12 August 2014 H2 2014 APAC LCOE UPDATE A race between renewable penetration and fuel prices Maggie Kuang
A NOTE ON BNEF S EXPANDING LCOE UNIVERSE BNEF introduces a new, expanded and more regional approach to providing clients with levelised cost of electricity (LCOE), project economics and cost data. What was once a global outlook will become a semiannual series of six LCOE notes, available through the Energy Economics Dashboard Note Overview Who gets it? Global AMER APAC EMEA Wind PV Global time series data on our Central LCOE cases, broken down by technology for 19 renewable energy technologies, plus three fossil technologies and nuclear Underlying data provided for global high, central and low scenarios Country-specific analysis of LCOEs of key fossil & renewable technologies across the US, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Peru and the Dominican Republic In-depth views of onshore wind and PV for key US states and Canadian provinces Country-specific analysis of LCOEs of key fossil & renewable technologies across China, Japan, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines Country-level comparisons of LCOEs to local renewable energy tariffs Country-specific analysis of LCOEs for key technologies across the UK, France, Germany, Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Turkey Estonia, Sweden and Poland In-depth views of German and UK markets Onshore wind analysis for over 30 countries with look at key technology cost drivers plus a view of the European offshore wind market Regional-level summaries of key LCOE trends PV cost analysis for nearly 30 key markets with look at key technology cost drivers Regional-level summaries of key LCOE trends All subscribers Subscribers to our AMER, Latin America, BNEF All and All Renewables services Subscribers to our APAC, Australia, BNEF All and All Renewables services Subscribers to our EMEA, BNEF All and All Renewables services Subscribers to our Wind, BNEF All and All Renewables services Subscribers to our Solar, BNEF All and All Renewables services 1
LEVELISED COST OF ELECTRICITY: METHODOLOGY NOTES (1 OF 2) Definition The Bloomberg New Energy Finance definition of levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) is the long-term offtake price required to achieve a required equity hurdle rate for the project. This report tracks the LCOEs of 24 technologies, all at utility-scale. The LCOE model is based on a pro-forma project finance schedule which runs through the full accounting of the project, based on a set of project inputs. This allows us to capture the impact on costs of the timing of cash flows, development and construction costs, multiple stages of financing, interest and tax implications of long-term debt instruments and depreciation, among other drivers. The outputs of the model include sponsor equity cash flows, allowing calculation of the internal rate of return. LCOE ranges driven by regional variations Where possible the LCOEs are given as a range, composed of a number of specific scenarios, with inputs corresponding to projects typical of those markets and technologies. Our global central scenario is made up of a blend of inputs from competitive projects in mature markets. For example, in the case of a global PV range, the low scenario corresponds to a typical Chinese project (including capex, capacity factors, and costs of debt typical in China); the high scenario corresponds to a Japanese project (capex, capacity factor, cost of debt typical in Japan); and the central scenario reflects the LCOE of a project with German capex, a capacity factor that is roughly at the global average, and a Western European average cost of debt. The central scenario thus does not reflect a project characteristic of any particular market, but rather incorporates a blend of inputs from a range of competitive and active markets. Because we have used this methodology consistently since 2009, the central scenario can be used to show how these costs of these technologies have evolved over time. Empirical data sourcing For the most competitive PV and onshore wind markets, we use proprietary price indexes to build bottom-up capex assumptions, paired with region-specific data for financing, macroeconomics, and resource quality. For example, for UK onshore wind, we derive the LCOE using the BNEF Wind Turbine Price Index for the UK, along with operations and maintenance (O&M) figures from our Wind O&M Index. The full capex also accounts for regional permitting and land acquisition costs. For PV and onshore wind projects in less competitive markets, and for all other technologies, we use a combination of reported project-level costs (as captured in our Industry Intelligence database), local input from our regional analysts, and data from publicly available primary research. 2
LEVELISED COST OF ELECTRICITY: METHODOLOGY NOTES (2 OF 2) Exclusion of subsidies Except where specified otherwise the LCOEs shown in this report represent the gross cost of building, operating and financing electricity generation technologies. As such the analysis excludes all subsidies and incentives (eg accelerated depreciation, grants, production tax credits) but includes conventional taxes such as corporation tax. This approach enables a direct comparison of the cost of generating electricity from different sources. These LCOEs are therefore from the price at which a developer may wish to sell the electricity, as the sale price would be net of any subsidies. Lumpy nature of certain technologies While cost evolutions can be tracked consistently for widely deployed technologies such as PV and onshore wind creating a coherent time series this may not be the case for other less mature technologies such as solar thermal and marine. Heavy dependency on support mechanisms and highly localised costs means that central scenarios reflecting current costs for these projects may move erratically as the geographic centres of deployment shift over time. Macroeconomics and universal assumptions For each individual country scenario, we apply the market s standard corporate tax rate and an inflation rate equal to the average of the IMF s forecasted CPI rate for that country, or the previous five years of actual inflation if a forecast is unavailable. For our central scenario, we have necessarily made certain simplifying assumptions: a single corporate tax rate of 35% and an annual inflation of 2%. We also assume that all projects are depreciated using a straight line approach. LCOEs are calculated assuming a development timeline that commences today. Today s LCOE is then inflated each year to reflect that project revenues are typically inflation-linked. This analysis is done in nominal dollars. The use of debt A key driver of the LCOEs for all renewable energy technologies is the cost of finance, and specifically the cost of debt finance. The cost and availability of debt is a function of project risk and market conditions. The technology-independent portion of debt costs is the level of the underlying interest rate from which debt costs are calculated. The specific market in which a project is being financed can also have an effect on debt spreads through lenders perception of market-specific sovereign, policy, regulatory or economic conditions. The higher the perceived risk, the higher the cost of debt. 3
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) GLOBAL AND APAC ALL TECHNOLOGIES PV - c-si Biomass - incineration Wind - onshore Geothermal - flash plant Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Regional Average Global Mid Coal is the cheapest source of power in Asia. In many cases coal-fired electricity costs less than half or even one third of solar electricity generated locally. This cost difference between fossil and renewable electricity will however likely decrease over time: fossil LCOEs will be driven up as fuel prices rise and environmental constraints are added, while the cost of renewable energy will decrease as increasing renewable energy penetration causes system costs to fall. Coal-fired electricity is cheapest in India at $30/MWh because of its low domestic coal prices The region s lowest cost PV is in Inner Mongolia, China, where high quality solar resources push LCOEs down to $90/MWh. The regional average is still high though due to the high costs of PV in Japan Onshore wind is reaching cost parity with gas power in India and China at costs of $75-80/MWh The average costs of PV in Thailand ($185MWh) and Malaysia ($180/MWh) is only marginally higher than that of wind power ($178/MWh) The Asia average LCOEs of renewables are higher than the global averages, primarily due to higher country risks and perceived high technology risks on renewables in these countries 4
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) INDIA AND CHINA SELECTED TECHNOLOGIES INDIA CHINA PV - c-si Biomass - incineration Wind - onshore Natural gas CCGT Coal fired PV - c-si Wind - onshore Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired 0 50 100 150 200 India Mid 0 50 100 150 200 China Mid Coal-fired power remains the cheapest among other power sources in both countries. Indian coal-fired electricity costs $34/MWh on average, while Chinese coal-fired electricity costs $51/MWh. No environmental costs are assumed Wind energy is second to coal-fired power in India in terms of cost competitiveness: the average wind LCOE is $74/MWh, marginally lower than gas power, and can be even lower in areas with high wind speeds India s solar LCOE stands at $109/MWh on average, triple the coal-fired LCOE in the country China s wind energy ($81/MWh) is approaching parity with gas power, but PV remains more expensive ($135/MWh). However, the assumed capacity factor for PV is low at 14% so the LCOE can be much lower for better sites Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 5
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) JAPAN AND PHILIPPINES SELECTED TECHNOLOGIES JAPAN THE PHILIPPINES PV - c-si Wind - onshore Natural gas CCGT Coal fired PV - c-si Wind - onshore Small hydro Biomass - incineration Geothermal - flash plant Coal fired Natural gas CCGT 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Japan Mid 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Philippines Mid Japan and the Philippines have the highest power prices in Asia, with the average fossil-fuel LCOE above $100/MWh and renewable LCOEs above $150/MWh Renewables are remarkably more expensive than fossil-fuel power in Japan. Solar LCOEs reach $292/MWh, triple the coal-fired LCOEs in the country, driven by low solar resources and high capex costs (partly resulting from the high subsidy). Onshore wind faces similar resource and capex challenges Japan s wind ($178/MWh) and solar ($292/MWh) LCOEs are 20% and 40% higher than the Philippines, respectively CCGT LCOEs in Japan are 20% higher than the Philippines, primarily due to the high cost of imported LNG in Japan, while the Philippines coal LCOE is slightly higher than Japan s because of higher financing costs Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 6
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) THAILAND AND MALAYSIA SELECTED TECHNOLOGIES THAILAND MALAYSIA PV - c-si Wind - onshore Biomass - incineration Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired PV - c-si Wind - onshore Biomass - incineration Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Thailand Mid 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Malaysia Mid Thailand and Malaysia are not only geographically close but share a similar pattern of LCOEs whose key feature is that solar energy costs ($185/MWh) almost the same as wind energy ($178/MWh) Both countries have relatively low wind resource availability, with average projects achieving capacity factors of only 20% versus the 32% assumed in our developed market central scenario Malaysia, despite having a more developed economy than Thailand, has cheaper power because of its energy reserves and lower level of policy uncertainty: coal ($67/MWh) and CCGT ($72/MWh) LCOEs in Malaysia are 30% lower than in Thailand as average fuel prices are lower Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 7
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) INDONESIA AND VIETNAM SELECTED TECHNOLOGIES INDONESIA VIETNAM PV - c-si Wind - onshore Geothermal - flash plant Biomass - incineration Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired PV - c-si Wind - onshore Biomass - incineration Small hydro Natural gas CCGT Coal fired 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Indonesia Mid 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Vietnam Mid Indonesia and Vietnam exhibit similar LCOE characteristics: both countries have a large fossil to renewables cost differential. In both countries, coal power (~$50/MWh) costs only a quarter of solar power (~$200/MWh), driven by cheap coal (and gas) prices and relatively expensive solar (and wind ) Vietnam s coal, gas and small hydro power are slightly cheaper than Indonesia as the country enjoys lower fuel prices and better hydro resources Wind energy enjoys a considerable cost advantage over solar in both countries (Vietnam: $168/MWh, Indonesia: $159/MWh) versus PV (Vietnam: $206/MWh, Indonesia: $204/MWh), reflecting the availability of high wind resources sites along both countries coasts Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 8
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) APAC COUNTRY RANGES UTILITY-SCALE PV (NO TRACKING) Japan Philippines Vietnam Indonesia Thailand Malaysia China India 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 LCOE Range Mid LCOE India produces on average the cheapest solar LCOEs in Asia, mainly attributable to its low balance of plants costs resulting from low labour expenses and a highly competitive market China follows closely with its cost advantage in equipment cost as the vast majority of PV modules are produced in China. Domestic manufacturers can offer substantially lower equipment price packages at prices of around $0.6/W Soft costs at the development stage driven by political turmoil push Thailand s solar LCOE up past Malaysia s, but fundamentally they should be at the same level (or even lower for Thailand given the more mature market) Japan has the highest solar LCOE in Asia, double India s level, because of the utilisation of expensive Japanese structural and electrical components, plus high labor and soft costs (all of which are not being reduced to comparable global levels due to the high feed-in tariff) 9
H2 2014 LCOE APAC UTILITY-SCALE PV (NO TRACKING) COUNTRY ASSUMPTIONS AND AVERAGE LCOE CAPEX CAPACITY FACTOR FINANCING India - low thanks to cheap local equipment and low land and labour costs Japan - high due to expensive Japanese components and high land and labour costs SEA - same equipment and BOP costs across the region; insignificant labour cost differences; Thailand, Indonesia, and Vietnam have higher development costs due to policy uncertainties India highest capacity factor thanks to highest solar irradiation Japan lowest capacity factor due to lowest solar irradiation SEA in the middle of Japan and India. Thailand is assumed to be the highest across SEA as the country has good solar irradiation and grid connections, and also enjoys a dispatch priority policy for renewables Project finance is widely available in Asia, with a typical structure of 60-80% of debt and remainder of equity Japan - highest debt ratio thanks to cheap yen-denominated debt Malaysia & Indonesia - lowest debt ratio as project debt is not easily available. Malaysia s project size is too small to attract project debt, while Indonesia has high repayment risk Cost of equity: higher in SEA and India given high country risk Fix O&M Debt ratio Cost of debt Cost of PVCsiNoTrack Capex ($m/mw) Capacity factor (%) Mid LCOE ($/MW/yr) (%) (all-in) equity (%) ($/MWh) Country Low Ave High Low Ave High Ave Ave Ave Ave India 1.2 1.3 1.4 16% 19% 21% 18,333 70% 11% 16% 109 China 1.5 1.5 1.6 12% 14% 20% 15,295 70% 7% 10% 135 Malaysia 1.5 1.7 2.4 14% 16% 18% 40,000 65% 7% 12% 180 Thailand 1.7 1.9 2.5 14% 17% 19% 40,000 75% 6% 12% 185 Indonesia 1.7 1.9 2.5 14% 16% 18% 40,000 65% 9% 15% 204 Vietnam 1.7 1.9 2.5 14% 16% 18% 40,000 70% 10% 15% 206 Philippines 1.5 1.7 2.4 14% 16% 18% 40,000 70% 6% 16% 209 Japan 2.3 2.9 4.0 12% 13% 14% 50,000 79% 2% 6% 292 Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance. 10
H2 2014 LCOE APAC UTILITY-SCALE PV (NO TRACKING), AVERAGE LCOE ATTRIBUTION BY COUNTRY LIFETIME CASH OUTFLOWS FROM PROJECT (UNDISCOUNTED) CAPACITY FACTORS LCOE ($/MWh) India China Malaysia Thailand Indonesia Vietnam Philippines Japan 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Capex F O&M Tax Interest Equity 0% 10% 20% 30% Capacity factor Global central 0 100 200 300 400 FINANCING The returns required by equity investors in solar projects in Vietnam, Indonesia, and India have a large impact on project cashflows Japan s high capex costs and cheap debt combine to lower the relative impact of financing costs on project cashflows CAPEX Capex constitutes a relatively larger part of the total solar cashflows in Japan where debt and equity costs have a smaller impact of cashflows than in China and Thailand India s high equity return requirements and expensive debt override relatively cheap capex requirements to be main cashflow drivers Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 11
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) APAC COUNTRY RANGES ONSHORE WIND Japan Thailand Malaysia Vietnam Indonesia Philippines China India 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 LCOE Range Mid LCOE India s wind energy takes the top spot in terms of cost competitiveness with the lowest LCOE, to even below $50/MWh. Average projects produce an LCOE of $74/MWh, thanks in large part to India s low wind capex China s average wind LCOE is 10% higher than India s, standing at around $81/MWh The Philippines falls in third place in APAC for wind energy, although its average wind LCOE is high by global standards at around $150/MWh, double India s level Japan has the highest average wind LCOE in the APAC region, currently at $178/MWh, as wind capex in Japan is three times as much as in India 12
H2 2014 LCOE APAC ONSHORE WIND COUNTRY ASSUMPTIONS AND AVERAGE LCOE CAPEX CAPACITY FACTOR FINANCING India - lowest capex thanks to cheap local equipment and low land and labour costs Japan - highest capex due to expensive Japanese components and high land and development costs SEA - same equipment and BOP costs across the region; insignificant labour cost differential; lower development cost in the Philippines as there s more certainty in policy implementation The Philippines highest capacity factor thanks to high wind speed in the north and grid connection and dispatch priority China high wind speeds but curtailment limits capacity factors Malaysia and Thailand lowest capacity factor due to lower wind speeds Financing cost does not vary by technology. Average cost of debt is similar to that for solar projects, which hovers from a low of 2% in Japan to a high of 11% in India Cost of equity is seen higher in SEA and India given high country risks Slightly higher gearing ratio than solar projects as wind projects tend to be of bigger size and more attractive to project debt lenders Fix O&M Debt ratio Cost of debt Cost of WindOnshore Capex ($m/mw) Capacity factor (%) Mid LCOE ($/MW/yr) (%) (all-in) equity (%) ($/MWh) Country Low Ave High Low Ave High Ave Ave Ave Ave India 1.0 1.0 1.1 15% 22% 33% 17,293 80% 11% 14% 74 China 1.3 1.3 1.6 21% 24% 29% 25,000 75% 7% 10% 81 Philippines 1.8 2.0 2.6 20% 25% 30% 25,000 70% 6% 16% 152 Indonesia 2.0 2.2 2.8 20% 23% 25% 25,000 70% 9% 15% 159 Vietnam 2.0 2.2 2.8 20% 23% 25% 35,000 70% 10% 15% 168 Malaysia 2.0 2.2 2.8 18% 20% 25% 25,000 70% 7% 12% 178 Thailand 2.0 2.2 2.8 18% 20% 25% 25,000 70% 6% 12% 178 Japan 2.6 2.9 4.4 20% 22% 25% 58,651 75% 2% 6% 178 13
H2 2014 LCOE APAC ONSHORE WIND AVERAGE LCOE ATTRIBUTION BY COUNTRY LIFETIME CASH OUTFLOWS FROM PROJECT (UNDISCOUNTED) CAPACITY FACTORS LCOE ($/MWh) India China Philippines Indonesia Vietnam Malaysia Thailand Japan 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% FINANCING Capex Fixed O&M Variable O&M Tax Interest Equity 0% 20% 40% 60% Capacity factor Global central CAPEX 0 50 100 150 200 The returns required by equity investors in wind projects in Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia are significant cashflow drivers for onshore wind India s interest costs play a key role in project costs, significantly more than in Japan Just as in solar - capex constitutes a relatively larger part of the total wind cashflows in Japan versus China, Thailand and the Philippines Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 14
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) APAC COUNTRY RANGES COAL Philippines Thailand Japan Malaysia China Indonesia Vietnam India 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 LCOE Range Mid LCOE India produces the cheapest coal-fired electricity which only costs around $34/MWh, one third of Japan s Vietnam, Indonesia, and China are at similar levels with an average cost of ~$50/MWh. China s extremely low coal capex offsets the impact from the high coal price on its coal LCOE Malaysia is in the middle of the Asia range, producing at $67/MWh on average Japan s coal-fired LCOE stands at $93/MWh due to its high import coal price and expensive capex Coal-fired electricity in Thailand costs around $99/MWh, substantially higher than in Malaysia as capacity factors are lower The Philippines coal-fired LCOE is the highest as it relies on Japanese equipment and Indonesian coal 15
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 APAC COAL PRICE ASSUMPTIONS ($/TON) 140 120 100 Japan China 80 60 40 20 India Vietnam 0 Coal price forecasts are built with adding moderate inflation rates on current domestic coal prices India and Vietnam have the lowest coal prices as both have abundant domestic coal production Malaysia imports 90% of its coal consumption, of which 70% is from Indonesia. The country s current coal price is above $80/ton. Thailand and the Philippines coal prices are assumed to be the same as Malaysia s. Although Thailand s current coal price is around $20/ton, its future coal price will align with Malaysia s as the country will import coal from Indonesia as domestic coal production dries up. The Philippines coal consumption is largely met through import (90%) as well, mainly from Indonesia 16
H2 2014 LCOE ($/MWH) APAC COUNTRY RANGES NATURAL GAS CCGT Japan Thailand Philippines India China Malaysia Indonesia Vietnam 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 LCOE Range Mid LCOE Vietnam offers the cheapest gas power in Asia with cost below $60/MWh, owing to cheap gas prices and high capacity factors Indonesia ranks the second cheapest as its cheap gas prices offset low capacity factors Malaysia, a major gas and LNG exporter in the international market, is unable to produce gas power cheaply due to low capacity factors. The country s low domestic gas prices have made its gas producers skip the local market and sell gas in the international market for higher profits The average gas power LCOEs in China and India are close, at around $75/MWh Japan is most expensive with an average LCOE reaching $120/MWh. Thailand and the Philippines are just below $100/MWh. The three countries have relatively high gas prices 17
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 APAC NATURAL GAS PRICE ASSUMPTIONS ($/MMBTU) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Japan Thailand, Philippines India China Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam Japan s gas price is dependent on its LNG import price. We expect Japan's average LNG import price to continuously decline until 2023 because of first, the arrival of cheaper US shale gas from 2017; second, a downward trending oil price (World Bank's forecast); third, a falling spot LNG price on the back of increasing global supplies Thai gas demand will be largely met by existing pipeline gas contracts with Malaysia and Myanmar until 2020. Therefore, the gas price for Thailand will likely remain flat before 2020 but increase to reflect future Asia LNG prices For the Philippines, we use Thailand s price estimate as an indicator because its domestic gas price mechanism is similar to Thailand s and its future LNG imports are also likely to rise India's gas price is a combination of LNG import prices and domestic gas prices. The domestic gas price is set by the government using a formula which calculates the average of an export parity price and an import parity price China's gas price is set using a formula which benchmarks gas price to fuel oil and LPG prices. Therefore, using this mechanism, our resultant gas price declines over the years with reducing oil prices as per the World Bank forecast Indonesia will be self-sufficient until 2018 based on our forecast and will therefore enjoy stable domestic gas prices. The international LNG price effect is factored in after 2020, similar to Malaysia and Vietnam 18
Vietnam Philippines China Japan India Malaysia Indonesia Thailand APAC SOLAR LCOE VS SOLAR TARIFF ($/MWH) 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Low Range Mid Feed-in tariff or Average power price Utility-scale solar projects that signed PPAs with Thai utilities under the old adder regime still enjoy the highest premium in Asia. However, the total projects only amounted to 325MW as of H1 2014. No further extension on project commissioning deadlines will be given, so Thailand s attractive situation will disappear next year. Indonesia has a solar reverse auction program which sets the ceiling price at $250/MWh. Therefore, the high premium is only receivable if everyone else bids at a price higher than $250/MWh which is very unlikely. Malaysia ranks third with a FiT of $216/MWh for solar projects between 1-10MW. India, Japan, China and the Philippines solar incentives are close to their respective solar LCOEs, but are enough to incentivise development. This is especially the case in Japan where costs seem to be inflated due to the high tariff. Vietnam does not have solar incentives at present and the average power price is too low to make projects viable. Note: Only feed-in-tariffs for utility-scale (>1MW) projects present. Vietnam has no solar incentives; Indonesia shows the solar auction ceiling price; Thailand shows the allin power price under a feed-in premium or adder programme. India shows the national benchmark FiT. Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance 19
Indonesia Malaysia Vietnam India China Thailand Japan Philippines APAC WIND LCOE VS WIND TARIFF ($/MWH) 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Low Range Mid Feed-in tariff or Average power price The Philippines offers the highest wind power premium through a FiT of $197/MWh (but it does have a capacity limit in place) Japan sits at the second place with a decent FiT of $210/MWh Thailand s wind adder has an all-in power price of $192/MWh, which is slightly higher than the average wind LCOE India and China s wind power tariffs - $80/MWh and $90/MWh respectively are rather modest compared to their respective average wind LCOEs Vietnam s wind FiT is far below the average wind LCOE and is currently being revised up to promote project development Malaysia and Indonesia do not have wind incentives at present. The average power prices are too low Note: Indonesia and Malaysia do not have wind incentives. The power price shown in the chart for them is their respective power purchase price. India has a generation-based incentive for wind power. 20
COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER This publication is the copyright of Bloomberg New Energy Finance. No portion of this document may be photocopied, reproduced, scanned into an electronic system or transmitted, forwarded or distributed in any way without prior consent of Bloomberg New Energy Finance. The information contained in this publication is derived from carefully selected sources we believe are reasonable. We do not guarantee its accuracy or completeness and nothing in this document shall be construed to be a representation of such a guarantee. Any opinions expressed reflect the current judgment of the author of the relevant article or features, and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, Bloomberg Finance L.P., Bloomberg L.P. or any of their affiliates ("Bloomberg"). The opinions presented are subject to change without notice. Bloomberg accepts no responsibility for any liability arising from use of this document or its contents. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed as an offering of financial instruments, or as investment advice or recommendations by Bloomberg of an investment strategy or whether or not to "buy," "sell" or "hold" an investment. 21
MARKETS Renewable Energy Energy Smart Technologies Advanced Transport Gas Carbon and RECs SERVICES Americas Service Asia Pacific Service EMEA Service Applied Research Events and Workshops Subscription-based news, data and analysis to support your decisions in clean energy, power and water and the carbon markets sales.bnef@bloomberg.net Maggie Kuang zkuang1@bloomberg.net Joseph Salvatore jsalvatore1@bloomberg.net