IFC Infrastructure’s Post

Financing for development

Thank you for inviting me to be part of this discussion Silvana Frontier It's interesting to catch up on the current state of public development in Chile. I found it intriguing that one of the points mentioned was the lack of citizen participation and the limited application of the concept of sustainability in national initiatives and projects. The low participation is partly due to a lack of information and a strong centralization in the Metropolitan Region (RM). People in other regions don't feel involved in the initiatives and show little interest in getting informed. This actually confirms a reality that many of us are already aware of - Chile needs to decentralize and develop other regions, not just the RM. I believe that a great focus should be on transportation and connectivity, an area that concerns me personally. When people perceive a place as "reachable," the notion of isolation weakens, inviting and creating space for more citizen participation. I think that by improving connectivity and promoting inclusive communication, we can increase participation. And if we combine this with the development of sustainable transportation, we can address two points at once. Thanks for the presentation Juan Manuel Sánchez Medioli and Colegio de Ingenieros de Chile A.G. #transport #connectivity #sustainabletransport

Here is a short video (in Spanish) that explains how Distrito Natural - Covivienda ecológica is taking leadership in designing and developing new residential formats in Spain. #cohousing #intergenerational #netzero

💡 Today we are not here to talk about health solutions, but rather to invite you, both companies and individuals, to help with the cases that Kellü and other organizations carry out in order to impact the lives of those who need it most. #Chile #Filantropia #Fundacion Desafío 10X

Since the reporter didn't reach out to DOE for comments, I want to clarify some things here while we put out an official statement: - Solar systems will pose no upfront cost to customers; - The average eligible household will have to contribute to the long-term maintenance of the system, a cost that will be more than offset by reduced energy bills and participation in net energy metering; - This minimal contribution will ensure systems remain operational throughout their lifespan while allowing DOE to impact more homes; - The leasing model also allows us to impact more homes because third parties can take advantage of the Investment Tax Credit and buy systems for super cheap (individual Puerto Rico citizens don't qualify for these incentives like mainland citizens); - There will not be liens on the property of beneficiaries; - We also awarded two non-profits (IBTS - Institute for Building Technology and Safety and Hispanic Federation) for education and consumer protection, and are setting up robust monitoring and auditing protocols. We will do a better job of communicating this more clearly. And our door is always open to discuss questions and concerns with anyone! Agustín F. Carbó-Lugo Eric Britton Ernesto Rivera-Umpierre, Esq.

I think the most common misunderstanding I've seen with this U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) program using funds apportioned by US Congress is the notion that any money is "given" to the financing companies that were selected (Sunrun, Sunnova Energy and Generac Power Systems). Actually: The program simply pays, on behalf of the very low income / disabled recipient, a portion (a very high portion, like 90%) of their lease payment for something that saves them way more money every month than the remaining 10% or so that they pay. Example: A hypothetical government program provides a 90% subsidy for rent that would normally have been $1,000. Rather than the renters having to actually pay $1,000 every month and the program giving them $900 cash every month, this hypothetical government program instead pays the person that receives the rent $900, so that the homeowner only has to pay $100 for rent rather than $1,000. Makes sense right? It's the same concept with this program, except for way better actually. It's true that these solar+storage systems will not be "free" for 40,000 homes of very low income and disabled families in Puerto Rico. "Free" is when something is given to someone at no cost (and generally, with no warranty). In this case, something is being given which results in a situation that's cashflow-positive for the recipients, making it even better than "free" for them. And, with a 25-year guarantee that the system will actually function. And, with separate nonprofits contracted to support educating the recipients about how solar power works. Other things in this article that are untrue: 1. That program recipients "could end up paying more for energy". Actually: They'll pay a little portion of their solar+storage lease payment and save a lot on their power bills (thanks to Net Metering providing a 1-to-1 reduction on power bills for all kWh of solar power put onto the grid). 2. That people "could have a lein on their house". Actually: Leins having nothing to do with this program; that's not a misconception, it's just a completely false statement. I don't understand how journalists can publish things that are just completely false; is there no obligation for fact-checking? 3. That this program is somehow "similar to PACE". Actually: PACE is a completely unsubsidized program (that doesn't exist in Puerto Rico) involving utilizing property taxes as payments for solar/storage/efficiency investments. It is something unrelated to and dissimilar to this program. 4. That the program "isn't designed for energy justice or energy independence". Actually: a) It is literally providing the definition of energy independence (solar+storage systems that function during blackouts, with 25 year warranties), b) it's providing it only for very-low-income and disabled peoples of Puerto Rico. ....and the list is a lot longer, but it's clear that there's some sort of misunderstanding of the nuts & bolts of what this program actually is and isn't.

What is the best strategy to build energy resilience in the long-term, among low-income families? Community leaders, like Casa Pueblo, recommend DOE to give the solar equipment away, without requiring payments. However, DOE chose the option to require lease payments, over a period of time. Which financing option will create more energy sufficiency over a longer time? It depends on who will have control over the leasing payments and their future use. Energy equipment depreciates over time and requires constant upkeep. Will the leasing payments be available to maintain the original solar panels in optimal conditions and be available for their future replacement? The technology of solar panels is advancing rapidly and the existing models will become obsolete soon. The availability of leasing payments to replace existing panels with new ones is the key factor that determine long-term resilience.

What Is the Digital Divide? The digital divide refers to the gap between demographics and regions that have access to modern information and communications technology and those that don’t. Though the term now encompasses the technical and financial ability to utilize available technology—along with access (or a lack of access) to the internet—the gap it refers to is constantly shifting with the development of technology. Source:https://lnkd.in/eZa_SiHx

This article highlights the urgency of action and the role of Next Generation funds in achieving a sustainable future. Kudos to Aquí tu Reforma for leading the charge in improving #Spain's energy efficiency. Impressive work! 👍

Here is the link to the Eurelectric paper in English: https://lnkd.in/e_QGDsH8