Forget Solyndra. Clean energy is hot again.

A number of big institutional investors see risks declining in clean energy and returns that are higher than junk bonds. As a result, clean-energy stocks have soared. Is it too late to get in?

Mark Von Holden/AP/File
SolarCity founders Peter (l.) and Lyndon Rive celebrated the company’s IPO last December. Its stock is up more than 200 percent for the year.
John Kehe/Staff
John Kehe/Staff

Nearly two years after Solyndra's widely politicized collapse, doubts surround solar and the entire clean-energy industry. Will subsidies survive? Will natural gas put solar out of business? To many investors, the industry seems volatile and risky.

But don't tell that to institutional investors. As they see it, the risks in clean energy have fallen and the industry now provides near bondlike safety coupled with yields near or even above 10 percent. That may explain why major firms, including Goldman Sachs, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, Google, Duke Energy, Bank of America, Kleiner Perkins, Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, Rabobank, Wells Fargo, Citi, and Berkshire Hathaway, are pouring money into renewable energy, especially solar and wind.

"Solar is a compelling value proposition," says Nat Kreamer, chief executive officer of Clean Power Finance, a San Francisco-based firm that finances solar projects. Duke Energy, the largest electric power holding company in the United States, announced in June that it was joining other investors using CPF to invest in distributed solar projects that provide reliable rates of return with managed risk.

Or take Goldman Sachs, which is on track to meet its target of providing $40 billion for financing and investing in clean-technology companies over the next decade. In May, it said it will fund $500 million in new projects by SolarCity, a San Mateo, Calif., firm that installs residential and commercial solar energy systems in 14 states. SolarCity has now raised more than $1.6 billion in capital for new solar installations.

So should average investors follow the big guys? Or is it too late to jump in? As of early October, SolarCity (SCTY) stock was up more than 200 percent for the year. Other leading solar energy companies, such as SunPower Corp. (SPWR) and SunEdison Inc. (SUNE), were up 365 percent and 155 percent, respectively.

Analysts are wary. Renewable energy stock prices have soared in the past only to plunge again. Solyndra and other Western solar-cell manufacturers collapsed because of a glut of cheap solar cells from China. Uncertainty over the renewal of clean-energy subsidies has added to the peaks and valleys of investment, because clean-energy companies would struggle without government incentives. An added reason for hesitation: Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has made natural gas abundant and remarkably cheap, making it tougher for renewables to compete.

Nevertheless, industry consolidation and steadily rising demand has improved the footing of the best solar industry manufacturers. They expect their margins to keep improving. Then there are all those cheap solar panels.

In the past, "the residential solar industry was effectively a market where wealthy individuals and early adopters who were interested in being environmentally conscious would pay more for getting solar electricity," says Mr. Kreamer. Now, consumers go solar because they are "paying less for solar electricity than they paid in their utility bills."

Since residential solar lowers consumers' electricity costs and since consumers are used to paying their monthly electricity bills, financing rooftop solar installations provides high returns at low risk, he adds. "The massive growth in deployment of renewable energy" gives investors the opportunity to buy "a bondlike instrument with low credit risk and a return that exceeds junk bond returns." He says that as more people learn about clean energy's sound fundamentals and robust growth, more individual investors will reap the handsome returns already flowing to major investors like Google and Goldman Sachs.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.