The Day 2 keynote lunch at the Intersolar & Energy Storage North America (IESNA) Midwest conference and trade show took a candid look at the state of clean energy finance, bringing together a capital provider and a distributed generation (DG) developer for a conversation that was more frank than most panels of this type.
Moderated by Julian Spector, Senior Reporter at Canary Media, Daniela Shapiro, Co-Chief Risk Officer at HASI and Cameron Bard, Chief Revenue Officer at Madison Energy Infrastructure analyzed the current financing environment, the evolving DG opportunity, the risk-versus-reward dynamic at the cutting edge of the market, and what developers in the Midwest should realistically expect from capital partners right now.
The Current Financing Environment
Neither panelist spent much time catastrophizing about the macro environment. Shapiro acknowledged that transferability has changed how deals get structured compared to the tax equity-only era, and that regulatory uncertainty — including the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) horizon — requires ongoing navigation.
But her broader point was that the industry has been here before: tax credits have expired and been extended before. The industry finds a way.
Bard was more emphatic. He pushed back hard on any reading of the current moment as unfavorable for distributed generation, arguing that the value proposition for DG customers has never been stronger. Retail rates are rising. Grid reliability is under pressure. Federal headwinds on large utility-scale projects are, if anything, creating an opening for faster, more flexible DG solutions to fill the gap.
He cited a Wall Street Journal headline describing customers paying more for less reliable electricity as evidence that the problem DG solves is real and growing, and that the industry is well-positioned to be part of the solution.
DG: The Right Technology at the Right Time
A significant portion of the conversation focused on why distributed generation specifically is having a moment. Bard’s argument was structural: DG is inherently fast and flexible, two qualities that are at a premium when large utility-scale projects face interconnection delays and regulatory headwinds.
As one example, he noted that commercial property owners in ComEd territory are now being approached by developers offering cash to host battery energy storage projects — a dynamic that simply didn’t exist a few years ago.
He also pointed to a shift in the utility relationship that he views as underappreciated. Historically, utilities opposed distributed energy resources as a threat to their business model. That dynamic is changing.
With retail rates rising and demand forecasts climbing, utilities are increasingly treating batteries, virtual power plants (VPPs), and other DG tools as assets in their own toolbox rather than competitive threats. Illinois’ VPP program is a case in point: ComEd’s ability to rate-base the associated rebates has brought the utility on board in a way that earlier community solar programs didn’t manage.
Shapiro framed the opportunity similarly from the capital side. The industry has more tools than it has ever had: storage is increasingly mainstream, digitalization is finally enabling DG to aggregate and operate at meaningful scale, and demand growth means everyone in the ecosystem is now motivated to solve the same problem.
Her caution was on affordability: if the industry doesn’t keep rate impacts in check, it will create political pressure that constrains the whole sector.
Risk Versus Revenue
Spector drew out an intentional contrast: both panelists hold CRO titles, but Shapiro’s stands for Chief Risk Officer and Bard’s for Chief Revenue Officer. The push and pull between those two orientations structured much of the conversation.
Bard described Madison’s approach as starting with the customer and working backward to the solution, rather than starting with what’s financeable and offering that to the customer.
His argument was that customer-first thinking leads to more resilient businesses: an EPC or developer who is flexible across community solar, behind-the-meter, on-site, and off-site solutions will weather market changes better than one that has built its model around a single product in familiar geographies.
Shapiro’s counterpart view was grounded in data and precedent. HASI gets comfortable with new structures by drawing parallels to past experience, understanding the downside scenarios, and working through the logic with developers.
She used the evolution of community solar contract structures in Minnesota as an example: indexed contracts were once considered unfinanceable, then education and market data made them workable, and now hybrid structures are standard. The pattern repeats with each new market evolution.
What Gets Financed & What Doesn’t
Spector pushed both panelists on specific asset types to get a sense of where the line between investable and not-yet-investable currently sits.
On Illinois’ new VPP program, Bard was cautiously positive but flagged a key principle: don’t build a business model around rebates. The smart inverter rebate number — 250 dollars — wasn’t the product of deep optimization; it was a political compromise.
The underlying value proposition for customers has to stand on its own. He pointed to Sunrock’s VPP program in California, where utilities are coming to the aggregator proactively because the value is real, and where the battery attachment rate on residential solar has crossed 70 percent without a rebate as the primary driver, as a more durable model to emulate.
On novel battery chemistries, both panelists were clear: not yet. Shapiro noted that HASI finances deployment, not R&D. New technologies need pilot data and technical validation before they can be financed at scale. Bard made the same point with more color, describing Madison’s focus on proven solar and storage technologies as intentional and strategic rather than risk-averse.
The analogy he used was a Swedish holdco that kept its teams focused with one instruction: stick to things smaller than a horse. The point, he said, is that staying focused on what you’re good at while others validate new technologies is a legitimate and often superior strategy.
Where Madison does want to be at the leading edge is digitalization and AI, which he views as genuinely transformative for how DG assets are operated and optimized on behalf of customers.
What It Means for the Industry
The keynote’s closing energy was optimistic but clear-eyed. Both panelists believe the DG market is entering a period of genuine strength, driven by rising demand, improving technology, a shifting utility relationship, and the growing digitalization layer that makes aggregating small assets into grid-relevant resources actually feasible.
The caution is familiar: don’t chase rebates, don’t overextend into unproven technologies, don’t lose sight of the customer, and don’t treat affordability as someone else’s problem. The developers and financiers who internalize those principles are, in their view, set up well for what comes next.
