Two plants, and why each one was structured the way it was.
One client bought the plant. The other bought only the electricity. Both cut the bill — the difference is whose balance sheet carries the asset.
The same question, answered two different ways.
Moon Beverages, Dasna
4.0 MWp across two production roofs. Client-owned, 3.3-year payback, and the template for a five-site group rollout.
Read itFortis Healthcare, Ludhiana
317 kWp of carport. Zero capital from the hospital, power below the grid rate from the first month.
Read itMoon Beverages, Dasna.
A Coca-Cola bottler in Uttar Pradesh with two large production roofs, a load that runs hardest through the hottest hours, and capital available for an asset it intended to keep.
The first order matters less than the four that followed it.
The group had the capital, a long horizon on the site, and the appetite to own. At a 3.3-year payback on a plant with a twenty-five year life, ownership is simply the cheapest electricity available — roughly twenty-one further years of near-free generation once the asset has paid for itself.
A bottling roof is not an empty plane. Skylights, extract fans, service walkways and existing penetrations all have to be designed around, and the sheeting has to survive twenty-five years of maintenance traffic without a single new leak.
Dasna is the flagship roof in a portfolio the group went on to build with us across five sites. That is the outcome worth reporting — not the first order, but the four that followed it.
Fortis Healthcare, Ludhiana.
A hospital with a 24/7 load, limited usable roof, a large car park, and a finance committee that would rather put capital into clinical equipment than into a power plant.
Hospital roofs are congested — plant rooms, chillers, helipads, expansion allowance. The car park was the largest uninterrupted area on the site, and a carport returns shaded parking for patients and visitors as well as generation.
On this structure the hospital committed no capital and took on no residual-value risk. We fund, build, own, insure and maintain the plant, and the hospital buys the units it consumes below its grid rate — which makes it an operating cost decision rather than a capital approval.
Because we own it for the term, every unit the plant fails to generate is a unit we do not get paid for. That is the alignment the model creates, and it is the reason the performance commitments are contractual rather than aspirational.
Every unit the plant fails to generate is a unit we are not paid for.
Fortis has re-ordered across multiple campuses since 2016, every one on the same zero-capital structure.
The structure follows the balance sheet, not the roof.
You have the capital, a long horizon on the site, and you want the cheapest electricity available over twenty-five years. The payback is the whole argument.
Capital is better deployed elsewhere, or a capital approval would take longer than the saving is worth waiting for. You pay per unit, below grid, from month one.
Your roof cannot carry enough of your load to matter. Open access or group captive supplies multi-megawatt volumes with no on-site footprint at all.
Savings figures are per project records at prevailing tariffs; payback is stated for client-owned projects only. CO₂ at the CEA grid emission factor of 0.71 t/MWh. Detailed techno-commercial data is available under NDA. Compare the three structures in full
Send us twelve months of bills.
Send twelve months of bills and we will model your site against the two structures you have just read. The analysis comes back free, with no commitment.