Rethinking Solar Strategy for Multinational Growth

Discussion with Johnny Daugaard

With nearly five decades of experience across 14 countries on 4 continents, Johnny Daugaard has helped corporations and governments navigate the complexities of solar adoption at scale. From CFO roles to consulting with Raytheon, Renault, Q8, and Scandinavian Airlines, and the ownership of JOGLR, and Powerroaming, his career bridges finance, energy, and strategy. In this article, he outlines six key blind spots that often derail corporate solar strategies, urging leaders to move beyond optics and design energy solutions that are practical, profitable, and politically grounded.

Turning Solar Panels into Long-Term Value through Smarter Integration

Corporate ESG strategies often oversimplify solar investment, treating it as a one-time expense rather than a strategic transformation. Many leaders view solar through the narrow lens of payback periods or headline-friendly ESG statements. But in doing so, they risk missing the broader value solar can create across operations, risk management, and reputation.

"Everyone has an ESG strategy, and almost everyone looks at it from a cost/benefit point of view". The real challenge, Daugaard explains, is the lack of willingness to view sustainability through an end-to-end operational lens.

To unlock solar’s full potential, companies must integrate it into their long-term infrastructure plans. This means working cross-functionally across procurement, legal, finance, and IT to assess how solar generation, consumption patterns, and compliance reporting connect. Moreover, ensuring supply chain traceability is now a necessity, not a nice-to-have. 

Daugaard notes that approximately 30% of solar panels in Western markets are coming from bankrupt factories, mainly due to price dumping from dominant producers. Corporations need to insist on traceability and guarantees to avoid reputational risks and uphold ESG integrity. Solar can drive significant operational savings and resilience, but only when it’s built into the company’s DNA, not bolted on as a symbolic gesture.

Solar Energy Challenges in Emerging Markets

Multinational companies often face a stark disconnect between global ESG commitments and the realities of deploying solar energy projects across diverse markets. What’s viable in Denmark, where infrastructure and regulation are well-aligned, may be legally, logistically, or politically unworkable in countries like Brazil, Serbia, or parts of Asia. “Green energy is only a good solution if you can produce it where it’s consumed”,  says Daugaard. 

But even that depends on grid capacity. In many emerging markets, underdeveloped transmission infrastructure remains a critical bottleneck, derailing even the most promising solar initiatives. “I got involved in sustainable energy in 2017, when I got the opportunity to invest in JOGLR, a startup developing solutions to mitigate the effects from the increasing urban congestion. It escalated further in 2020 when I was asked to help the Serbian government establish a local solar power presence”, Daugaard recalls. In 2021, the country had just eight EV charging stations nationwide, and seeking to aligning with EU energy directives required tripling its national grid capacity. The case reflects a broader reality: climate ambitions often race ahead of infrastructure readiness.

Even in developed economies, bold sustainability mandates frequently lack matching investments in permitting reform and grid modernization. The result is a growing execution burden, particularly for energy-intensive industries like manufacturing, logistics, and data infrastructure.

In Asia, the picture shifts again. ESG enforcement may be lighter, but infrastructure limitations and political volatility still constrain progress. For global companies, the challenge is clear: uphold ESG commitments at the corporate level, while tailoring local strategies to what’s realistically achievable.

Overcoming Grid and Storage Bottlenecks in Solar Energy Projects

One of the most underestimated challenges in solar execution is infrastructure readiness. Even the most sophisticated solar farm becomes a stranded asset if it can’t transmit electricity, or if it creates surges the local grid cannot manage.

"Corporations need to get documentation prior to investing in renewable energy”, Daugaard emphasizes that this paperwork helps ensure transportation and grid connections are resolved before construction finishes, critical for minimizing delays and ensuring energy can be delivered as planned.

Grid expansion is often out of sync with corporate project timelines. According to Daugaard, ”When you’re building a large solar panel farm, it takes 2 years from the moment you make the decision to when the cables are in place and energy flows to the grid. It’s not something you do overnight”. By contrast, rooftop solar can be deployed in as little as 3–4 months.

Battery storage introduces both promise and confusion. While long-duration storage goals are often discussed, the technical and logistical challenges are significant. In practice, companies can realistically plan for 6–12 hours of localized energy storage.

Daugaard emphasizes, to support municipalities and critical operations, like home care for the elderly, during 24 to 48-hour outages. Solar investments should therefore be viewed as not only economic or environmental decisions but also as part of broader business continuity planning.

How to Make ESG Investments in Solar Energy Truly Strategic

Under pressure from investors, boards, and regulators, many companies are racing to go green, but not all green investments are created equal. Some are meaningful shifts in how a business operates; others are surface-level moves that check a box but don’t move the needle.“I do not see any green investments as symbolic, except some very large projects, which are most often funded by government subsidies”. However, Daugaard notes that some green investments are not profitable when viewed through a traditional, standalone P&L lens.

True ESG alignment requires strategic execution. For instance, EV charging stations powered by solar are only impactful if paired with proper timing and storage. Otherwise, most charging happens when solar energy isn’t available, relying instead on fossil-fueled grids.

Daugaard also explains, ““Today, more than 80% of all the energy generated to charge for EV cars comes from oil and gas powered plants. Because when do people charge their cars? They charge them when the sun is not shining”. This means that unless infrastructure is developed to enable outside daytime charging or adequate storage, these solutions may offer only symbolic impact.

Solar investments must therefore be integrated into broader energy use strategies, not just built to impress stakeholders. They should drive measurable operational benefits, reduce long-term energy costs, and support business continuity.

Managing the Risks and Opportunities of Distributed Energy Systems

The decentralization of energy is exciting. Peer-to-peer solar, autonomous charging hubs, and microgrids offer freedom from utility monopolies and the chance to build smarter, cleaner networks. But unchecked decentralization can backfire. "If you can create a supply chain where EV charging stations get electricity from solar powered transformer stations, then green energy is truly green".

However, Daugaard warns that as companies increasingly invest in distributed solutions, national energy authorities still need to guarantee 100% supply. If 25% of power is generated independently, central authorities are still expected to build and maintain infrastructure for 100% of potential demand, resulting in overcapacity and rising public costs.

This creates a planning paradox. While local solar production reduces dependency, it also complicates national planning and undermines utilities' financial models. The takeaway is clear: integrate, don’t isolate. Work with public utilities and share generation data to ensure stable, cost-effective coexistence.

How Solar Energy Strategies Vary by Region and Market Conditions

Solar hardware might be standardized, but implementation never is. What works in Denmark or Spain may collapse in Brazil or the Balkans. Energy prices, land access, labor costs, and even politics will differ dramatically. "It is unreasonable to expect anyone to develop the one solar power strategy". Daugaard adds that implementation varies widely across Africa, the Arab peninsula, the Balkans, Brazil, and the European Union, each requiring its own tailored approach based on local context.

Daugaard points out that the real cost differentials lie in permitting, logistics, and grid access. Even within the EU, Denmark sends surplus energy to Norway, paying them to take it, only to buy it back later as hydro powered energy at full cost. Germany, meanwhile, generates solar energy that often goes unused due to poor timing and insufficient grid storage.

Rather than force uniformity, companies must tailor their solar rollouts by geography. Start where infrastructure exists, or can easily be established, and where pricing dynamics favor decentralization. Build flexible frameworks that can evolve with regional energy landscapes.

Executive Takeaways

Turning solar from aspiration into ROI requires more than installing panels. It demands a cross-functional, localized, and financially disciplined approach that aligns with both ESG mandates and operational realities.

To succeed, CFOs must approach solar investments with the same rigor they apply to core business decisions. That means:

• Aligning solar infrastructure with local grid capacity and storage readiness
• Understanding political and regulatory risk by region
• Modeling financials based on dynamic pricing, inflation risk, and fast payback
• Ensuring ESG compliance across the full supply chain—not just panel procurement
• Localizing execution to account for terrain, permitting, labor, and resilience needs

For CFOs, the solar playbook starts with pragmatism. A finished solar farm, by late 2025, should not exceed $0.40 per installed Watt Peak. Product guarantees aren’t optional, they’re critical to ESG reporting and long-term performance. And resilience planning matters: 24–48 hour backup capacity isn’t just about sustainability, it’s about business continuity. 

‍