Why CRESS Adoption Is Lagging Despite Strong Policy Support

The Corporate Renewable Energy Supply Scheme (CRESS) was designed to let corporate buyers procure renewable power directly from generators, and it arrived with real policy weight behind it. On paper, it should be one of the more straightforward routes for large energy users to secure clean power in Malaysia. In practice, uptake has been slower than the programme’s backers expected.

Where the friction sits

A July 2026 Hong Leong Investment Bank (HLIB) research note pointed to a specific cause: System Access Charges (SAC), the fee corporate buyers pay to use the grid for these bilateral supply arrangements. SAC is currently set at 20 sen per kilowatt-hour for firm power and 40 sen per kilowatt-hour for non-firm power — a cost structure HLIB describes as high and uncertain enough to have reduced CRESS’s commercial attractiveness for prospective buyers.

That distinction between firm and non-firm power matters. A corporate buyer wanting guaranteed, round-the-clock supply pays double the rate of one willing to accept variable renewable output. For many potential CRESS participants, that pricing gap changes the economics of the deal before financing or project structure even enter the conversation.

What HLIB is recommending

The research house is calling for regulatory refinements, specifically a recalibration of SAC rates, to improve CRESS’s bankability and accelerate adoption. The underlying argument is straightforward: a scheme built to give corporate buyers a direct procurement route only works if the access cost doesn’t erode the case for using it in the first place.

Why this matters beyond CRESS itself

CRESS sits alongside LSS6 and MyBeST as one of the three major programmes HLIB expects to shape Malaysia’s renewable energy sector through the second half of 2026. Unlike the other two, which are competitive tenders with published capacity targets, CRESS’s growth depends on ongoing commercial decisions by individual corporate buyers — which makes it more sensitive to a cost structure like SAC than a tender programme would be.

For MESA members advising corporate clients on renewable procurement, the SAC rate is currently one of the more concrete numbers to model against before recommending a CRESS-based structure over other options.