disk drives)
    distinguishable only on marginally better
    technology and reliability of the brand.
  • Low cost producers with integrated business
    models will fend off margin degradation.
  • Asian producers with their low cost models will
    ultimately win market share race but they are
    likely to sacrifice margins along the way as they
    have proven they are willing to do in the past
  • Cell/Module gross margins will trend toward
    10-12 despite declining silicon costs in 2009.
  • Combined, China and Taiwan go from roughly 23
    market share in 2006 to 41 by YE 2007.

?

Source PV News and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
32
Overview of Major Steps in Making a Solar Cell
  • It typically takes between 1.5 hours to 6 hours
    for a wafer to be converted to a finished module
    depending on the level of automation and inline
    metrology. Most players we have spoken to are
    aiming to produce between 2,400-3,000 cells per
    hour with many facilities still producing 1,500
    cells per hour.
  • Wafers are the initial product needed in the
    multi-step process of producing solar cells based
    on silicon wafers. Silicon based solar cells
    made up about 93 of the total industry supply
    last year so this method is most prevalent.
    Before a wafer can be used, it must be tested to
    make sure that it can proceed with the solar cell
    production process. Wafers that are cracked,
    chipped, or have too much content of boron are
    typically rejected.
  • In the first production step, damage to the wafer
    that is a result of the sawing process is removed
    using a wet chemical etching process. After
    etching, the wafers are then cleaned using
    another wet chemical process and then dried. For
    the most part, the etching and cleaning is
    automated however we have seen some Chinese
    facilities performing the cleaning part by hand,
    which can be quite dangerous to employees.
  • Phosphorous diffusion is the step performed next
    once a wafer has been cleaned and dried. In this
    step, the wafer is placed in a furnace and
    exposed to a gas containing phosphorous. The
    temperature inside the furnace gets up to 900C as
    oxygen is added, which causes a phosphorous oxide
    layer to form on the surface of the wafer inside
    the vacuum. Depending on the length of time the
    wafer is inside the diffusion vacuum and the
    temperature, the phosphorous diffuses into the
    silicon wafer at varying depths. An electrical
    field is formed within the wafer at the boundary
    of the areas within the wafer that contain
    phosphorous and the area that is without
    phosphorous atoms. It is this field that
    generates the electrical current within the wafer
    as it is exposed to sunlight.
  • The subsequent step is referred to as edge
    isolation, in which the electrical connection
    between the front and backside of the wafer is
    broken. It is at this point that the remaining
    phosphorous that remains on the wafer is removed
    with a wet chemical process. This phosphorous on
    the edge is referred to as phosphorous silicate.
    In addition, companies we spoke with cited the
    need for more inline metrology in this step to
    assure the homogeneity of the coating layer and
    assure there are no finger prints or water stains
    on the wafer.
  • After the edge isolation and wet chemical process
    to remove the phosphorous silicate, an anti
    reflective coating (AR Coating) is applied to the
    front of the wafer to reduce reflectivity of the
    solar cell and improve electrical properties on
    the surface of the wafer. This is a key step in
    improving efficiency of the solar cell.
  • After the AR Coating is applied to the wafer, the
    screen printing, or metallization process begins,
    by applying thin metal connectors on the front of
    the wafer. These metal connectors, typically
    silver, are referred to as fingers. The
    fingers go across the wafer horizontally and
    larger vertical connectors called bus bands
    connect the fingers together. Typically there
    are two fatter bus bars per wafer however, some
    wafers contain three. Bus bars are also applied
    to the back of the wafer with a paste and then
    another printing step is performed with aluminum
    as well. After these printings, the wafer is
    dried in an oven. Once the wafer is completely
    dried out, a great deal of heat is applied to the
    contacts to sinter them into the wafer to fully
    connect them to the silicon in the wafer. These
    contacts are used to extract the electrical
    current from inside the wafer and connect them to
    the fingers so that it can be connected to other
    cells and laminated to make a complete module.
    Before a module can be made, the cells must be
    tested and sorted to determine their output so
    that the modules have cells with similar levels
    of efficiency.

33
Opportunity Lies in the Companies that are
Enabling Commoditization Equipment
  • Equipment typically makes up about 65-70 of the
    capex budget for cell/module producers.
  • The race to 1 GW of capacity by 2009 is leading
    to a bonanza for equipment companies.
  • Typical lead times remain in the 12-18 month
    range, with most industry participants telling us
    that down payments are 30-40
  • Capex per watt for traditional silicon ingot,
    wafer, cells and modules is about 1.00-1.20 per
    watt.
  • Currently there is roughly 7 GW of cell
    production supply globally, with estimates of
    2010 demand ranging from 7 GW on the low end to
    23 GW on the high end. We believe demand will be
    in the 10 GW range.
  • Systems today are cobbled together with multiple
    suppliers but turnkey lines are becoming more
    pervasive as new players enter the market that
    know nothing about solar (Moser Baer, PCB players
    in Taiwan).
  • There are very few publicly traded equities in
    the solar capital equipment segment to date. With
    only a handful already public (Meyer Burger,
    Centrotherm, Roth Rau, Manz Automation, BTU
    International, etc.), we expect a great deal of
    equity issuances in the segment over the next
    12-18 months as many players capitalize on the
    near-term surge in demand. Traditional semi
    players are looking for a solar angle as well.

Source Thomas Weisel Partners
Source Prometheus Institute
34
Solar Equipment Supply Chain (Capex Assumes 300
MW Plant)
Silicon Manufacturing
TCS Production
Capital Expenditure 450 M
Silicon Reactors
Filament Production
STC Converters
Product Handling
Off Gas Recovery
  • Degusssa
  • LX Engrg
  • SCC
  • GT Solar
  • MSA
  • PPP
  • Solmic
  • Beijing Design
  • CDI
  • GT Solar
  • MSA
  • PPP
  • GT Solar
  • Solmic
  • GT Solar

Wafer Manufacturing
Capital Expenditure 270 M
Inspection Sorting
Feed Stock Prep
Wafer Cleaning
Slurry Recovery
Ingot Growth
Wafering
Sectioning
  • GT OEM
  • ALD
  • Crystalox
  • PVA Tepla
  • JFE
  • Daichi
  • Chinese Cos.
  • HCT
  • MeyerBurger
  • HCT
  • MeyerBurger
  • Manz
  • Henneke
  • GT OEM
  • GT OEM
  • Rena
  • GT Solar
  • HCT
  • SiC

Cell Manufacturing
Capital Expenditure 180 M
Incoming Wafer Inspection
Nitride Deposition
Oxide Etching
Sintering (Firing)
Edge Isolation
Testing Sorting
Screen Printing
Diffusion
Etching
  • Baccini
  • Asys
  • BTU
  • Despatch
  • RTC
  • Centrotherm
  • SierraTherm
  • Baccini
  • GT Solar
  • Manz
  • Baccini
  • OTB
  • Spire
  • BTU
  • Despatch
  • Centrotherm
  • SierraTherm
  • Amtech
  • Rena
  • Stangl
  • Schmid
  • RothRau
  • Semco
  • Centrotherm
  • Applied Films
  • Amtech
  • Rena
  • Stangl
  • Schmid
  • Manz
  • Rena

Module Manufacturing
Capital Expenditure 90 M
Incoming Cell Inspection
Tabbing Stringing
Assembly
Lamination
Prep
Testing
  • Meier
  • Spire
  • NPC
  • 3S
  • Rena
  • Stangl
  • Schmid
  • Rena
  • Stangl
  • Schmid
  • Misc. Players
  • Somot
  • T-Technik

35
Energy Efficiency / Demand Response Industry
The power grid is under-invested and likely to
remain so in the foreseeable future with
electricity demand outgrowing investment in
supply. Demand Response and Energy Efficiency
are solutions
A cheaper, quicker and green alternative to
building new capacity is Demand Response i.e. the
curtailment of energy consumption (when requested
by utilities or grid operators) by end-users of
electricity at times of peak demand. Electrical
equipment such as air conditioning, lighting,
motors, etc. can be switched off automatically
through wireless or internet signals, thus
providing virtual capacity in a few minutes. The
demand response aggregator recruits program
participants as an outsourced service provided to
the utility or grid operator, and is paid based
on the capacity committed and/or made available.
The average payout from the utility is 80,000
per megawatt per year. The aggregator shares
50 with the end-user who committed capacity.
Typical contracts with utilities are 3-10 years
with fixed prices and for capacity of 25-150 MWs.
The aggregator recruits participants, installs
the required hardware at the end-user site and is
on standby 24/7 to deploy the committed capacity
when called upon by the utility or grid operator
during a grid event. The aggregator uses a
paging, cellular or radio network to
automatically send signals to shut down
equipment. We view the Commercial and Industrial
(CI) segment of the end-user market as more
lucrative and larger than the Residential segment
it can take 2-3 years to build out capacity in
a residential program, but only 2-3 months for a
CI program since CI end-users can offer much
higher capacity.
Energy Efficiency, creating capacity by never
using it While demand response addresses peak
capacity issues, energy efficiency has the
potential to curb the growing demand for base
load power generation.
On a business as usual case investment in
generation, transmission and distribution assets
to meet required demand is expected to be 10
trillion between 2005 and 2030. Energy
efficiency, especially in buildings, has a chance
to supplant a meaningful proportion of the
projected energy need. Buildings consume 40 of
all energy in the United States and 72 of all
the electricity produced yields 38 of all
carbon dioxide emissions and 36 of all
greenhouse gas emissions and accounts for 80
(or 238 billion) of total U.S. electricity
expenditures. A 5 increase in building
efficiency would translate to roughly 78 billion
kW hours of electricity saved at 2005 levels, or
roughly 5 billion at a national 0.06-0.07 per
kW price. The multidisciplinary nature of the
industry will require products, installers and
services to be effective. In the past, many
consumers have been burned by promises of energy
conservation that resulted in the acceptance of
sub par products such a scenario is unlikely to
play out today. The need to prove energy savings
will also likely lead to the need for whole
building software and metering solutions, a
segment we also feel will grow in the coming
years. So, in this industry, we believe the
companies most likely to succeed are those
offering fully integrated energy solutions that
are able to prove their cost effectiveness
36
Demand Response Snapshot
37
Clean Fuels/Products Industry
-Ethanol Industry-
  • Keys to Watch
  • Producers have had major liquidity issues, a
    continued tight financial market could put
    ethanol producers in jeopardy.
  • Mid-Western flooding had caused concern for the
    corn supply but initial reports from the USDA
    show the situation might not be as dire as
    feared. At this point corn prices should
    continue weaken as we go into the fall.
  • Despite the improving corn costs, expectations
    should be tempered as low ethanol prices and
    infrastructure issues are likely to weigh on the
    stocks until investors get more certain clarity
    on industry dynamics exiting 2008. Cash corn
    prices are set to be well in the 5.00-6.00
    range, which threaten to hurt results. We,
    however, are likely to see industry dynamics
    improving with falling corn costs and look for
    sustained ethanol pricing support to become more
    positive.

The bottom line is the 36bn gal Renewable Fuel
Standard, which includes a very important 9bn gal
biofuel mandate for 2008, is a positive, and we
are cautiously optimistic as to the long-run
viability of the biofuels industry.
On Going Issues In Ethanol
  • Commodity risk. Industry fortunes are tied to two
    volatile commodities, ethanol and corn. These
    factors limit earnings visibility.
  • Minimal IP. Commodity business with minimal
    technology differentiation. We believe
    ultimately results in price pressure and low
    margins.
  • The regulatory uncertainty Government support
    remains key and a new RFS could provides support
    but supply could still outstrip regulated demand.
  • Minimal Visibility Without the ability to see a
    long term price for ethanol, which a roughly 5
    cent move in the price causes a roughly 5-10 cent
    move in EPS, we have minimal visibility into
    2009.
  • The promise of cellulosic ethanol. Improvements
    in enzyme technology are required to meet long
    term ethanol production targets. Developers of
    these enzymes should have strong intellectual
    property position and therefore minimal commodity
    risk. (Most are private companies)

38
Ethanol Basics
Wet-milling Ethanol Production
Dry-Milling Ethanol Production
Source USDA
Source USDA
  • Ethanol is a type of alcohol primarily used as a
    blend component in the U.S. gasoline market.
  • Currently in the U.S. ethanol is primarily made
    from corn. Although a variety of feedstocks for
    ethanol production are under development, most
    production in the U.S. uses corn-based
    technology. Most of the corn supplied to the
    ethanol industry is grown in Illinois, Minnesota,
    Nebraska and South Dakota.
  • Corn is converted to ethanol with either dry or
    wet-milling technology. The primary difference
    between dry milling and wet milling is the
    pretreatment of the corn. In dry milling the
    corn is crushed as opposed to wet milling where
    it is soaked before processing.
  • Dry-milling accounts roughly 3/4 of ethanol
    production capacity and is employed in the
    majority of new production facilities due to
    lower capital costs than wet-milling and a higher
    ethanol yield. Dry-mill production yields roughly
    2.7-2.8 gallons of ethanol and 15-17lbs of dry
    distilled grains (DDGS) at about 150-200/ton
    currently.
  • Wet-milling accounts for roughly 1/4 of
    production capacity (RFA) and has a higher yield
    of co-products and lower ethanol yield. The wet
    milling process has several outputs a bushel of
    corn put through the wet milling process produces
    2.5 gallons of ethanol, 1.5lbs of crude corn oil,
    12.4lbs of gluten feed (livestock feed) and 3lbs
    of gluten meal (poultry feed). All of these
    products have viable markets.

39
US Ethanol Supply/Demand Analysis
  • We expect a more balanced supply/demand situation
    in 2008 as more difficult operating conditions
    (financing and high input prices) will make it
    tough for new entrances to succeed.
  • It now takes in the 100,000-300,000 per day in
    working capital to support the corn requirements
    of a typical corn ethanol plant, start-ups and
    poorly funded plants will have trouble
  • We believe plant shutdowns and delayed/canceled
    construction will accelerate as we move further
    into 2008

Source Company reports, USDA, Ethanol Producer
Mag, DOE, and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
40
Theoretical Ethanol Plant
Fully Depreciated and paid for plants with
longer histories of operation will have an
advantage in this low spread environment,
creating barriers to entry in the industry.
Source Company reports and Thomas Weisel
Partners LLC
41
Clean Fuels/Products Industry
-Clean Coal-
  • Keys to Watch
  • The U.S. air pollution control market is the
    primary driver in Fuel Techs NOx reduction
    technology segment. Domestic policy for coal can
    be traced back to 1970 with the implementation of
    the Clean Air Act. While increased regulation
    can increase the cost and complexity of running a
    coal plant, there are currently minimal viable
    substitutes to switch to that make economic
    sense. We view the current as well as future
    clean coal regulations as major drivers of
    industry growth.

New requirements regarding carbon dioxide,
nitrous oxide and mercury reductions are leading
to an investment in performance improvement,
while being environmentally friendly.
Industry Thesis
  • The United States has the largest coal reserves
    in the world, holding roughly a quarter of global
    supply. Scientists estimate that the United
    States has nearly 200 years worth of supply at
    current run rates. As a result, we do not look
    for coal plants to be shut down any time soon. We
    do, however, expect global policy to require
    capital expenditures to force coal facility
    owners to move to production methodologies that
    emit less pollution. The growth in consumption
    of coal over the last several years has largely
    been due to the rapid growth seen in China and
    India, where the bulk of new capacity additions
    have been coal based.
  • The idea of Clean Coal has been around for
    decades, but costs and lack of technology
    availability led to stagnant growth in the
    industry. As greater regulations enter the fray
    and greater awareness of green house gas
    emissions and global warming become a part of
    doing business, we expect to see a prolonged (a
    very prolonged in fact) upgrade cycle. Utilities
    do not move on a dime we have seen that with
    Fuel Techs quarterly results as well as numerous
    other players focused on both the coal and
    broader utility market. We expect the upgrade of
    coal plants to last five to 10 years, if not much
    longer.

42
Fuel Cell Industry
The fuel cell industry faces many challenges
before full-scale commercialization of the
technology takes place. In our view, cost,
durability, system size and heat recovery are all
areas that need further development and
improvement to make fuel cells a commercial
reality.
  • Keys to Watch
  • In response to increasing grid disruptions and
    the disarray that followed Katrina, the FCC on
    October 3, 2007, issued a ruling that within 12
    months local exchange carriers (LEC) and
    commercial mobile radio (CMR) service providers
    file a certified emergency backup power
    compliance plan that describes how the LECs or
    CMRs provider will supply emergency backup power
    to 100 percent of non complaint assets in the
    event of a commercial grid power failure. A
    minimum of 24 hours of backup power is required
    for assets inside central offices and 8 hours for
    other assets including cell sites, remote
    switches and digital loop carrier system remote
    terminals. It also has a provision that requires
    CMRs and LECs to detail their monitoring of
    backup power capabilities to remain compliant. We
    believe this is a positive to fuel cells as its
    solution shows positive economics versus other
    backup solutions at about five hours. We believe
    this and the forklift market will be the largest
    near term market for fuel cells.
  • Technology validation in the form of large orders

Ongoing Industry Issues
  • Waning enthusiasm Emergence of solar and
    alternative fuel sector has reduced investor
    attention on fuel cells.
  • Long road to Commercialization Still waiting for
    commercial products. Will back up power or fork
    lifts be first markets? The fuel cell industry
    faces multiple challenges that must be overcome
    before full scale commercialization of the
    technology takes place.
  • Burn Fuel cells companies still burning cash
    and some may run out in 07
  • Valuation Very difficult to value.
  • Technology not there yet In our view, cost,
    durability, system size, and heat recovery are
    all areas that need further development and
    improvement to make fuel cells a commercial
    reality.
  • Efficient Hydrogen Production still needed To
    truly create pollution-free fuel cells, hydrogen
    must be produced by renewable means and will
    likely take many years before reaching cost
    competitiveness. Hydrogen today for fuel cells
    uses more electricity than it saves.

43
Fuel Cell Basics
A fuel cell is an electrochemical device that
converts chemical energy directly into electrical
energy. Electricity is generated through a
reaction in which oxygen and hydrogen combine to
form water, along with heat that can be recovered
and used. A fuel cell is composed of three
primary components a fuel electrode (the anode),
an oxidant electrode (the cathode), and an
electrolyte in between the two electrodes. When
hydrogen reaches the anode, an electrochemical
reaction takes places, splitting the hydrogen
molecules into protons and electrons. The
protons can pass through the electrolyte, while
the electrons are forced through an external
circuit, allowing the energy to be captured as
electricity. The protons and electrons rejoin at
the cathode, where they react with oxygen to form
water.
Individual Fuel Cell
Source htttp//www.wikipedia.com
Source htttp//www.wikipedia.com
44
Fuel Cells Snapshot
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com