Alternative Capital Markets Solutions in Renewable Energy Finance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The panel “Alternative Capital Markets Solutions in Renewable Energy Finance” was held on May 2, 2014, at IMN’s Second Annual Sunshine-Backed Bonds Conference in New York. The purpose of the panel discussion was to look beyond bank lending, tax equity, and securitization to explore alternative capital markets solutions for renewable energy financing. The panelists discussed several different kinds of vehicles. Real estate investment trusts (REITs) are tax-advantaged vehicles that would require changes to federal tax rules to implement fully for renewable-energy assets, but there are alternative approaches that involve REIT financing for real estate connected to solar installations and debt backed by certain types of renewable energy assets, as well as financing a broader range of renewable-energy assets through taxable REIT subsidiaries. “Yieldcos” are taxable corporations that own renewable and/or conventional power generation assets and raise equity capital from the public equity market or private investors. State-sponsored green banks provide some opportunities for private sector developers, but their in-state focus may limit what they can accomplish at a large scale. The “green bond” market has been primarily focused on “use of proceeds” green bonds, which are vanilla debt issued by an established bond issuer that promises to investors that it will use the issuance proceeds to pay for green energy or sustainable infrastructure projects; they have gained increasing focus from issuers, banks, and institutional investors as issuance volumes have grown dramatically to over $20 billion in 2013. Canadian income trusts are designated by the Canada Revenue Agency to operate as profit-seeking corporations but pay out all their earnings to unit holders before paying taxes. TOPICS:ESG investing, portfolio theory, portfolio construction
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".