.svg){kind=small}
For clients who view energy decisions as a matter of margins, risk, and long-term control, not just cost.
Solar options are evaluated under conservative assumptions so savings, incentives, and risk are understood before capital is committed.
We prioritize structures like PPAs and leases when preserving cash, credit, or borrowing capacity creates better ROI.
PPAs, leases, and ownership scenarios are modeled with conservative assumptions for internal and board review
Clear deliverables, documented assumptions, and a decision structure leadership can defend as conditions change.
Energy decisions are evaluated on risk-adjusted returns,
not modeled savings or optimistic projections.
Capital is structured to balance return, risk,
and balance-sheet impact across structures.ship, PPA, lease, and financing structures.
If risk cannot be clearly explained or defendedunder scrutiny, the recommendation does not proceed.
Energy decisions rarely fail because of technology.
They fail because risk is misunderstood, incentives are misaligned, or assumptions fail under changing conditions.
Before any recommendation advances, Sunchoice Energy isolates exactly where financial, contractual, and performance risk sits, on the balance sheet, in operating budgets, and across counterparties.
Utility exposure, escalation assumptions, incentives, counterparty risk, and contract duration are evaluated together, because risk never shows up in isolation.
Aggressive projections are removed. Sensitivities are tested. Trade offs are made explicit.
Initial engagements are designed to inform decisions, not force outcomes.
Engagement begins with a focused evaluation of energy cost exposure, load behavior, site constraints, and internal approval requirements — before any solutions are discussed.Sunchoice Energy begins by understanding your exposure to rising energy costs, how your facility uses power, site constraints, and the realities leadership must operate within.
The deliverable is not a proposal. It is a decision framework leadership can evaluate, stress-test, and approve or reject with clarity. If no structure meets return and risk thresholds, no recommendation proceeds.
Utility exposure, load behavior, site constraints, and internal approval requirements are evaluated. The objective is to define decision boundaries before any structure is considered.
Ownership, PPA, and financing structures are modeled using conservative, finance-grade assumptions aligned with CFO and board expectations.
Contract terms, escalation assumptions, performance guarantees, and counterparty risk are evaluated together to surface hidden exposure.
The deliverable is not a proposal. It is a decision framework leadership can evaluate, stress-test, and either approve, or walk away from with confidence.