In September 2018, now-outgoing California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB100: a mandate to keep California on a path to deriving 100% of its power from clean sources by 2045. In an article for Utility Dive, S&P Global Ratings’ Michael Ferguson explains how this may mean significant credit implications for the state’s power generators.
Undeniably, SB100 is a boon for renewable energy assets in California. But it’s a mistake to consider these benefits to be mutually interchangeable — instead some assets stand to benefit more than others.
Ferguson writes: “While SB100 will naturally benefit existing solar and wind power, less obvious is by how much and when. Both asset types represent most renewable installations in the Golden State. Yet they are by no means immune from risk.”
Read the article here.
On the recent November ballot, Colorado’s citizens voted against measures that would have changed the nature of the state’s oil and gas development. Before the vote’s defeat, S&P Global Ratings published a report outlining the possible risks for energy exploration and production (E&P) companies, should the proposal be made law.
Proposition 112 would have required that E&P companies extend well setbacks (the permissible distance between a wellhead and surrounding structures) from 500 feet to 2,500 feet. This distance would have, in effect, rendered 85% of the state unusable for oil and gas drilling. By some estimates, this could have decreased the state’s GDP by some US$26 billion annually by 2030.
Michael Grande, director, S&P Global Ratings, said: “Passage of Proposition 112 is clearly a credit negative for the energy companies we rate, and it will affect some companies more than others.”
Following Moorgate’s outreach, Upstream (behind a paywall), Oil Voice, and Oil Gas Journal covered the news.