GreenVolts crumbles and questions about the future of HCPV emerge from the rubble

The high concentrating PV (HCPV) company, GreenVolts, is officially selling its assets after its primary investor, ABB, pulled support from the startup. GreenVolts outsourced its manufacturing to contractors such as Foxconn, so assets up for sale will largely be intellectual property.

GreenVolts obtained exactly what many small solar manufacturers are looking for: a large, well-positioned, strategic investor to add bankability and take responsibility for driving growth. Semprius found that in Seimens, and Miasolé had been looking for a buyer and recently closed with Hanergy. While the advantages of this gaining significant support from a strategic investor are numerous, there is also an inherent risk, as became apparent with GreenVolts and ABB. If the investor proves fickle and decides to cut losses, the solar company will not be able to survive. Strategic investors that invest in solar need to be willing to take a short-term loss for long-term gain.

For the broader HCPV industry, GreenVolts’ failure adds to concern surrounding the industry that has been growing since Amonix shut down its Las Vegas manufacturing facility (client registration required). We expect the situation to get worse before it gets better, but our favorites – Soitec, SolFocus, and Suncore as outlined in the Lux Research report, “Putting High-Concentrating Photovoltaics into Focus” (client registration required) – are still moving forward on capacity and installation targets, and can easily satisfy our 700 MW HCPV demand forecast in 2017.

As hype for HCPV dwindles, companies are starting to look into low concentrating PV (LCPV) as an intermediate technology between expensive, highly efficiency HCPV and cheap, less efficient flat panel PV. SunPower’s C7 product aims to do just that with reflectors that concentrate sunlight 7X onto SunPower’s interdigitated back contact (IBC) solar cells with 22.8% cell efficiency under 7X concentration. The company has an agreement with Tucson Electric Power to install 6 MW of the LCPV product. Low concentration allows for a broader range of reflector options as long as they are cheap and limit optical losses. SunPower’s C7 system uses parabolic trough glass mirrors, but startups like TenKsolar and Absolicon use 3M reflector films, Solaria uses patterned glass, and Cool Earth Solar uses a proprietary refractive film co-developed with Avery Dennison.

Monocrystalline silicon (c-Si) solar cells used in LCPV modules are many times cheaper on a per area basis than multijunction cells used in HCPV modules; however, c-Si cells are more susceptible to heat and UV degradation, and benefits from increased encapsulant transparency will multiply under concentration, which can translate to interesting opportunities for innovative material suppliers. Material and chemical companies may want to look to LCPV as a potential new market for innovative optical or encapsulation materials.

Siemens’ low-energy desal system – Deal or no deal?

At Singapore’s International Water Week conference in July, Siemens announced the results of its low-energy electrodialysis desalination system. The project for the Singapore government targeted energy usage of just 1.5 kWh/m3, which is near the theoretical limit* for desalination technology. Siemens operated the Singapore plant for the last three years, and during that period reduced its energy consumption to 1.7 kWh/m3. However, they explained to Lux that the system’s opex and capex still needed improvement to be truly competitive with seawater reverse osmosis (RO). Contractually, failing to reach the 1.5 kWh/m3 target holds no penalty. Siemens said that it had completed optimization of the plant, but added that it’s still working in the lab to reduce costs. It aims to unveil the product of that work in 12 months to 24 months.

In learning more about this technology, some things stood out to us. First, the system’s membrane is 10 times more expensive than the threshold for cost effectiveness. This is especially striking given that it’s an off-the-shelf product with no modifications. In addition, the system achieved a relatively low freshwater recovery of 35%. Although electrodialysis systems are not expected to require as much pretreatment as reverse osmosis, this system operated behind an existing ultrafiltration membrane, signifying a best-case scenario. Further, this solely Siemens-driven effort created more than 100 invention disclosures, suggesting the project is at least as much research as development.

While Siemens has proven it is possible to approach the theoretical limits of energy use for desalination using electrodialysis, it has yet to prove it can do so in a cost effective way. Without this, it is unlikely this system will see the widespread implementation implied from the buzz surrounding its press release.

* Client registration required.

GE and partners back Emefcy’s energy-positive water treatment technology

Late last month, Energy Technology Ventures (a joint venture between GE, NRG Energy, and ConocoPhilips) announced plans to invest an undisclosed amount in Israeli company Emefcy. Additional investors included Pond Venture Partners, Plan B Ventures, and Israel Cleantech Ventures.

Emefcy has developed a microbial fuel cell (MFC) that uses naturally-occurring bacteria in an electrogenic bioreactor to treat wastewater and generate electricity. It works by using bacteria to biologically oxidize organic chemicals dissolved in wastewater. Specifically, the bacteria release electrons, free protons, and CO2 as part of their metabolic processes. The electrons are captured by the anode, while the free protons combine with oxygen that permeates the cathode to make water and complete the electrical circuit.

In effect, Emefcy’s technology harvests renewable energy directly from wastewater. This, the company claims, is less energy-intensive than conventional aerobic processes or methane-producing anaerobic digestion, and enables an energy-positive wastewater treatment plant. According to both Emefcy and Energy Technology Ventures, the benefits of this technology are both economic and environmental. In its release, Emefcy states that “conventional wastewater treatment uses 2% of global power capacity (80,000 megawatts and 57,000,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide), costing $40 billion per year.”

While GE’s interest in the technology is remarkable, arch competitor Siemens reported in a poster session at this week’s Singapore International Water Week that it is in the process of building its own pilot scale MFC.

Emefcy’s target markets include wastewater treatment in the food and beverage, pharmaceutical and chemical industries. We estimate that the addressable market size is $4.25 billion, comparable to that of membrane bioreactors plus conventional aerobic treatment equipment. The company plans to use Energy Technology Ventures’ investment to further develop the technology into a full-scale commercial plant by the end of this year “for municipal and industrial wastewater treatment,” said Emefcy’s CEO Eytan Levy.

GE is a large player in wastewater treatment, and is expanding its technology focus on Israel, calling it the “Silicon Valley of water technology.” In fact, GE recently opened its newest research and development center in Haifa, which will partner with local technology companies and universities to develop clean energy, water, and healthcare technologies. GE is also partnering with Kinrot Ventures, an incubator company that’s based in Israel and active in the water space.

The demand response market shakeout continues

On March 3, the building controls giant Johnson Controls announced its acquisition of EnergyConnect, a demand response company, for $32 million. EnergyConnect offers a software-as-a-service energy dashboard focused on the commercial and industrial (C&I) ”price-response” demand response market, which helps customers save money by shifting consumption to times with lower electricity rates. It also offers traditional “dispatch” demand response to reduce energy consumption during periods of peak demand. 

Building on a 60% revenue growth in 2010, EnergyConnect further increased its acquisition appeal in January when it won a multi-year contract with the California State University (CSU) system, which also happens to be a customer of EnergyConnect’s competitor EnerNOC. This head-to-head competition of direct response players within one institution is indicative of the increasingly competitive C&I marketplace, and the competition will only get hotter as building management systems integrate more deeply with smart-grid systems. 

The strategic alignment of Johnson Controls with EnergyConnect furthers the ongoing consolidation in the DR industry, highlighted last year when Honeywell acquired Akuacom (see the May 17, 2010 LRGJ*). The “big four” building controls companies – JCI, Honeywell, Siemens, and Schneider Electric – all now have significant stakes in the lucrative C&I demand response market. As these diversified companies supplement their core offerings with a demand response add-on it will squeeze pure-play demand response providers like EnerNOC and Comverge by driving their margins down (see the November 17, 2010 LRPJ*).

As we reported last fall (see the September 29, 2010 LRPJ*), it is not only the building controls companies who are applying the squeeze, but also utilities (see the September 22, 2010 LRPJ*) and third-party deal-makers. As the size of the pie for C&I demand response grows, the winners will be determined not only by their ability to find new slices in uncharted territory, but also their ability to take bites out of competitors’ pieces by offering multiple DR services. Clients should divest investments in pure-play demand response companies, and look to establish partnerships in the building IT space before the best offerings are off the table (see the Lux Research report, Sifting Winners from Losers in the Building IT Acquisition Frenzy*).

*Client registration required.

Siemens’ acquisition strategically adds value to its membrane business

In a continuation of Siemens’ membrane-related acquisitions and internal developments in its water business, Siemens Water Technology announced its acquisition this month of the Clearlogx Process chemical feed system from MarMac Water LLC. The Clearlogx system is an automated chemical feed system that enhances organic contaminant removal in water and wastewater. The system’s proprietary controlled release of acid, coagulant, and chlorine reduces membrane fouling and the formation of disinfection byproduct. What is especially interesting is that combining coagulants with a membrane system will result in a more efficient treatment technology.

In our report earlier this year titled “Filtering out growth prospects in the $1.5 billion membrane market” (client registration required) we noted that fouling is the top issue plaguing membrane-treatment systems. So, improving fouling resistance for membranes would allow the technology to gain significant market share. Multi-functional membranes and membrane systems combine multiple technology solutions that can both filter out contaminants from wastewater as well as remove them – either by killing, dissolving, or breaking them down. Often, we see membrane companies pair with a chemical disinfectant or precipitation technology provider to offer customers a more complete treatment train. For large companies, developing such systems is even easier, and the Clearlogx acquisition provides the Siemens’ Memcor membrane system with chemicals that can reduce membrane fouling so they can treat greater volumes of wastewater with membranes that have increased life. Because of the added functionality, we expect to see growth of Memcor’s presence in pharmaceutical and food and beverage process water treatment.

Which water technology will help unlock offshore oil and gas reserves?

Graphic of the weekAlong with the crude oil and natural gas that fuels modern civilization, the energy industry brings nearly 233 billion barrels of wastewater from beneath the earth’s surface every year. This so-called “produced water” can contain a variety of contaminants – from oil and grease to chemicals, micro-organisms, and radioactive elements. The need to treat this water before disposal or reuse has attracted a multitude of technology developers clambering to tackle the challenge. This week’s graphic ranks 29 companies developing solutions for offshore produced water treatment.

Offshore oil platforms are a wholly different kettle of fish than onshore rigs. Clearly, offshore technologies must fit within strict confines, making large treatment systems simply unfeasible. Plus, disposal options are limited for offshore produced water. Generally it is just discharged into the ocean, and regulation around contaminant levels is strictly enforced. Energy exploration and production companies are required to send monthly discharge samples for testing. Regulation for offshore produced water discharge is mainly focused on dissolved and dispersed hydrocarbon content. This last factor helps explain the favorable position of MyCelx Technologies Corporation and Abtech Industries. Both companies derive their high technical score for developing hydrocarbon absorbing polymer technology, which suits for the size and contaminant considerations of offshore treatment.

Veolia MPPE occupies the Dominant quadrant in several of the report’s figures, including this one. In the case of offshore treatment, the company’s position is due in part to applications in the North Sea, which has the most strict discharge limits of less than 20 ppm of hydrocarbons allowed and a “no damage requirement,” which Veolia’s system is able to address. The challenge with absorbants is that they produce waste (sponge or beads) that also needs to be managed. For this reason, advanced oxidation and coarse filtration are other technologies applied to this market segment.

Honeywell’s entrance into demand response sends shivers through the nascent industry

Earlier this month, Honeywell announced its acquisition of Akuacom, a Bay-area company that provides automated demand response technology and services for the smart grid. The acquisition beefs up Honeywell’s current smart-grid portfolio by enabling it to provide utilities and independent system operators (ISOs) two-way communication with energy management systems at commercial and industrial sites. This capability lets utilities and ISOs automate the delivery of price and reliability signals to these facilities and more effectively trim peak demand.

With nearly ubiquitous temperature and HVAC controls (several of which already interface with demand response software), Honeywell is already one of the “big four” building controls firms – along with Johnson Controls, Siemens, and Schneider Electric. The company is currently the largest residential demand response player in North America. It also has a presence in more than 10 million commercial buildings and thousands of industrial plants. As such, adding demand  response technology will let Honeywell leap from inside the building envelope to the utility and provide an end-to-end connection between energy provider and user to reduce peak energy demand and maintain optimum building efficiency.

The acquisition marks the beginning of industry consolidation that will see a handful of winners emerging from the demand response segment. Among them will be established early entrants like EnerNOC, and a half dozen or so alignments between large building control players and key demand response firms. There may also be one or two stranger alliances between large appliance makers and demand response firms, such as by the Tendril-GE pact. Thus, look for a few more high-profile demand response acquisitions to occur as  other stalwart control firms quickly follow suit in the wake of Honeywell’s Akuocom acquisition. Meanwhile, we also expect the vast majority of mass-produced, VC-backed demand response and building energy management firms to be frozen out of the market and fall off the map.