REC TRADE RESULTS OCTOBER 2017

Non-solar demand was significantly higher than in October 2016, and also higher than last month. In total 4.87 lakh RECs were traded (90.78% higher than October 2016, and 27.51% higher than in September 2017), and clearing ratios on IEX and PXIL were 4.5% and 3.3% respectively. Solar RECs did not trade due to a stay imposed by the Supreme Court.

 

VALIDITY OF RECS WHICH WERE ABOUT TO GET EXPIRED BETWEEN OCTOBER ’17 AND MARCH ’18 GETS EXTENDED BY SIX MONTHS

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has in its order dated 29/08/2017, declared that those Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) which were expiring between 1st October 2017 and 31st March 2018 are now going to remain valid till 31st March 2018. In its order dated 30th March 2017, the commission had extended the validity of RECs which were going to expire between 1st April 2017 to 30th September 2017 till 31st March 2018.

 

The order  can be accessed here.

REC TRADE RESULTS SEPTEMBER 2017

Non-solar demand was significantly higher than in September 2016, and also higher than last month. In total 3.82 lakh RECs were traded (47.56% higher than September 2016, and 32% higher than in August 2017), and clearing ratios on IEX and PXIL were 3.56% and 2.36% respectively.

Overall, for the six months ended September, Non-solar demand is up by 11% compared to the same period last year. Solar demand is up by 27% despite reading only in April this year. Since then, trading has been suspended due to the stay imposed by the Supreme Court.

 

REC TRADE RESULT AUGUST 2017

Supreme Court allowed conditional trading of Non-solar RECs in an order dated July 14, 2017 . Demand was expected to be low for two reasons – 1) obligated entities are required to pay at old RECs rate (Rs 1500/ REC); and 2) compliance is required to be done by March to obligated entities have enough time to comply even after the final order of Aptel is received.

This is the second month when trading has taken place after CERC allowed conditional trading of Non-Solar RECs but the demand was not as robust as last time .

Non-solar demand was marginally higher than in August 2016 , and significantly lower than last month. In total 2.89 lakh RECs were traded (11.83 % higher than August 2016), and clearing ratios on IEX and PXIL were 1.05% and 4.96% respectively.


Solar RECs were not traded as the stay imposed by the Supreme Court remains in force in the case of Solar RECs.

CERC REJECTS IEX’S PROPOSAL FOR GDAM

The Indian Energy Exchange (IEX), so as to provide the obligated entities more number of ways to fulfill their RPO compliance, had proposed to the CERC to allow the existing renewable energy generators to trade RE on IEX.

 

For the same, it had proposed that the following contracts including Green Day Ahead Market (G-DAM) which includes Solar and non-solar day ahead market be introduced. If the bid made in the G-DAM is not cleared or cleared partially, they can bid in DAM. Also, in lieu of the bid cleared in DAM, the seller will get equal number of RECs.

This order was rejected by the CERC and the following reasons were given for the same:

  • As per CERC, the status regarding the availability of surplus power is not clear. Also, based on the experiences in the past, it can be established that such trade will not lead to addition of new RE capacity.

  • The IEX has supposed that there are no discrepancies in the forecasting and scheduling for RE generators which is not the case. Therefore, their suggestions of remove the need for revision flexibility during the day is not valid.

  • Based on the suggestions of IEX which mentioned that in case if the bid made in the G-DAM is not cleared or cleared partially, they can bid in DAM, it can be assumed that the situation will lead to registration of RE sellers for FIT route as well as REC mechanism. This will demand that a system be established where there is proper accreditation, registration, accounting of RE generation and settlement mechanism.

  • The G-DAM market may dissuade the buyers from entering into long term contracts which provide comfort to RE investors.

  • The guidelines related to the timelines for scheduling of power traded will have to be amended as per IEX which the commission felt will be an unnecessary step right now.

  • IEXs recommendations assume that the the green power traded in G-DAM will follow the same scheduling procedure as that followed by conventional power. Therefore, the commission feels that there is no need to introduce a separate segment for trading.

The order can be accessed here.

REC TRADE RESULT JULY 2017

Supreme Court allowed conditional trading of Non-solar RECs on July 14, 2017 (our blog on the same can be accessed here). Demand was expected to be low for two reasons – 1) obligated entities are required to pay at old RECs rate (Rs 1500/ REC); and 2) compliance is required to be done by March to obligated entities have enough time to comply even after the final order of Aptel is received.

However, demand for Non-solar RECs was robust. In total 4.95 lakh RECs were bought (110.76 % higher than July 2016), and clearing ratios on IEX and PXIL were 4.31% and 3.52% respectively. Higher demand was primarily driven by demand for some utilities where state regulators had given RPO enforcement orders in recent months.

Solar RECs were not traded as the stay imposed by the Supreme Court remains in force in the case of Solar RECs.

SUPREME COURT ALLOWS CONDITIONAL TRADING FOR NON SOLAR RECs

The matter of CERC’s order on new RECs pricing and the stay granted by the SC on trading, another  hearing was held in Supreme Court on 14th July 2017.

 

Main highlights of the Order:

 

  • An Intervention appeal was filed  requesting  obligated entities to purchase RECs at previous prices i.e. Rs 1500/ REC (MWH) with the additional amount deposited with the CERC

 

  • The Supreme Court allowed this, and directed that the differential price (Rs 500/REC) i.e. between the earlier floor price (Rs 1500/REC) and the present Floor Price(Rs 1000/REC) to be held by CERC during the pendency of the matter with Appellate Tribunal

 

  • Therefore, stay on the REC Trading (only for Non Solar RECs) have been withdrawn by Supreme Court and trade is likely to start. However, we believe that it will be some time before trading can start as CERC will have to develop modalities to accept such a deposit.

 

  • The stay on Solar RECs trading remains in place, and the hearing on that matter will be held  in due course

 

Today (17/July/17) the Appellate Tribunal was due to hear the above matter, but it has been postponed to a later date.

 

Implications of the SC order:

 

  • Trading will resume in the case of Non-solar RECs, but will remain suspended in the case of Solar RECs. However, we believe that it will be some time before trading can start as CERC will have to develop modalities to accept such a deposit.

 

  • Despite the start of trading, it is very unlikely that any meaningful demand for Non-solar RECs will materialise. Given the lack of any pressure to comply with RPOs, it is unlikely that any obligated entity will spend a higher amount while the matter is still sub-judice in the ApTel.

The SCs order can be accessed here

Our previous analysis of the order on stay of REC trading can be accessed here

 

An article, covering the order was published Business Standard. REConnect was quoted in the article suggesting that ““Trading will resume in the case of Non-solar RECs, but will remain suspended in the case of Solar RECs. However, we believe that it will be some time before trading can start as CERC will have to develop modalities to accept such a deposit”.

SUPREME COURT ORDERS STAY ON REC TRADING

After the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission’s (CERC) order dated 30th March 2017 on reduction of prices for RECs, many REC-generating companies had filed petitions stating that they had incurred a loss as vintage multiplier was not provided. They had first gone to Appellate Tribunal of Electricity (APTEL) to suggest a way to clear the existing REC stock. While the APTEL agreed to introduce a vintage multiplier, it refused to put a stay on the trading.  When the petition was taken to the supreme court, it not only put a stay on the trading, it has also stayed the new price regime which was introduced by the CERC.

 

The Business Standard article covering the same can be accessed here.

Our blog covering the reduction in the REC prices and our analysis of the same can be accessed here.

REC TRADE RESULTS MARCH 2017:

March trading results were far better than anticipated considering the recent CERC order on revised floor and forbearance prices. The March trade session remained a robust one. Total Non-solar demand was 8.88 lakhs (vs 10.4 L demand in February), and clearing ratios on IEX and PXIL were 6.11% and 9.6% respectively. For the full year FY 16-17, total RECs sold were 59.3 lakh as compared to 43 lakhs last year – an increase of almost 37.7%. This was the last trading session of FY 16-17.

 

Total solar demand was 1.43 lakhs, and the clearing ratio in IEX and PXIL were 2.90% and 2.74% respectively (Feb 2017 demand was 49,544). For the full year FY 16-17, total RECs sold were 5.5 lakh as compared to 6.4 lakhs last year – a decrease of almost 14.06%.

Non Solar – The clearing ratio stood at 6.11% and 9.6% in both IEX and PXIL respectively.

Solar – Clearing ratio stood at 2.90% and 2.74% in IEX and PXIL respectively.

 

NEW FORBEARANCE AND FLOOR PRICE FOR REC FRAMEWORK:

Summary:

  • The Honorable CERC published the final order on revised price bands for RECs which will be valid from April 1, 2017 onwards.

  • The new floor and forbearance prices are given below

 

  • This represents a drastic reduction of 71% for Solar RECs, and 33% for non-solar RECs

  • Existing inventory of RECs will not be given vintage multiplier

  • RECs that were at the verge of expiry have been given an extension
Impact on the market:

Immediate impact:

  • Overall, existing RECs projects will take a loss of Rs 1,866 crore due to reduction in the value of existing REC inventory. This represents roughly 50% of the total value of RECs. With such a significant loss, it is likely that several projects will become NPAs.

  • Reduced trading in March 31 trade session – generally, the March trading session sees high trading volumes as it is the last trading session of the compliance period. However, with the prospect of significant saving by trading in April, many obligated entities are likely to postpone trading to the next month.

Infact, this has been acknowledged and even allowed by a state regulator. See relevant order for allowing postponing of trading to an obligated entity here – http://www.mercindia.org.in/pdf/Order%2058%2042/DO-35%20of%202017-16032017.pdf

 

Long-term impact:

  • Potential (marginal) higher demand going forward – RECs prices have come down to such an extent that most captive and open access based consumers are likely to find buying RECs cheaper way of meeting RPO than buying green power. This may also apply in the case of several Discom’s, particularly in states that are power surplus. These low prices may therefore result in increase in demand of RECs.

However, it must be kept in mind that REC price reduction is always beneficial to the Obligated entities which are non-compliant as they will have an option to purchase RECs and fulfill their RPO compliance at lower prices whereas Obligated Entities who have been regularly meeting their RPO compliance will have incurred significantly higher cost. Therefore, a regularly reducing floor price actually incentivises postponing purchase of RECs, rather than meeting RPO.

Without strict enforcement and any risk of penalty, Obligated entities still have no incentive to comply. We believe that RECs demand will increase, but only to a very limited extent, as most obligated entities still don’t face any reason to comply with RPO at all.

The previous order can be accessed here and our analysis of the same can be found here.

Go to top