Podcast: Solar PV Asset Management

May 30, 2017

Welcome to the Solar O&M Insider, the first podcast series dedicated to solar PV operations, maintenance and asset management.  This series is brought to you by Alectris, a global solar asset care innovation firm and is hosted by Glenna Wiseman of Identity3.

Cedric Brehaut of SOLICHAMBA is one of the leading industry analysts for solar PV O&M and asset management.  His annual reports are published in concert with GTM Research.  This month, May 2017, Cedric and his team issued a new report, one that focuses solely on asset management.  In this episode we’ll get his insights into what drove the decision to separate out asset management, highlights of the report and a look at the changing software landscape this space.

Also contributing to this discussion is Laks Sampath, US and Latin America country leader for Alectris.  The Alectris, Solar ERP, ACTIS was part of the software review in this new study.

This episode of the Solar O&M Insider features:

  • Defining Solar Operations and Maintenance (O&M) vs Asset Management (AM)
  • Rationale to Separate O&M and AM Reports
  • Technical vs Financial Solar PV Asset Management
  • Four Trends Shaping Solar Investment Community based on Analysis of 198 Investors
  • Key Findings of Solar Asset Management Software Review
  • Challenges to Asset Management Software Adoption
  • Evolution of Software Suppliers into the Market

Alectris Solar OM Insider podcast on solar asset managementFULL TRANSCRIPT

Welcome to the Solar O&M Insider, the first podcast series dedicated to solar PV operations, maintenance and asset management.  This series is brought to you by Alectris, a global solar asset care innovation firm and is hosted by Glenna Wiseman of Identity3.

Cedric Brehaut of SOLICHAMBA is one of the leading industry analysts for solar PV O&M and asset management.  His annual reports are published in concert with GTM Research.  This month, May 2017, Cedric and his team issued a new report, one that focuses solely on asset management.  In this episode, we’ll get his insights into what drove the decision to separate out asset management, highlights of the report and a look at the changing software landscape this space.

Also contributing to this discussion is Laks Sampath, US and Latin America country leader for Alectris.  The Alectris, Solar ERP, ACTIS was part of the software review in this new study.

Cedric: Thank you, Glenna. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Laks: Thanks, Glenna. Happy to be here.

Defining Solar Operations and Maintenance (O&M) vs Asset Management (AM)
Glenna: Cedric, welcome back to the Solar O&M Insider. Let’s start with the bit of perspective. Can you give us a quick definition of O&M versus asset management?

Cedric: Sure. That is the big question, isn’t it? I’ll give you a bit of a formal definition and then I’ll give you some color on it. So typically, in the power generation industry, the term asset management, oftentimes abbreviated as AM, is the financial, commercial, legal and technical management of the assets. It includes pretty much all dimensions. But it is usually considered separately from operations and maintenance. The way I like to define it is: asset management is the scope that is assigned to an asset manager as opposed to an O&M manager. And in most cases, at least for large plants, an asset manager does some oversight on O&M activities but is not in charge of execution of O&M activities. So that is where I draw the line. The asset manager is in charge of all the aspects, including financial, commercial, legal and technical, and usually they do the financial, commercial and legal aspects, but on the technical side it’s more of an oversight function to make sure that the O&M is done properly and that performance is optimized. They oversee O&M, they don’t do O&M.

Glenna: Okay, and same question to you, Laks. You have many years working in this sector. What is your quick definition?

Laks: I agree with Cedric to a certain extent. Where I start to diverge is the way I view asset management is two pieces. The financial and legal side which is what Cedric was talking about. And then there’s the technical asset management. For me, the technical consists of actually managing the actual plant which is the hard assets. The panels, the modules, the substation, the inverters, transformers, so on and so forth. Where plant operations and maintenance come in is what is going on with these actual assets in the field. You would rarely catch me calling it O&M because plant operations is the key to managing the technical management of this asset, making sure you have spare parts, making sure the plant is actually operating correctly like it is supposed to, all the reporting that the financial asset management needs, providing that to them. Maintenance to me is strictly boots on the ground and that happens the minute a service ticket is actually introduced and that’s when maintenance comes. Anything before a service ticket is issued is strictly operations of the plant and that’s how I kind of tend to define these three pieces.

Glenna: Well, we can see how we could have a whole talk just on this.

Cedric: Yes, we certainly could.

Rationale to Separate O&M and AM Reports
Glenna: Let’s stay focused because I want to really dive into this particular report. In your previous report, Cedric, you’ve kind of quote “lumped together” O&M and asset management and you’ve alluded a little bit to why that has changed now. But tell us what has shaped your new report and the decision to go in this direction. And the new report, everyone, is called “Solar PV Asset Management, 2017 to 2022.”

Cedric: Well, that’s a good question, Glenna and really, it comes down to looking at markets and the players.  The decision to separate it out was because I am convinced that these are distinct markets with distinct dynamics and a distinct set of market players. When I came to that conclusion it made perfect sense to separate it out. In the beginning, it was part of the analysis that I did with O&M and over the years, the O&M report evolved to being called O&M and asset management because, gradually, I included a little bit more and more of asset management. But as I came to understand the asset management landscape better and to dive deeper into its analysis, it became clearer and clearer that it needed its own report because I just couldn’t handle both in one report unless I made it a 300-page report that would take six months to write and it would be almost outdated by the time it would be published. We decided to split it out and having done it, I think I’m comforted in the fact that it was the right decision because separating it was what allowed me to dive deeper into the asset management aspects and not having to worry about O&M which I’ll cover in the next edition of the report. It does make sense in hindsight as well.

Glenna: And the timing, just to have an idea of the rhythm of these reports. The solar asset management just has come out this month May, 2017 and the O&M generally comes out later in the year. Correct?

Cedric: Yes, the O&M is in the Fall.

Technical vs Financial Solar PV Asset Management
Glenna: Okay, so people can kind of get that in their minds. Let’s dive into the different parts of asset management. Laks, you touched on it just a minute ago, technical versus financial asset management. Maybe you could elaborate a little bit on that and tell us why it’s important for owner, operators to match these areas to the right service suppliers.

Laks: That’s a good one simply because to me, financial…If you look at…If we’re going from left to right, there’s a financial asset management, there’s a technical asset management, there’s a plant operations and then the plant maintenance. The O, which is the operations, is really the linchpin between technical asset management and maintenance and it’s the technical asset management which is…O can be part of that, the operations side of it simply because that’s where you get all the data, production numbers from. That the financial asset managers need. So it could be the same person but, you know, are you going to find somebody who is able to tell whether the plant was producing properly and report properly or are you going to find more a person that is more an operations person? The key here is how do you reduce cost? At the end of the day, everybody’s trying to reduce cost of plant operations. We’ll say we want to reduce cost of plant operations but then we end up spending a lot more money on plant maintenance. The reason you spend a lot more money on plant maintenance is simply because you don’t have an effective plant operations team.

If you have an effective plant operations team, then you can really minimize the truck rolls by combining certain aspects of the maintenance, boots on the ground. For example, we have an issue at one of our plants. We’re a three-megawatt plant, a transformer blew up. It is now time for doing preventive maintenance, as well. So now instead of just sending the guys out to do the corrective maintenance, we also have them do preventative maintenance during their downtime so you reduce the cost for actually the entire process. So that is critical and that’s why I kind of tend to break it down the way I do. It has financial impact to making sure that your plant operations are a very effective operation.

Glenna: So, Cedric, first, let’s kind of clarify terminology so it matches up with your report. Do you call financial asset management financial or do you have another term you use in your report?

Cedric: Well, what Laks calls financial asset management I call asset management and I lump in the financial aspects but also commercial and legal. It means that the terminology can fluctuate a bit and unfortunately, we don’t have a well-accepted set of definitions but as a market analyst I’m trying to push towards standardization of terms.

I do agree that there’s a separation between the financial, commercial, legal on one side and then technical on the other side and as you move into the O&M realm, you get into operations and then maintenance. I do agree with that and I do see also that there is…that the line between technical asset management and plant operations is often blurred. That is definitely true. And there’s some overlap between these functions. I think the main difference would be that people in charge of plant operations look at things in real time every single day, all day, as opposed to an asset manager or even a technical asset manager is just going to check it once in a while. Depending on their processes, they may check it every day or they may check it every month. It really depends on portfolio size and the processes for this particular asset and how much they trust their operations people. But they’re not doing things real-time in most cases. That’s another element to add to the separation that we mentioned before is the…how closely you look at things. But overall, I would say I’m aligned with what Laks said and for sure, a stronger plant operations yields dividends in terms of your maintenance.

Glenna: Well, and this all just makes for a very interesting, constantly evolving industry in which standards…the standardization and the definition of terminology around the globe is quite fascinating to watch develop and so I think your reports are really important to help us understand that, Cedric. Okay, so we’ve got this area where technical asset management kind of is the gray area between O&M and asset management in your terminology. Am I understanding that correctly?

Cedric: Yes.

Glenna: Okay, perfect.

Laks: Glenna, and I completely agree with the way Cedric characterized it. Yes, he’s right. The technical asset management is not a day to day kind of a thing. It is just like financial asset management. It’s not actually day to day. They’re probably really busy the first two weeks of a month when they’re closing all the different kinds of things. And the rest of the time they’re looking to make sure that legal contracts are in place, the leases are in place, so on and so forth. So, yes, in that sense, he’s absolutely right. It’s a little bit more static than the day to day operations.

Glenna: I think we’re really honing in on the important differences here in terms of the titles of the people that are involved and the level of activity, day to day, versus more on a monthly basis. Does that make sense?

Laks: Yes.

Four Trends Shaping the Solar Investment Community based on Analysis of 198 Investors
Glenna: Okay, perfect, all right. And Cedric, I understand that your report incorporates the input of 198 investors. Is that correct?

Cedric: It analyzes 198 investors. I couldn’t talk to 198 investors. That would take too long but yes. That’s correct. I’ve analyzed as many as 198 which is…it’s one of those projects where you start something thinking it’s going to be a certain amount of work and you end up with spending a lot more time on it than you thought, but I’m pleased with the results.

Glenna: And those investors that count for 55 gigawatts of solar capacity?

Cedric: That’s right.

Glenna: That’s a lot of input and review and incorporation of the feedback or, you know, the input from the investment community. Congratulations on that. What did you learn from all that that you can share with us and what can the industry do better to meet their needs from your point of view?

Cedric: There are a lot of things evolving as trends. With the limited time we have, I’ll just pick on a few. One big aspect I think is geographic diversification of portfolios. It may not be as apparent in the US but it is definitely a strong trend when you look at things from a global perspective. We’re moving from investors that are focused on one country to investors and portfolios that are covering multiple countries. Clearly, multiple countries within Europe but also multiple countries across continents including Europe and then potentially Asia or Latin America. We’re really transitioning from a country specific investment landscape to a more geographically diverse set of portfolios. And this has an impact on the entire value chain because these portfolios need to be serviced and we’re now seeing investors that want to have one or a small number of providers on the asset management side and on the O&M side potentially across their portfolios as opposed to just having one set of vendors per country. So that’s one big trend.

Another trend is energy trading because you see more and more projects globally where solar is participating in wholesale markets. This brings in another set of challenges. It may not make much difference from an O&M standpoint although it could from a perspective that you have to now do a better job at scheduling your power, forecasting it and you  have to make even more efforts to reduce unplanned outages. But the bigger difference is on the business side, on the commercial and financial aspects: you’re now selling energy on wholesale markets which is completely different than having a straight PPA or a Feed in tariff.

But another big trend, I would say a third one, is the convergence with wind. I wrote a piece on this topic that’s going to be published by Green Tech Media in the next few days and it’s the fact that many investors own both wind and solar assets and from an O&M perspective, there’s a bunch of differences. So we still see distinct landscapes but from an asset management perspective, it’s not that different. I think we can expect the convergence of the investors to translate also into the convergence of the asset management service providers.

And then maybe one last trend because I don’t want to monopolize the mic here is process automation because we have price pressure across the value chain so everybody needs to get more efficient in what they do and that includes asset management and that a lot of companies are using software to automate these processes.

Three Key Findings of Solar Asset Management Software Review
Glenna: Well, and that’s a perfect segue because in our whirlwind discussion here…because software is obviously a hugely important component to managing dispersed portfolios and gives you the ability to incorporate multiple renewable energy technologies into one platform if you have the right software. Let’s talk about the software part of your study a little bit. My information is that you covered 10 software vendors with solutions that were applicable to 12.5 gigawatts and that included the Alectris solution called ACTIS. Is that correct?

Cedric: Yes, that’s correct.

Glenna: In our blog post related to this, we’ll have a graph that has some of the attributes related to this software. Tell us a little bit, Cedric, about your key findings there that you can share with us. And remember, everyone, this is a purchased research project so you’ll want to check out the GTM website, GTM Research website where you can purchase the research and, you know, get it soon before he’s started the next one. And because this is a fast-moving industry so you want to stay on top of it.

Cedric: That’s right. And we still have a bit of time before the next one but to me, it almost seems like I’m starting the next one as soon as I finish the previous one. Let’s talk about key findings on the software side. I think one of the key findings is that it…this is still an early market and the adoption rates are low. We can pat ourselves on the back and come back and think, “Oh, my God. Twelve and a half gigawatts of software.” Yes, but it’s 12.5 gigawatts and for the top 200 or 198 investors that I analyzed, they manage 55 gigawatts. And then if you look at the overall total install base across segments globally, it’s 300 gigawatts. There’s still a long way to go. I would say still in early markets, still low adoption rates. We’re getting there but there’s still a long way.

Another key finding is that flexibility is super important because there’s no such thing as standard processes for asset management so a software has to be flexible to adapt to pretty much any variation of processes that a particular customer may have. And that’s tough because at the same time you want something that’s easy to use and to deploy. It’s very hard to reconcile these two characteristics of a software package having at the same time something that’s going to be super flexible to do pretty much anything any way the customer wants it and at the same time, be fast to deploy, cost effective and easy to use. I think that’s the conundrum that software companies have to work with, and it adds to the challenge.

A third point that I can highlight is that integration with other platforms is absolutely key and when you look at the diagrams that we’re referring to here and that’ll be included in the blog post, it highlights the fact that asset management software is in the middle of an ecosystem of many different pieces of software. Even the scope of an asset management software itself can be defined in different ways. And some vendors include certain pieces, others don’t, and it may make sense for certain customers, not others. So pretty much, it’s a world of integration, and software solutions that evolve in this environment have to take that into account.

Challenges to Asset Management Software Adoption
Glenna: So Laks, Cedric has hit on a really important point that we’ve got this 300 or so gigawatts of installed solar out there but we’re only dealing with a fraction of it on the asset management software side. In addition to the integration issue, what other kinds of things do you think are stumbling blocks or challenges in terms of the adoption of asset management software?

Laks: The primary stumbling block is recognition for a need for it.

Cedric: Yes.

Laks: Cedric mentioned emerging trends. It was nice to see that a platform like ACTIS actually hits three of the four emerging trends which is, you know, I’d like to take process automation first because that’s the scariest for existing, you know, investors is that, “Geez, I’m already on this platform. Do I really want to move? If I move, will I be able to integrate it?”

The problem right now is one of siloes. Monitoring is done on one platform. You could have a portfolio of five different monitoring platforms that you’re looking at. You could have SAP as your financial back end. You could have Quick Books as your financial back end. You could have Service Max as your, you know, service ticket management. The key question is are these all integrated? How do you export stuff from the production numbers or the alerts that you get from monitoring companies to a Service Max and then onto the overall report that the financial asset management. I’ll stick to that definition of Cedric’s which is fine. The asset manager has to provide to his community.

You know, the key here is all of these pieces. When you talk about process automation, integration is key whereas a platform like ACTIS is actually built on Microsoft Dynamics CRM which essentially means that automatically anything that Microsoft Dynamics CRM can integrate with, we can integrate with. We have APIs through which we can collect the data. We can create the trouble tickets. We can manage all of those pieces. We can manage the boots on the ground. So that part of the integration has already happened.

The other piece you had talked about earlier in emerging trends have to do with geographic differences as well as wind. If you take the geographic part of it, this software is developed in Europe and so we’re already across the pond, so to speak of. And so, we are fully on the geographic scale as well.

As far as wind goes, we are in discussions right now to integrate wind into our portfolio because there are some new wind players. See, the existing wind players already have something or the other. And in fact, the big ones really do have it in siloes. And I’ve talked to a few of them and they go…they don’t talk to each other. The different siloes, I mean.

Wind is something that we are starting to look into and starting to get that information as well. So three out of four isn’t bad, Cedric. Trading is something obviously, we have to kind of look into to see what needs to happen there. And when we do that, you’ll suddenly have a fully integrated software which from a technical asset management side of it we actually do the financial side as well but again, there people are saying, “Yeah, but we have the rest of our finances on Quick Books or SAP,” or whatever the choice software is. We can integrate with them. Give you a simple example, we use our software to manage 350 megawatts of solar systems. All of our vendors are paid through the ACTIS system. That’s because ACTIS is integrated with our back end. Our finance guys use SAP so it all happens automatically.

Earlier, if you heard a little ding-a-ding from my side of the world, I clicked over and it was a payment that was made. I already got notice that one of my vendors got paid for going and washing modules. When they call me, I don’t have to call my accountant to say, “Hey, did you pay this guy to start washing the modules? I have to pay 50%.” No, I just go to ACTIS and look at it because we’re fully integrated with SAP. It is key to have that integration or the process automation which Cedric was talking about earlier.

Glenna: I just have to ask this question, Cedric, to you because we did a webinar a while back and looking at sort of data and it was shocking to me. We had people from all over the world who participated in it and a lot of them a), didn’t know how much time their team spent on these reports and b), were still on Excel only. And I just like our…as an industry, are we just…we just don’t want to let go of our Excel? I mean, what is it with that? Any comments?

Cedric: Excel is a blessing and a curse at the same time because you can…for one plant, you can start doing things in Excel. And then you add a second one and you’re like, “Okay, I can change it. I can make it work.” And then, little by little, it becomes more and more painful and more complicated and at some point you outgrow Excel but you’re used to it. There’s an inertia and a challenge in having people switch over and then Excel is virtually free. I mean, it has a cost but it is virtually free. But it becomes sometimes difficult for software providers to go out there and say, “Hey, you can save money, you can be more efficient but here you need to pay for software.” And people look at you and it’s like, “What? Your software is expensive.” It is a bit difficult because asset management software providers have to sell an ROI to people who may not know exactly how much they’re spending in labor.

Glenna: Bingo. If you have a scenario where you have an increasingly complex portfolio geographically spread out with teams geographically spread out and those Excel spreadsheets live on somebody’s desktop, they’re not Cloud based, they’re not transparent to the rest of their team, you, as an owner, operator, investor, whatever configuration it is that has, you know, ownership of that plant, are at risk of that data and that information not being available to you should something happen to that person who’s holding that data.

Cedric: Right. And I mean, I would say even if you’ve done things right, you do have some Cloud backup and the files are still there, I don’t know if you have personally experienced trying to understand a complex Excel file created by someone else. I have. I wouldn’t say it’s impossible but in most cases, what you’re going to have happen is the new person that’s probably going to redo their own thing in Excel again. You just have an incredible waste of time and waste of expertise every time you get a new person. And I’m sorry to say that but it’s unlikely that an asset manager will stay 10 years or 20 years on the job. They will move on just like people do. And so, every time a new person gets on board, Excel is a liability and creates a high cost of transition and creates risk of things falling through the cracks during that transition period, too.

Glenna: Well, all excellent points that we could spend another whole session on, I’m sure.

Cedric: Yes.

Glenna: Let’s just ask were there any surprises as you looked at this software?

Cedric: The biggest surprise I had, I’ll tell you that it shocked me, is a story from a software provider talking with a portfolio owner in Europe and explaining to me how things can be done with software and that, “Oh, instead of using X number of people, you use a lot less people and things will be more robust,” and then having the owner tell them, “But what am I going to do with these people?” It can be an issue particularly in countries…in mature markets where you have contracts secured for a longer period of time like Germany, you still have a lot of megawatts, gigawatts actually, of assets that were secured with very high feeding tariffs where the owners have no incentive to go and reduce the costs and they just don’t want to go and fire people. I didn’t think of that until the actual story was told to me and it is true that in some markets you may hit a wall if you try to sell productivity gains because simply they don’t want to get rid of the people. I don’t think we have this problem culturally in the US.

Glenna: That’s why I’m laughing. It’s like, “Wow.”

Cedric: That’s why I’m telling this story, too, is because I really don’t think it would be an issue in the US and I don’t think it is. But this is one thing that surprised me. Probably the thing that surprised me the most.

Laks: Cedric, I don’t want to be too hasty in saying that culture doesn’t prevail here. I’ll give you a simple anecdote. Last year, I was coming back from SPI, a large portfolio holder. I ran into an old friend on the airplane and he said, “Oh, you know what? You should meet this person. This person is our asset manager. She’ll be able to address what you are talking about.” I got talking to her returning back home and at the end of the conversation, she said, “But Laks, if I had your software, why does the company need me?” I know it’s a pregnant clause but how you just, you know…

Cedric: No. That is true. I think that can be a concern for some of the folks out there and I think it’s mitigated a lot in the US though because you still have such high growth in portfolios in the US and in emerging markets like Latin America and Asia that it’s not a question of are you going to fire people or lay people off. The question is, “How many more sites can you handle with the same amount of people if you improve these processes?” It’s a much more positive way of looking at things versus markets that are on the mature side maybe like Germany or the UK is kind of getting to a stall. They’re no longer going to grow in the next few years. In those markets, if you look at productivity gains, you are looking at potentially laying people off. I think that whether you’re in a mature market or a fast-growing market, the perspective is different. But I totally can believe the attitude that you’re talking about where some folks may feel threatened by software that automates things. But I do think it’s a trend that we’re not going to stop because price pressure is here and you need something to be able to continue to operate and meet the price points that the market demands.

Evolution of Software Suppliers into the Market
Glenna: Well, and I think it’s human nature to be concerned or apprehensive about change. And so, when you’re looking at the huge amount of growth that’s going to continue across the planet related to solar and the drive to be competitive with more traditional energy sources this part of the software on the asset management side is critical to the equation. You know? I think what you’ve done here, Cedric, is really phenomenal. Is there anything that you’d like to add related to how you see those SaaS providers coming into the market? You know, where have they evolved from? Alectris came out of, you know, building and designing, building and operating actually plants and developed this software because they wanted to use it for themselves. Is that the track or is it multiple kinds of tracks into the market? What do you see?

Cedric: Well, I see that all the players that I analyzed are software as a service companies.  They all have software DNA. The majority are focused on the asset management software piece but there’s also some monitoring companies that are moving into the asset management software space and there is oftentimes a blurred line between monitoring and asset management software. It gets into the level of granularity that gets into the frequency as well. Real time data versus aggregated data and we see an evolution where even customers are not always clear. They ask their monitoring provider to do more asset management stuff and then they’re asking the asset management software providers to do more monitoring, sometimes without realizing that these are two different solutions and we should not try to have everything in one. It’s a bit difficult.

But I would say that’s part of the equation and the other part of the market is simply there’s a bunch of third party asset management companies that prefer to do their own software and that’s the other part of the market. There’s a few examples of companies, of such companies that also sell the software in itself but most…in most cases, they just do their own thing. They’ve realized that Excel was no good and they’ve looked at the software space and many have the assumption that that software is too expensive. Right or wrong, I cannot tell. They decide to have their own software initiative. So that’s another phenomenon that we see out there.

Glenna: Okay, all right. So Laks, you’ve mentioned many of the attributes of ACTIS, the ACTIS Solar ERP Platform. Is there anything that you want to sort of add to the mix here as we start to wrap up?

Laks: The only thing I want to add to the mix is that Cedric was absolutely right. People are trying to move in from the monitoring side into the asset management side and vice versa and stuff like that. The key here is monitoring plant operations, paying attention to alerts, paying attention to productivity, being able to create trouble tickets on the fly based on alerts, sending out, scheduling your service providers in the key areas…how well can somebody integrate all of this in a platform? I know Cedric said it is, it gets complex. The nice thing is ACTIS actually is a complex software and so a lot of people look at it differently depending on what color glass they’re wearing or which area they’re looking at. What we’re trying to do is to look…have them look at it in the clear glass rather than any colored glass.

Glenna: Cedric, where can listeners get more information about your study?

Cedric: They can simply go to GTM Research and look for the report. It’s called “Solar PV Asset Management, 2017 – 2022” because it includes market forecasts all the way to 2022. There’s also a lot of other reports at GTM Research. I’m currently starting the work on the upcoming global PV monitoring report and then as we mentioned earlier, in the Fall, there will be a new edition of the operations and maintenance report.

Glenna: What next industry event could folks hear you speak?

Cedric: I will be at Intersolar North America, in the asset management track.

Glenna: Thank you, Cedric and Laks, for joining us for this session of the Solar O&M Insider.

Cedric: Thank you, Glenna. Thank you, Laks.

Laks: Thanks, Glenna, for having me.

Glenna: And thank you, listeners, for joining us for this session reviewing the state of Solar PV Asset Management by the industry’s leading analyst, Cedric Brehaut. Email us at marketing (at) alectris.com to send us your ideas for topics and guests for the series.

I’m Glenna Wiseman. The Solar O&M Insider Podcast Series is brought to you by Alectris at alectris.com.