Why Must the Project Company Only Sell Its Power into the Wholesale Market in a VPPA?

Mar 14, 2022

Reading Time : 2 min

The basic payment terms in a VPPA are a formula: Fixed Price minus the Floating Price, where (a) the Fixed Price is a set $/MWh price, and (b) the Floating Price is the variable wholesale price. If the Floating Price is greater than the Fixed Price, the Project Company will owe the difference to the C&I customer. If the Floating Price is less than the Fixed Price, the C&I customer will owe the difference to the Project Company. The Fixed Price is typically set to where, more often than not, the C&I customer is expected to receive more money from the Project Company than the C&I customer has to send to the Project Company.

A fundamental principle underlying the payment term in VPPAs is that the Project Company receives the wholesale price (that is, the Project Company receives the Floating Price) from the wholesale market through its physical sale of electricity into the wholesale market. This is primarily what ensures that the Project Company can pay the C&I customer if the wholesale price (i.e., the Floating Price) is greater than the Fixed Price.

If all or a portion of the electricity produced by the Project Company can be physically sold, instead, at a fixed rate to another customer (that is not the wholesale market), the creditworthiness of the Project Company will be jeopardized due to its payment obligations under the VPPA:

1. First, a mismatch will be created between the $/MWh price the Project Company will receive from such third party sale versus the wholesale price. For example, if the wholesale price is $50/MWh (and greater than the Fixed Price) and the third party’s fixed price is $40/MWh, the VPPA payment formula will require the Project Company to pay the C&I customer as if it received $50/MWh, instead of the $40/MWh it actually received, for every MWh sold to the third party. This creates a cash flow concern for the Project Company with respect to where it will receive the $10/MWh shortfall it must pay to the C&I customer, thus creating an uncertainty of payment to the C&I customer.

2. Second, there will also be a mismatch between such third party’s creditworthiness versus the wholesale market’s creditworthiness. Wholesale markets for electricity (until Texas Winter Storm Uri in 2021) are typically considered very safe. Even after Winter Storm Uri, a third party purchasing physical electricity from the Project Company is probably less likely to pay its bills as compared to the wholesale market. This creates more uncertainty as to the Project Company’s ability to pay the C&I customer because the C&I customer must rely on the third party’s ability to pay the Project Company for the Project Company to pay the C&I customer.

Some of these credit concerns could be partially mitigated through credit support, but any type of credit support, absent an unlimited parent guaranty, has its limits. Instead, a Project Company will provide a covenant to the C&I customer that the Project Company will not physically sell the electricity it is financially settling with the C&I customer to anyone, except for sales into the wholesale market.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

March 19, 2026

International trade policy has emerged as a dominant force shaping the oil & gas sector, with sweeping tariffs imposed on products from virtually every nation using authorities including IEEPA, Section 232 and Section 301. President Trump's "America First Trade Policy" leverages duties as negotiation tools to secure bilateral deals featuring significant oil & gas purchase commitments, making trade considerations essential for any cross-border transaction. Energy dominance serves as a cornerstone of the administration's economic and national security strategy, placing the industry squarely in the spotlight. 

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 10, 2026

Federal energy regulators are assuming expanded roles as the administration prioritizes energy dominance and infrastructure development to meet unprecedented power demand. FERC Chairman Laura Swett has vowed to expedite data center interconnections while addressing jurisdictional challenges, warning that unmet electricity demand could drive data centers abroad and create national security risks. The agency is processing pipeline applications faster than in prior years and considering blanket authorizations for certain LNG and hydroelectric projects to streamline approvals. 

Pipeline projects previously stalled by Clean Water Act permits are being revitalized, particularly in northeastern states where historically high electricity prices have increased openness to natural gas infrastructure. The Department of Energy is expanding its emergency authority to require retention of generation resources and has granted major LNG export approvals, signaling commitment to expanding U.S. export capacity under a streamlined framework that deprioritizes climate considerations.  

The Administration is bullish on the opportunities for the U.S. energy industry in Venezuela and eager to support companies willing to navigate the political risk inherent in the operations at the moment. Early meetings with President Trump and industry leaders showed the path forward may be longer and more complex than anticipated by the President. 

As permitting reforms advance and the pendulum swings toward fossil fuel favorability, the regulatory and policy landscape is fundamentally reshaping energy infrastructure development timelines and investment opportunities. 

Oil & Gas in 2026: Energy Policy & Regulation 

Delve into the complete regulatory & policy outlook at our Oil & Gas in 2026 report.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 3, 2026

Macroeconomic turbulence and volatile commodity markets significantly influenced oil & gas M&A activity throughout 2025, with deals showing renewed momentum only in the year's second half.  

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 24, 2026

On February 19, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an order rescinding the soft price cap for bilateral spot market energy sales in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) region.1 As previously covered, on July 15, 2025, FERC initiated a Federal Power Act Section 206 proceeding following the D.C. Circuit’s decision finding that FERC must apply the Mobile-Sierra public interest standard before ordering refunds for above-cap bilateral sales and vacating FERC’s orders requiring refunds for certain bilateral spot market transactions in the WECC region that exceeded the $1,000 MWh soft price cap.2 FERC’s Order follows through on the proposal it made last July to eliminate the WECCs soft price cap and marks a recognition that Western wholesale markets have evolved over the past two decades to become sufficiently competitive to render the soft price cap unnecessary.  

...

Read More

© 2026 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.