Texas Hedging: Why Did Some Projects Emerge Unharmed While Others Are in Trouble?

Mar 22, 2021

Reading Time : 2 min

A hedge agreement is a contractual device used to lock in a predictable, per-unit price against commodity price fluctuations; however, although a hedge agreement transfers price risk away from the facility owner, volumetric (or production) risk often remains with the facility owner.

There are two basic types of hedges in the Texas market, distinguished by how the hedge is settled, and each type handles production risk quite differently. One type, a fixed-shape hedge, settles pursuant to a set megawatt hour (MWh) schedule that is independent of the actual megawatt hour production from the facility. The second type, a percentage-offtake hedge, settles pursuant to a percent (sometimes 100%) of the megawatt hour production from the facility. Facilities that lost their production capabilities due to the Texas storm generally faired neutrally if they had percentage-offtake hedges because no energy was settled against ultra-high market prices. Conversely, the facilities with a fixed-shape hedge were the ones that generally fared poorly because they were forced to settle (in accordance with their set MWh schedule) against such high market prices without the benefit of receiving these high market prices through their physical production of MWhs.

The following chart demonstrates a typical hedge arrangement (whether it is a fixed-shape or percentage-offtake hedge) (note, for simplicity, this shows a financially settled hedge, but the concept equally applies to a physically settled hedge).

Hedge documents primarily capture the arrangement between the project company and the hedge provider, which is illustrated in the top half of the chart above. Revenue received from the wholesale market, based on the facility’s actual production, is what underpins the ability of the project company to pay the hedge provider through financial settlement (or to schedule and deliver energy at the hub, if this is a physically settled transaction). This wholesale revenue is represented in the bottom half of the chart. In a fixed-shape hedge, the transaction between the project company and hedge provider continues, regardless of whether the project company is receiving revenue from its actual production. In a percentage-offtake hedge, the settlement between hedge provider and project company is dependent upon (and directly correlated to) the amount of production from the facility.

When the hub price reaches $9,000 per MWh and the facility shuts down due to icy conditions, a fixed-shape hedges continues settlement of the hedge arrangement, based on the $9,000-per-MWh price and predetermined settlement quantity; however, a percentage-offtake hedge will not settle because the quantity will be zero. As a result, the project company with a fixed-shape hedge must pay the hedge provider the difference between $9,000 and the strike price when it has no underlying revenue coming in, which is the primary cause of the liquidity crunch many facilities in Texas with hedge offtake agreements are facing (that is, project companies with fixed-shape hedges).

While renewable energy hedges in Texas are, as a whole, lumped together as poor performers in the recent Texas winter storm, the facilities with percentage-offtake agreements emerged (generally) unscathed while the facilities with fixed-shape hedges generally are hurting.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

October 27, 2025

On October 23, 2025, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) directed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to conduct a rulemaking to assert jurisdiction over load interconnections to the bulk electric transmission system and establish standardized procedures for the interconnection of large loads.1 The Directive included an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANOPR) that sets forth the legal justification for asserting jurisdiction over transmission-level load interconnections and fourteen principles that should inform FERC’s rulemaking process. The Secretary has directed FERC to take “final action” on the Directive no later than April 30, 2026.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

October 24, 2025

On October 21, 2025, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a final order (DOE/FECM Order No. 5264-A1) granting Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC long-term authorization to export up to 1,446 billion cubic feet per year of domestically produced liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its Louisiana facility to countries without a free trade agreement with the United States (Non-FTA Countries). The final order follows a March 2025 Conditional Order,2 which issued while DOE was still completing its review of the agency’s 2024 LNG Export Study.3 The final order confirms that the project’s export volume and term authorization (through December 31, 2050) are unchanged, but provides for a three-year “make-up period” to allow export of any approved volume not shipped during the original term.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

October 9, 2025

On October 1, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued Order No. 914 amending certain Commission regulations to incorporate a conditional sunset date in compliance with the Trump administration’s April 2025 Executive Order, “Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy” (the EO).

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

October 8, 2025

Akin is pleased to serve as a gold sponsor for Infocast’s Energy Independence Summit in Houston, October 21-23. Energy partner Charlie Ofner will moderate the Macroeconomics of Domestic Energy Independence panel, projects & energy transition partner Shariff Barakat will lead Opportunities in US Manufacturing: How Big, How Fast, How FEOC?, and counsel Taha Qureshi will guide the discussion on Cornerstones for Energy Independence: Investing in Grid Security & Cybersecurity.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

October 6, 2025

As of October 6, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) continues to operate despite the lapse in appropriations that resulted in a government shutdown on October 1, 2025. While FERC receives appropriations from Congress, it primarily is self-funded through fees and charges obtained from the industries it regulates, offsetting its total costs. Hence, during prior government shutdowns in 2018 and 2013, the agency was able to continue operations. However, FERC published a plan for operating in the event of a lapse in appropriations on September 30, 2025, available here

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

September 8, 2025

On September 4, 2025, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee convened a hearing to consider the nominations of Laura Swett and David LaCerte to serve as commissioners at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission). Swett is a former FERC Staff that served as legal and policy advisor to former FERC Chairman Kevin McIntyre and Commission Bernard McNamee. LaCerte is an attorney in private practice that previously held positions at the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board and the Louisiana Department of Veterans Affairs.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

September 9, 2025

On August 29, 2025, Christopher Wright, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) submitted a proposal to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under section 403 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (DOE Organization Act), asking that FERC terminate its long-running proceeding in Docket No. PL18-1, which addresses proposed updates to its policy statement on the Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Facilities. The docket resulted in a draft policy statement that has never been finalized, nor relied upon by FERC in a published order, but would require FERC to consider environmental impacts and potential mitigation prior to making a public interest determination under the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The Secretary asks FERC to rescind the draft policy statement in its entirety to remove any uncertainty in gas infrastructure development. Rescission would require FERC to initiate a new docket and develop a new record should it want to reinitiate similar policy changes in the future.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

August 15, 2025

On August 8, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an enforcement order in Skye MS, LLC (Skye) and levied a $45,000 civil penalty on an intrastate pipeline operator in Mississippi, resolving an investigation into the operator’s violations of section 311 (Section 311) of the Natural Gas Policy Act (NGPA). FERC faulted the operator for providing a Section 311 transportation service without timely filing a Statement of Operating Conditions (SOC) and obtaining FERC’s approval for the transportation rates. Section 311 permits intrastate pipelines to transport interstate gas “on behalf of” interstate pipelines without becoming subject to FERC’s more extensive Natural Gas Act (NGA) jurisdiction, but requires the intrastate pipeline to have an SOC stating the rates and terms and conditions of service on file with FERC within 30 days of providing the interstate service. Under the NGPA, Section 311 rates must be “fair and equitable” and approved by FERC. In Skye, FERC stated that the operator began providing Section 311 service on certain pipeline segments in Mississippi in May 2023, following their acquisition from another Section 311 operator, but did not file an SOC with FERC until April 2025. The order ties the penalty to the approximately two-year delay between commencement of the Section 311 service and the SOC filing date. The pipeline operator was also ordered to provide an annual compliance report and to abide by additional verification requirements related to the filing of its FERC Form No. 549D, the Quarterly Transportation & Storage Report for Intrastate Natural Gas and Hinshaw Pipelines.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.