24/05/2022 · 1 minute read
For a project to be eligible to receive subsidies and feed-in tariffs, there is often strict criteria that needs to be met. Often these rules operate to ensure that smaller projects, who have fewer economies of scale, are able to benefit from larger feed-in tariffs. However, some contractors have tried to circumvent this criteria by building multiple small projects next to each other versus aggregating into one large project.
In this scenario, there is an identified risk that the regulator might disagree with this approach and ask for the projects to be aggregated. This could result in the project being offered a lower rate of feed-in tariff and the regulator might even claw back any feed-in tariff that has been received historically.
In this episode of our Infrastructure Risk Perspectives podcast we explore this risk using a recent case study and explain what the ultimate insurance was and why this created a positive impact for both related parties.
Managing Director, Private Equity, Mergers and Acquisitions, Marsh Specialty UK
Infrastructure and Energy, Private Equity, Mergers and Acquisitions, Marsh Specialty UK
Head of Specific Risks