Proposals for businesses to match clean energy procurement with electricity use on an hourly, instead of annual, basis has stirred debate among stakeholders worldwide. Nonprofit EnergyTag, a proponent of time-stamped certificates, recently held workshops in Singapore, Taipei and Shanghai. Argus spoke to its Asia Pacific head Shailesh Telang. Edited highlights follow.
How much interest is there in Asia for hourly matching of renewable energy procurement?
Interest is rising faster than what we expected, especially among large corporations with global supply chains. Singapore stakeholders see matching as essential for credible cross-border clean power imports. Half-hourly power market data is available, so the country is a natural hub for time-stamped certificates.
Taipei already has the T-REC certificate system built upon granular power data. Industry participants think hourly matching is critical for maintaining global competitiveness.
The conversation in China is geared towards system efficiency, where hourly matching and time-based emissions factors can be tools to integrate renewables and energy storage.
We expect momentum to grow further when the 24/7 Carbon-Free Coalition [of global businesses] launches more widely next year.
Asia has many regulated power markets. Do the merits of hourly matching still apply, and what policy changes are needed to advance renewables uptake?
In Asia-Pacific, we believe the feasibility of hourly matching is higher than what many people assume. There are three enablers.
First, more power grids are settled at 5-30 minute intervals. Second, smart metres are rolling out in countries such as Vietnam and India. And corporate demand for high-integrity claims is growing. So the technical foundation for hourly matching exists.
In countries with wholesale power markets and active corporate procurement, such as Australia, India and Japan, key policies needed are better access to meter and market data, expansion of hybrid PPAs and energy storage, and enabling time-stamped certificates.
In partially liberalised markets, such as Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia, policy steps include clarifying PPA frameworks and recognising the role of energy storage.
In vertically integrated markets, hourly matching will likely start as utility or retailer-led products, and industrial pilots. Priorities here are improving data transparency and enabling corporate power procurement.
A big part of 24/7 clean energy comes from storage-backed renewables, but battery storage is still nascent in Asia. How will this impact the feasibility of hourly matching?
Granular matching directly supports energy storage. In markets with high solar generation we see the "duck curve" becoming common — where solar power is ample in the daytime when electricity demand is relatively low, but unavailable during periods of evening peak demand.
When corporates match renewable energy consumption annually, they use daytime solar certificates for nighttime consumption, without positive impact to the grid. That is incorrect accounting.
In Asia-Pacific, where we do not have many spot power markets, energy storage will initially be backed by governments. Eventually market forces can support energy storage, but now the role of policy is paramount.
Is EnergyTag's strategy in Asia different from in Europe and the United States?
We started out in Asia-Pacific over a year ago. It is a very complex market.
We work on standards and alignment — we engage with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHGP), International Organisation for Standardisation, 24/7 Carbon-Free Coalition and Science-Based Targets initiative to ensure local market realities are represented on these global platforms.
We work with regulators on time-based certificate issuances, and storage-backed renewables certification. We also conduct pilots with utilities and corporations.
We do not aim to impose a single model, but to enable each market to choose what works while staying aligned with global rules.
In Europe there are concerns that 24/7 clean power contracts incentivise generation against the needs of the power grid, although having more market participants could solve this. How do you see this playing out in Asia?
Europe has a very sophisticated wholesale market, where daytime peaks for solar generation are a reality, as is solar power cannibalisation. Most Asia-Pacific markets are not fully liberalised, so the region is not yet exposed to the same issues and solutions, but both risks and opportunities will come later.
Stakeholders are split on whether GHGP should switch to hourly matching or maintain the current annual approach. What has been the feedback from Asia?
We expect hourly matching to apply to large companies' market-based accounting. This does not mean a 100pc match, but more accurate accounting.
Also, we expect the transition to hourly matching to include feasibility measures for smaller companies, and a pathway to certify clean energy from energy storage systems.
Industry concerns are valid and fall into three main categories. One is cost — many believe hourly matching requires expensive storage. Modelling work shows that system costs fall when the right incentives align. Another is data and feasibility, although this is reducing over time. Third is fairness for emerging markets — on this we understand GHGP is considering graded pathways.
On a global level, the sentiment around sustainability has recently shifted. Do you see this general pullback affecting your work?
Sustainability practices can be challenging, but they bring necessary innovation to solve climate change. Challenges will remain, but there will also be solutions.
