國(guó)際能源署-降低資金成本-釋放新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體和發(fā)展中經(jīng)濟(jì)體清潔能源投資的戰(zhàn)略（英）-2024

Reducing

theCost

of

CapitalStrategies

tounlockcleanenergy

investment

in

emergingand

developing

economiesWorld

EnergyInvestmentSpecialReportINTERNATIONAL

ENERGYAGENCYTheIEAexaminesthefullspectrumIEA

membercountries:IEA

associationcountries:ofenergyissuesincludingoil,gasandcoalsupplyanddemand,renewableenergytechnologies,electricitymarkets,energyef

iciency,accesstoenergy,demandsidemanagementandmuchmore.Throughitswork,theIEAadvocatespoliciesthatwillenhancethereliability,afordabilityandsustainabilityofenergyinitsAustraliaAustriaArgentinaBrazilBelgiumChinaCanadaEgyptIndiaIndonesiaKenyaMoroccoSenegalSingaporeSouthAfricaThailandUkraineCzechRepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIrelandItalyJapanKorea31membercountries,13

associationLithuaniaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandsNewZealandNorwayPolandPortugalcountriesandbeyond.SlovakRepublicSpainSwedenSwitzerlandRepublicofTürkiyeUnitedKingdomUnitedStatesThispublicationandanymapincludedhereinarewithoutprejudicetothestatusoforsovereigntyoveranyterritory,totheTheEuropeandelimitationofinternationalfrontiersandboundariesandtothenameofanyterritory,cityorarea.CommissionalsoparticipatesintheworkoftheIEASource:IEA.InternationalEnergyAgencyWebsite:AcknowledgementsThis

report

was

prepared

by

the

Energy

Investment

Unit

in

the

Office

of

the

Chief

EnergyEconomist

(OCEE)

Division

of

the

Directorate

of

Sustainability,

Technology

and

Outlooks(STO).ItwasdesignedanddirectedbyTimGould,ChiefEnergyEconomist,and

CeciliaTam,Acting

Head

of

the

Energy

Investment

Unit.

Lucila

Arboleya

Sarazola

supported

the

designof

the

report

and

led

co-ordination

of

the

report

together

with

Siddharth

Singh.

Chapter

1was

co-led

by

Lucila

Arboleya

Sarazola

and

Cecilia

Tam.

Chapter

2

was

co-led

by

SiddharthSinghandLucilaArboleyaSarazola.Other

principal

authorsofthereportwereTanguyde

Bienassis

(led

buildings

and

end

use);Musa

Erdogan

(co-led

storage

and

Chapter

1);

David

Fischer

(co-led

storage);

Emma

Gordon(led

hydro);

Alana

Rawlins

Bilbao

(led

electricity

grids);

and

Peter

Zeniewski

(led

advancedfuels).EmileBelin-BourgogneandRyszardPospiechprovidedsupportacrosssectors.EleniTsoukalaprovidedessentialsupportandErinCrumwasthecopyeditor.The

report

also

benefited

from

input

provided

by

numerous

IEA

colleagues,

in

particularHeymiBahar,TrevorCriswell,ChristopheMcGlade,MichaelWaldronandBrentWanner.Additional

thanks

go

to

the

IEA

Communications

and

Digital

Office

(CDO)

Division

for

theirhelp

producing

the

report

and

website

materials,

particularly

to

Jethro

Mullen,

ActingHead

of

CDO,

and

Curtis

Brainard,

Astrid

Dumond,

Lucile

Wall,

Therese

Walsh,

IsabelleNonain-Semelin,Oliver

Joy

and

PoeliBojorquez.Specialthanksalsogoto

theIEAFinanceIndustryAdvisoryBoardfortheirvaluableinputs.PeerreviewersMany

senior

government

officials

and

international

experts

provided

input

and

reviewedpreliminary

drafts

ofthereport.

Their

comments

and

suggestions

wereofgreat

value.

Theyinclude:CharlieDonovanLucyHeintzImpaxAssetManagementActisSeanKidneyClimateBondsInitiativePayneInstituteBradHandlerHaraldHirschhoferGautamJainTheCurrencyExchangeFund(‘TCX’)ColumbiaUniversityAriolaMbistrovaSoniaMedinaWaleShonibareBjarneSteffenKelvinWongOrganisationfor

EconomicCo-operationandDevelopmentChildren’sInvestmentFundFoundationAfricanDevelopmentBankETHZurichDBSBankJoseA.OmaechevarriaIberdrolaAcknowledgements3This

publication

has

been

produced

with

the

financial

assistance

of

the

European

Union

aspart

of

its

funding

of

the

Clean

Energy

Transitions

in

Emerging

Economies

programme(CETEE-2)

within

the

Clean

Energy

Transitions

Programme,

the

IEA’s

flagship

initiative

totransformtheworld’senergysystemtoachieveasecureandsustainablefutureforall.The

work

reflects

the

views

of

the

International

Energy

Agency

Secretariat

but

does

notnecessarily

reflect

those

of

individual

IEA

member

countries

or

of

any

particular

funder,supporter

or

collaborator.

None

of

the

IEA

or

any

funder,

supporter

or

collaborator

thatcontributed

to

this

work

makes

any

representation

or

warranty,

express

or

implied,

inrespect

of

the

work’s

contents

(including

its

completeness

or

accuracy)

and

shall

not

beresponsibleforany

useof,orrelianceon,thework.4InternationalEnergyAgency

|

Reducing

the

Cost

of

CapitalTableofContentsAcknowledgements

3Executivesummary

71Unlockingcleanenergy

investment111.1

Thecleanenergyinvestmentgap

121.1.1Today’sinvestmenttrendsandfutureneeds

131.1.2Investmentpriorities

to2035

151.1.3Sourcesoffinance

181.2

Thecostofcapital

191.2.1Whatisthecostofcapital?

191.2.2Whydoesthecostofcapitalmatterfor

EMDEenergytransitions?

251.3

Bringingdown

thecostofcapital

272Identifying

risksthat

influencethecost

of

capital332.1

Introduction

342.2

Utility-scalesolarPVandwind

352.2.1Utility-scalesolarandwindingrowingmarkets

392.2.2Utility-scalesolarandwindinmaturingmarkets

412.3

Grids

462.3.1Publiclyledgridfinancing

482.3.2Privatelyledgridfinancing

502.4

Energyefficiencyinbuildings

542.5

Electricmobility

582.6

Advancedbiofuels

622.7

Utility-scalehydro

652.8

Batterystorage

69AnnexesAnnexA.Definitions

75AnnexB.References

85Table

of

Contents5ExecutivesummaryCleanenergy

investmentin

mostemerginganddeveloping

economies

hasyettotake

off:

Ahighcostofcapitalis

a

majorreasonwhyHow

emergingmarketand

developingeconomies

(EMDE1)

meet

their

risingenergyneedsis

a

pivotal

question

both

for

their

citizens

and

for

the

world.

Cost-competitive

clean

energytechnologies

open

the

possibility

to

chart

a

new,

lower-emissions

pathway

to

growth

andprosperity,

but

capital

flowstoclean

energy

projects

in

many

EMDE

remain

worryingly

low.Global

clean

energy

investment

has

risen

by

40%

since

2020,

reaching

USD1.8trillion

in2023,but

almostall

the

recentgrowthhas

beeninadvancedeconomiesandinChina.

EMDEaccount

for

around

15%

of

the

total,

despite

accounting

for

about

a

third

of

global

grossdomestic

product

and

two-thirds

of

the

world’s

population.

India

and

Brazil

are

by

a

distancethelargestEMDEcleanenergymarkets.All

pathways

to

successfulglobalenergytransitions

dependon

expandingcapitalflows

toclean

energy

in

fast-growing

EMDE.

With

growing

international

attention

to

this

issue,

theInternational

Energy

Agency

(IEA)

was

tasked

by

the

Paris

Summit

on

a

New

Global

FinancingPact

in

June

2023

to

make

recommendations

on

how

to

bring

down

the

cost

of

capital

forclean

energy

investment

in

EMDE.

This

report

answers

that

request,

building

on

previous

IEAanalysisandonnewsurveydatacollectedfortheIEA’sCost

of

CapitalObservatory

project.Our

survey

of

leading

financiers

and

investors

confirms

that

the

cost

of

capital

for

utility-scale

solar

photovoltaic

(PV)

projects

in

EMDE

is

well

over

twice

as

high

asit

is

in

advancedeconomies.

This

reflects

higher

real

and

perceived

risks

in

EMDE

at

the

country,

sectoral

andprojectlevels.Anelevatedcost

of

capitalpushes

upfinancing

costsandmakes

itmuchmoredifficult

to

generate

attractive

risk-adjusted

returns,

especially

for

relatively

capital-intensiveclean

technologies.

As

a

result,

EMDE

can

end

up

paying

more

for

clean

energy

projects

orthey

can

miss

out

altogether.

Solar

PV

plants

and

other

clean

energy

projects

tend

to

involvea

relatively

higher

share

of

upfront

expenditure

and

a

lower

share

of

operating

expenses

intotal

project

costs.

If

countries

cannot

afford

high

upfront

costs,

they

can

be

locked

intopolluting

technologies

that

might

initially

be

less

expensive

but

require

persistent

spendingon–andcombustionof–fossil

fuelsfortheiroperation.Countryandmacrofactors

areamajorcontributortothe

high

costof

capitalforclean

energyprojects,

but

sotooarerisksspecifictothe

energy

sectorBroad

country-related

risks

and

macroeconomic

factors

typically

explain

a

large

share

ofcountry-by-country

variations

in

the

cost

of

capital.

These

include

the

rule

of

law

andsanctity

of

contracts,

as

well

as

concerns

about

currency

fluctuations

and

convertibility.

Asthe

balance

of

capital

spending

on

energy

in

EMDE

shifts

away

from

dollarised,

globallytraded

commodities,

such

as

oil,

towards

clean

energy

projects

that

rely

on

domesticallygenerated

revenues,

the

overall

quality

and

predictability

of

the

domestic

businessenvironment

become

even

more

important

for

investors.

Mechanisms

that

mitigate

theserisks

include

guarantees

against

expropriation

and

facilities

to

reduce

the

cost

of

currency1ReferencestoEMDEinthisreportexcludethePeople'sRepublicofChina

(hereafter,"China").Executive

Summary7hedging.

However,

over

the

longer

term

there

is

no

substitute

for

efforts

to

tackle

theunderlying

issues

by

strengthening

national

institutions,

reducing

inflation,

and

deepeninglocal

capital

markets

and

financial

systems.

EMDE

that

have

successfully

scaled

up

cleanenergy

investment,

including

India,

Brazil

and

South

Africa,

have

all

relied

heavily

ondomesticsourcesofcapital.There

are

also

project-

and

sector-specific

risks

that

can

be

addressed

directly

by

energypolicy

makersandregulators;thesearethefocusof

thisreport.

Inthe

case

ofcleanenergygenerationprojects

in

the

powersector,keyissues

highlighted

by

surveyrespondents

relateto

sector

regulations,

the

reliability

of

revenues

–

dependent

mainly

on

the

off-taker’s

abilityto

pay

on

time

–

andthe

availabilityof

transmission

infrastructure

orland,

and

howall

theseissues

are

defined

in

contracts.

Such

project-

and

sector-specific

elements

can

account

for20-30%

of

the

higher

cost

of

capital

in

EMDE.

This

report

provides

detailed

insights

into

thesefactors,

how

they

vary

across

parts

of

the

energy

sector,

and

what

can

be

done

to

addressthem.

There

are

plenty

of

positive

examples

in

EMDE

where

clear

regulation,

a

vision

andintent

to

move

ahead

with

clean

energy

transitions,

and

a

readiness

to

work

with

the

privatesectorhaveyieldedimpressive

results.The

requiredincrease

in

EMDEclean

energyinvestment

ishuge,butalmostallofit

involvesmaturetechnologies

supported

by

tried

andtestedpoliciesFrom

USD270billion

today,

annual

capital

investment

in

clean

energy

in

EMDE

needs

torise

to

USD870billion

by

the

early

2030s

to

get

on

track

to

meet

national

climate

andenergy

pledges,

and

to

USD1.6trillion

in

a

1.5-degree

pathway.

The

increases

are

neededacross

a

range

of

technologies

and

sectors,

but

three

areas

stand

out:

almost

a

quarter

ofthe

total

clean

energy

investment

over

the

next

ten

years

goes

to

utility-scale

solar

and

windprojects,

and

another

quarter

is

made

up

of

investment

in

electricity

networks

and

inefficiency

improvements

in

buildings

together.

A

small

fraction

of

the

total

investment

spend–

less

than

USD

50billion

per

year

–

would

be

sufficient

to

ensure

universal

access

toelectricityandtocleancooking

fuels.The

increase

in

spending

is

steep

but

almost

all

the

required

EMDE

investment

is

in

maturetechnologies

and

in

sectors

where

there

are

tried

and

tested

policy

formulas

for

success.This

would

give

EMDE

a

firm

foothold

in

the

new

clean

energy

economy,

with

major

benefitsfor

energy

access

and

security,

sustainable

growth,

and

employment,

as

well

as

for

emissionsand

air

quality.

Only

about

5%

of

the

cumulative

EMDE

clean

energy

investment

needs

to2035

are

in

sectors

that

depend

on

nascent

technologies

such

as

low-emissions

hydrogen,hydrogen-basedfuels,orcarboncapture,utilisationandstorage.KeyrolesforenhancedinternationalsupportandconcessionalfinanceInvestment

on

this

scale

will

mean

scaling

up

all

sources

of

finance,

with

a

vitally

importantrole

for

well-coordinated,

enhanced

international

financial

and

technical

support.As

partof

the

global

push

toexpandandimprove

finance

forsustainable

development,

we

estimatethat

a

tripling

of

concessional

funding

for

EMDE

energy

transitions

will

be

required

to

getEMDE

on

track

for

their

energy

and

climate

goals.

Not

all

projects

or

countries

require

this8InternationalEnergyAgency

|

Reducing

the

Cost

of

Capitalkind

of

support,

and

it

cannot

replace

needed

policy

actions

or

institutional

reforms.

But,used

strategically,

it

can

help

countries

remove

barriers

that

are

slowing

clean

energyinvestment

–

including

weaknesses

in

project

preparation,

data

quality,

and

energy

sectorpolicies

and

regulation

that

push

up

the

cost

of

capital

–

and

bring

in

much

larger

volumes

ofprivate

capital.

Targeted

concessional

support

is

particularly

important

for

the

leastdeveloped

countries

that

will

otherwise

struggle

to

mobilise

capital.

Stronger

coordinationamong

governments,

development

finance

institutions,

private

financiers

and

philanthropieswillbeessentialtohelpEMDEnavigateandunderstand

thedifferentfinancinginstruments,risk-mitigationandcreditenhancementtoolsthatcanhelpprojectsget

offtheground.Loweringthe

cost

of

capitalby

1percentagepointcouldreducefinancingcostsforEMDEnetzero

transitionsby

USD150billionperyearOuranalysisshowsthat

capitalcosts–

e.g.for

land,

buildings,

equipment

–

areusually

thelargestsingleelementin

totalcleanenergyprojectcostsinadvancedeconomies,whereasin

EMDE

the

largest

element

is

financing

costs.

Financing

costs

for

utility-scale

solar

PVprojects

in

EMDE,

for

example,

can

constitute

around

half

or

more

of

the

levelised

cost

ofelectricity.

Efforts

to

decrease

the

cost

of

capital

in

EMDE

are

not

only

crucial

for

investorsbut

also

for

the

overall

affordability

of

energy

transitions

for

consumers.

We

estimate

thatnarrowing

the

gap

in

the

cost

of

capital

between

EMDE

and

advanced

economies

by1percentage

point

(100basis

points)

could

reduce

average

clean

energy

financing

costs

inEMDE

byUSD150billion

every

year.Recommendations

onhowtobring

downthecostof

capitalforclean

energyinvestmentin

EMDEMultiple

factors

affect

the

cost

of

capital

and

many

of

the

economy-wide

risks

lie

outsidethe

remit

of

energy

decision

makers,

but

the

quality

of

energy

institutions,

policies

andregulationsstillmattersgreatly.Inthisreport,wehighlighttheimportanceofaclearvisionand

implementation

plan

for

energy

transitions,

backed

by

reliable

data

and

support

withproject

preparation.

We

underscore

the

need

for

enhanced

international

support

andcollaboration.

Using

case

studies

and

EMDE

country

examples,

we

also

explore

in

detail

somespecific

risks

and

applied

solutions.

Findings

are

presented

here

under

four

headings

thatreflect

recurring

themes

from

our

discussions

with

investors

and

policy

makers:

theimportance

of

good

policy

and

regulation,

reliable

payments,

timely

permitting

andavailabilityofinfrastructure,andtailoredsupportfornewandemergingtechnologies.

Policy

and

regulatory

requirements

for

clean

energy

projects

vary

widely

acrossdifferent

parts

of

the

energy

economy,

although

a

common

denominator

is

the

need

forregulations

to

be

technically

sound,

clear

and

predictable.

Regulatory

uncertainties

inthe

power

sector

are

a

major

concern,especiallyin

new

areas

suchas

energystorage

orprivately

financed

grids.

Strongregulatoryframeworksfor

efficiency,

includingbuildingcodes

and

stringent

minimum

energy

performance

standards

for

appliances

as

seen

inChile,

are

a

necessary

condition

to

scale

up

investment

in

these

sectors.

SouthAfrica’sExecutive

Summary9experience

with

well-designed,

regular

procurement

programmes

for

renewables

hasbeenveryeffectivetojump-startbatterystorageinvestmentanddeployment.

Payment

and

revenue

risks

can

be

offset

by

wider

availability

and

use

of

guarantees,alongside

efforts

to

strengthen

the

underlying

financial

health

of

the

entities

involved.Delays

in

payment

of

power

purchased

by

off-takers,

generally

state-owned

utilities,have

been

a

regular

concern

for

investors

and

financiers

of

renewable

generationprojects

in

EMDE(exceptformore

mature

markets

that

have

alreadyseenconsiderabledeployment

of

solar

PV

and

wind).

Greater

availability

of

guarantees

that

cover

suchpayment

delays,

which

are

being

introduced

in

various

African

countries

for

example,can

help

to

reduce

risks

and

unlock

more

investment

in

countries

that

are

seeking

toscale

up

renewable

power.

This

implies

increasing

the

capital

allocated

for

guaranteesbyinternationalfinancialinstitutions.

Timely

permitting

and

co-ordinated

build-out

of

grids

increases

the

predictability

ofproject

timelines

and

avoids

connection

delays,

a

risk

that

worries

investors

more

andmore,

including

in

EMDE

with

a

good

track

record

of

clean

power

projects.

In

the

caseof

hydropower

for

example,

identifying

viable

sites

and

conducting

environmental

duediligence

can

cause

significant

construction

delays.

Similar

issues

are

highlighted

byinvestors

for

grids

and

utility-scale

solar

and

wind,

especially

in

countries

with

highshares

of

variable

generation.

India’s

experience

with

solar

parks

where

tenders

wereput

in

place

with

land

provided

have

reduced

risks

and

enabled

lower

financing

costs.Tenders

to

allocate

transmission

around

green

corridors

are

also

on

the

rise.

As

theshare

of

renewables

increases,

it

is

easier

to

earmark

transmission

lines

as

“green”,given

these

are

needed

almost

exclusively

to

evacuate

existing

or

expected

solar

andwind.

Their

green

characteristics

can

also

help

attract

high

levels

of

private

internationalcapital.

Bringing

in

the

private

sectorto

build

transmissionlinesthrough

projectfinancestructures

(with

contracts

like

those

successfully

applied

in

generation),

as

seen

in

Braziland

various

other

Latin

American

countries,

has

a

proven

track

record

and

could

bemorewidelyapplied.

Somenewandemergingtechnologiesandsectorsrequiretailoredsupporttoaddressspecific

risks,

such

as

the

lack

of

charging

infrastructure

for

electric

vehicles

ortechnological

risk

associated

with

first-of-a-kind

advanced

biofuel

projects.

Thesesectors

will

need

tailored

solutions

such

as

targetedtaxcredits

or

first

loss

guarantees,alongside

complementary

measures

such

as

consumer

accesstolow-cost

auto

loans

forelectric

vehicles

and

pricing

reforms

that

make

electricity

competitive

with

(oftensubsidised)

transport

fuels.

As

with

other

growth

markets,

governments

should

considerrenewable

fuel

standards

or

biofuel

mandates

such

as

those

applied

in

Indonesia

toprovidestablemarketconditionsforinvestors.10InternationalEnergyAgency

|

Reducing

the

Cost

of

CapitalChapter1Unlocking

clean

energy

investmentWhythecostofcapitalmattersS

U

M

M

A

R

Y?

Meeting

national

and

global

climate

goals

requiresa

massive

scale-upincleanenergyinvestments

in

emerging

market

and

developing

economies

(EMDE).

Annual

cleanenergy

investment

to

get

on

track

for

a

1.5-degree

pathway

needs

to

reachUSD1.6trillion

in

EMDE

(excluding

China)

by

the

early

2030s,

up

from

aroundUSD270billion

today.Thesesums

arewaybeyond

thecapabilities

ofpublicfunding.All

sources

of

finance

will

need

to

grow,

but

the

largest

growth

will

need

to

come

fromprivatesources,backedby

strategicandjudicioususeofinternationalpublicfinance.?

A

high

cost

of

capital

in

EMDE

makes

it

much

more

difficult

to

generate

attractive

risk-adjustedreturns,especiallyfor

relativelycapital-intensivecleanenergytechnologies.Survey

data

collected

by

the

IEA

show

that

the

cost

of

capital

is

well

over

twice

as

highinEMDEasitisin

advancedeconomies.?

Country

and

macro

risks

are

the

largest

contributors

to

this

high

cost

of

capital,

butthere

are

also

energy

sector

and

project-specific

risks

that

are

within

the

remit

ofenergypolicymakers

to

address.

These

energy-specific

elements

are

the

focus

of

thisreport,

although

efforts

in

parallel

to

tackle

broader

risks,

such

as

currency

risk,

andtofurtherdevelopdomesticfinancialsystemsinEMDEarealsoessential.?

There

is

a

wealth

of

country

examples

showing

that

predictable

clean

energy

policyframeworks,

based

on

a

coherent

vision

for

energy

transition

investments

andfinance,

are

prerequisites

for

scaling

up

investment.

These

are

areas

where

nationalpolicymakersinEMDEshouldtakethelead.Butmuchgreaterinternationalfinancialand

technical

support

is

also

required,

especially

for

the

least

developed

countriesandnascentmarketswheretechnologyrisksarehigher.?

Mobilising

private

finance

at

the

scale

needed

will

require

at

least

a

tripling

ininternational

concessional

funds

to

help

improve

the

risk

return

profile

of

cleanenergy

projects

across

the

electricity,

end-use

and

low-emission-fuel

sectors.

Anestimated

USD

90billion

to

USD

110billion

per

year

in

concessional

funds

is

neededto

get

on

a

1.5-degree

pathway.

These

funds

can

help

mobilise

private

capital

incountriesandsectors

thatdo

nothaveaccesstocommercial

finance.?

Lowering

the

cost

of

capital

can

substantially

bring

down

the

overall

cost

of

transitionsand

reduce

the

costs

paid

by

consumers.

A

onepercentage

point

reduction

in

the

costofcapitalcompared

with

current

levels

would

savearound

USD

150

billion

in

annualcleanenergyfinancing

costs

(representing20%

of

annual

financing

costs)

for

netzerotransitions

to

2050.

Better

risk

management

through

strong

policy

frameworks

andregulationas

wellasenhanceddeploymentof

de-riskinginstrumentsarekey.Chapter

1

|

Unlockingclean

energyinvestment111.1

ThecleanenergyinvestmentgapCleanenergyinvestments

have

increasedrapidly

in

recentyears,rising

by

40%

since

2020

toreach

an

estimated

USD1.8trillion

in

2023.

These

investments

encompass

a

range

oftechnologies,

including

low-emissions

power

and

fuels,

energy

efficiency

improvements,electrification

of

mobility

and

heat,

and

grids

and

storage.

Spending

in

these

areas

is

nowsignificantlyhigherthantheUSD

1trillion

goingto

unabatedfossilfuels.However,

patternsofinvestment

reveal

a

major

geographical

imbalance.

Morethan

80%ofclean

energy

investments

–

and

the

vast

majority

of

the

increase