Storing Photovoltaic Energy

Solar panels can not produce energy at night or during cloudy periods. But rechargeable batteries can store electricity: the photovoltaic panels charge the battery during the day, and this power can be drawn upon in the evening.

Storing Thermal Energy

Residential solar hot water systems – which use the sun’s thermal energy to heat water for the home – have a simpler storage system. Water flows through solar collectors on the roof, and then goes to a storage tank where it can be drawn upon as needed.

Concentrating solar power(CSP) plants use thermal energy to power a generator. While some CSP facilities use water as the heat transfer medium, most new systems us oil or molten salt. These fluids allow the heat energy to be stored for use during cloudy periods or at night.

The History of Solar Batteries

With the cost of batteries dropping and a bevy of solar companies now offering residential backup systems, it may seem like the “solar with storage” revolution is just getting started. In reality, batteries helped launch rooftop solar decades ago. When it comes to solar with storage, everything old is new again.

The solar revolution got its start in the 1970s when enthusiasts and “off-gridders,” spurred by the energy crises of the day, paired rooftop solar with old-school, lead-acid batteries. This state of affairs continued through the mid-1990s, when the spread of net metering made tying into the grid more attractive.

Lead-acid battery. Photo credit: Shaddack assumed (based on copyright claims). Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Battery Adoption Sputters Amid Net Metering

Net metering appeared on the solar scene in the 1980s. The ability to sell excess energy to the utility solidified the economic case for residential solar but also reduced the need for personal storage. 

• 1980: Utilities in Idaho begin to adopt net metering
• 1981: Utilities in Arizona begin to adopt net metering
• 1983: Minnesota passes the first statewide net metering law
• 1996: California passes its own law creating incentives for grid-tied solar

While the commercialization of lighter, more energy-dense lithium-ion batteries in the early 1990s represented a major advancement in storage, they were still too costly, complex, and impractical for widespread use. The Y2K scare temporarily spiked demand for storage systems, but interest dropped off after the supposed threat had passed. Batteries fell by the wayside as more and more states implemented net metering programs to incentivize solar uptake.

War on Net Metering Revives Interest in Battery Storage

Utilities have begun targeting net metering in recent years, charging that solar customers aren’t paying their fair share to use and maintain grid infrastructure. Some utilities have slapped new fees on solar, while others have sought to eviscerate state net metering programs altogether.

Net Metering Flip-Flops and Uncertainty in Nevada

Nevada is one example. Regulators there issued a decision to phase out net metering and increase fees on solar households in 2015. Following public outcry and legal action, the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada reinstated net metering the following year. Utility company NV Energy is challenging that decision.

Hawaii Halts Net Metering Program

Hawaii has experienced similar roadblocks. Abandoning the grid for solar with storage is a popular option in that state, where the need to import fossil fuels makes traditional energy 2-3 times more expensive. The state’s Public Utilities Commission ruled to close Hawaiian Electric Companies’ net metering program to new participants in 2015, accelerating battery adoption among solar customers.

Without net metering (or with additional fees), the savings from grid-tied solar are often anemic or nonexistent. The solar industry has taken a hit in states where utilities are pushing back against net metering as a result. By allowing solar customers to use their own excess energy instead of feeding it to the grid (and paying the utility for use of the infrastructure), affordable battery storage may salvage rooftop solar in those regions.

Battery Prices in Dramatic Decline

Recent improvements in battery technology have significantly trimmed the cost. Lithium-ion battery prices have fallen by nearly half since 2014 and by 11% from 2015 to 2016, largely due to the growing popularity of electric vehicles.

Musk Debuts the Tesla Powerwall and Powerpack

Storage finally became a reality for residential solar customers when Tesla announced the Powerwall and Powerpack in May 2015. Suddenly, home energy storage was affordable, simple, and sexy. The “star power” of Tesla CEO and serial entrepreneur Elon Musk was also instrumental in catapulting battery backup into the mainstream. The Powerwall sold out through the following year almost immediately. Sunrun, LG, Orison, Sunverge, Mercedes-Benz, German company Sonnen, and a handful of other companies currently offer comparable home battery storage units.

Gigafactories Driving Prices Down

Tesla’s gigafactory in Reno, Nevada—the world’s largest factory building—will been instrumental in scaling the technology and reducing prices further. While the factory only began producing battery cells for Powerwalls and Powerpacks in January 2017, Tesla already has plans to expand the facility. Once the factory is in full swing, Tesla expects production to drive down the per kilowatt hour cost of its battery pack by more than 30 percent.

In Tesla’s investor newsletter, Musk said: “This will allow us to achieve a major reduction in the cost of our battery packs and accelerate the pace of battery innovation. This will also allow us to address the solar power industry’s need for a massive volume of stationary battery packs.”

New Gigafactories on the Horizon

Earlier this year, Tesla said it plans to announce 2-4 new gigafactories in 2017, though it’s unclear whether they’ll produce solar panels, batteries, vehicle components, or a combination of those products to support their business plans. AES Corp. and Altagas Ltd. also opened their own battery factories in southern California in January. Unsurprising, that state is fully embracing battery technology; the government there has mandated that utilities add more than 1.32 gigawatts by 2020.

The well-timed drop in battery prices may be able to compensate for the loss of net metering, at least in part. Today, solar customers in areas fighting net metering can simply install one of several affordable home storage systems to provide their own backup and overnight power, bypassing the utility entirely.

One state is even encouraging residents to add battery storage. In a move to help homeowners cope with high energy costs, Maryland became the first state to pass a tax credit for installing energy storage in April 2017. If other states follow Maryland’s example, positive incentives may speed storage uptake.

The Future of Solar With Battery Storage

While battery storage has come a long way from its modest beginnings, the numbers still don’t add up for many businesses and homeowners. Its time is coming soon, however. The energy storage market will balloon to $250 billion by 2040, Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) predicts, and battery storage will automatically come with rooftop solar systems by the 2030s. When it does, solar may well become one of the dominant power sources in the global energy mix.

The post How is Solar Energy Stored? appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Advantages of Solar Power

Environmental Benefits

• Solar radiation is a plentiful, renewable resource and is the most efficient of all renewable energies.

• Solar panels do not emit any pollutants during use.

Financial Benefits

• Despite high initial costs, government rebates and the long life of solar panels make solar energy cheaper than drawing power from the grid in the long run.

• Solar panels require little maintenance and are becoming less expensive as the technology progresses.

• A solar electric unit increases the value of your home.

• Solar energy is an economical alternative in areas where it is costly to run conventional power lines.

Energy Independence

• Stand-alone solar energy systems have batteries to provide power when the electricity grid cannot.

• Solar energy also reduces the country’s dependence on oil and other non-renewable, environmentally damaging fossil fuels.

Disadvantages of Solar Power

Technical

• The main disadvantage of solar energy is that while some panels are very good at absorbing solar radiation even on cloudy days, generating a useful amount of solar power requires a minimum level of solar exposure. Ensure to optimize your system to make the most of the available sunlight.

• Solar panels only absorb solar radiation during the day, so on a cloudy or rainy day, the system may generate below-usual levels of energy. Thus most systems require a storage tank or battery and a backup power source.

Aesthetic

• 

  Photo Credit: Go Solar California

  Depending on the efficiency of your selected solar panel and number of householders, a solar PV or water heating system may require a large amount of roof space or structures to optimally orient the panels.

• Some homeowners may not like the appearance of solar panels or hot water panels on their roof. New technologies, such as solar shingles and building-integrated photovoltaics, provide aesthetically pleasing options.

Economic

• The up-front cost of a solar electric or water heating system is higher than other types of energy generation systems. However, incentives and financing options can significantly lower the cost of a solar thermal or PV system and shorten the payback period.

• Some systems require more auxiliary components than others, and these components need replacement during the life of the system.

The post Advantages & Disadvantages of Solar Energy appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Market Conditions

Over the past few years, a market oversupply has led to a sharp decline in solar panel price. According to a Department of Energy report, the average pre-incentive cost of installing a PV system fell by 17 percent from 2009 to 2010 thanks to:

• declining wholesale module prices
• falling non-module costs (mounting hardware, labor, permits and fees, shipping and taxes)
• economies of scale: as installations increase, cost decreases.

Because of rising grid electricity price and the decrease in the cost of PV, some argue that residential PV systems have already reached grid parity(when the cost of solar is the same as drawing energy from the grid). But local factors, described below, will be key in deciding whether going solar is cost effective for your household.

First Solar employees at an installation in Nevada. Credit: First Solar

Local Factors

Various factors that are contingent on your location impact the cost of going solar. These include:

• available solar radiation: the more sun that hits the panels, the more electricity is produced.
• panel placement: panels should be mounted to maximise the amount of radiation that reaches them. In the northern hemisphere, the optimum solar panel location is a south-facing roof. Usually 100 square ft of unshaded south-facing roof can produce 1 KW of electricity.
• energy demand: The more energy your household uses, the more solar panels you need. According to the DOE, systems rated between 1 and 5 KW are usually enough to meet the needs of home and small business owners.
• system efficiency and size: generally, the bigger the system, the lower the cost per kWh.
• grid-tied vs. going off the grid: most households opt to stay connected to the grid. Going off the grid requires batteries to store power – these batteries can be quite expensive.
• tax credits: there are a variety of federal and state tax credits for home solar.

These factors strongly impact how long it takes for the savings from going solar to pay for the original system (the payback period). Households that already take measures to conserve energy, and that are located in regions with plenty of sun and preferable tax credits, will find going solar most affordable.

Financing Options

Nowadays there are a variety of ways to pay for home solar energy systems. While the cost of buying and installing a home solar system has fallen over the past few years, other options exist for those not looking to pay thousands of dollars up front. These include:

• energy efficient mortgages are offered by banks for purchases of new homes with solar energy systems, as well as refinancing options for the addition of a solar energy system to an existing home.
• leasing a home solar energy system
• solar PPAs are agreements wherein a third party owns the system, and the customer only pays for the electricity generated.

Third-party owned systems (whether leased or under a PPA) are gaining popularity, and make the switch to solar much more affordable.

So is going solar more expensive than staying on the grid?

Unfortunately, there is no clear cut answer to the question “why are solar panels expensive?” As detailed above, the cost of going solar really depends on your location. Solar energy is already viable in most states in the U.S. And for households who want to avoid the up-front cost, third-party owned home solar energy systems are the most cost-effective option.

The post Why are solar panels so expensive? appeared first on Solar Tribune.

BMW i is planning to release electric versions of BMW cars to be called the i3 and i8, and the German company SOLARWATT is developing a solar-powered carport to go alongside these cars.

The SOLARWATT carport is essentially a wooden parking space covering topped with solar panels that will not only charge a BMW i car, but can also generate some power for the household.

It’s part of an effort by BMW i to provide consumers not only electric vehicles, but also easy charging options.

“This is the next step in the BMW i 360-degree package for customer-friendly electric mobility,” said Marcus Krieg, head of BMW’s 360-degree ELECTRIC project.

“Cooperating with the leading carmaker and visionary supplier of electric vehicles and EV-related mobility services shows that our new systems offer practical solutions which will play an important role in future energy supply,” said SOLARWATT CEO Detlef Neuhaus

While the BMW i won’t be available until later this year, SOLARWATT carports are already on the market in Germany.

The post BMW teams up with SOLARWATT on solar EV charging station appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The company employs 3,300 globally and will cut the aforementioned positions from its production facility in Saxony, Germany. The facility currently has 1,800 employees, meaning this cut could reduce the staff by 16 percent. Germany’s biggest solar firm expects these cuts to be complete by the end of 2012.

SolarWorld AG is the parent company of SolarWorld Industries America, the firm leading the push for import tariffs on Chinese solar cells entering the U.S. SolarWorld alleges that, as in the U.S., Chinese firms have been dumping solar products at below production cost on the German market.

“The main reason is Chinese unfair trade behavior, but this is an additional burden — that several European companies, especially Germany and Italy, are cutting their feed-in tariffs,” said SolarWorld’s spokesperson Milan Nitzschke. “This is another burden coming at exactly the wrong point in time.”

A worker at SolarWorld's factory in Freiburg, Germany. Photo Credit: SolarWorld AG

Nitzschke said that the job cuts in Germany would be primarily by ending temp-worker contracts rather than outright layoffs.

Speaking to a potential trade case to protect against the risk of more European solar firms going bankrupt, Nitzschke said “we have to do that very fast because month-by-month we are losing companies in Europe.”

SolarWorld CEO Frank Asbeck told Bloomberg that the trade complaint could move forward in one of three ways: either the firm itself files a complaint with the European Commission, individual EU member states or the EU Commission itself could start an investigation.

“I’m confident that one of the three options will be taken [in June],” Asbeck said. “We then expect timely proceedings so that we could see first results in the spring.”

In fact, many are speculating that the government may step in by the end of the month after Environment Minister Peter Altmaier told WirtschaftsWoche business magazine that the German government may file a trade complaint against China to show the government’s support for the German solar industry.

According to Bloomberg, at least five German solar companies have filed for bankruptcy since December, straining under the pressure of a global oversupply of Chinese solar products.

The post SolarWorld to cut 300 jobs in Europe thanks to Chinese “dumping” appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Commerce preliminarily ruled to levy stiff tariffs on imports of Chinese solar cells. The Chinese claim that the U.S. measures under contention, including against solar imports, impact Chinese exports to the U.S. worth $7.3 billion.

China accuses the U.S. of using trade protectionist measures unfairly in order to shield U.S. companies from Chinese competition.

“The relevant practices constitute the abuse of trade remedy measures which undermines the legitimate interests of China’s enterprises,” China’s mission to the WTO said in a statement.

Chinese workers at the Tianxiang Solar Energy Equipment Factory in Huaibei, China. Photo Credit: Los Angeles Times

On Thursday, the Ministry of Commerce said that the U.S. had unfairly subsidised six renewable energy projects, violating the rules of free-trade. The ruling is a result of an investigation launched in November in response to Washington’s own inquiry into whether Chinese manufacturers were dumping solar cells on the market at below-cost prices.

The Ministry of Commerce announcement did not include details but an earlier statement said the investigation covered wind, solar and hydropower projects in Washington, Massachusetts, Ohio, New Jersey and California.

In Friday’s WTO filing, China requested consultations with the U.S. to resolve the dispute; the U.S. has ten days to respond to the request and must start negotiations within 30 days. If the negotiations fail, China can request a judgment from a WTO panel, which can order the U.S. to pay compensation or abandon the measures.

“China’s resort to dispute settlement is premature and not an appropriate use of dispute settlement system resources,” said Nkenge Harmon, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.

“This step by China suggests that China does not really care what the United States does; rather, China has determined without benefit of the facts that whatever the United States does will fall short of what China would like to see,” Harmon said.

The post China files WTO complaint against U.S. solar tariffs appeared first on Solar Tribune.

On May 3, the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE) said that SolarWorld’s claims that Chinese manufacturers are dumping below-cost PV products in the U.S. market are false. Solar World heads up the Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM), the group pushing for tariffs on Chinese PV imports.

Citing SolarWorld testimony to the International Trade Commission (ITC) as well as statements to various media sources, CASE charges that SolarWorld has admitted to selling solar cells and panels at a loss in order to stay competitive and maintain market share.

Quality inspection station in module assembly at the SolarWorld manufacturing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon. Photo Credit: SolarWorld

According to CASE, “this aggressive pricing strategy is exactly what German-based SolarWorld accuses its China-based competitors of doing.”

“It’s certainly an extremely competitive global market for solar cells and modules, and we don’t fault SolarWorld for cutting its prices to compete,” said Jigar Shah, president of CASE. “But we do fault SolarWorld for hypocritically attacking its competitors at the expense of the American solar industry.”

But according to a May 7 statement, CASM claims that CASE’s allegation is “both factually and legally incorrect, as by law U.S. producers cannot dump in the U.S. market.”

“The trade laws are designed to remedy dumping and subsidies that injure a competing foreign industry, and CASE’s statement concedes this exact point: We are harmed by excess Chinese capacity that is dumped in the United States.”

CASE also argued that SolarWorld has received over $100 million in subsidies and government support in the U.S., Qatar and Germany, though “[t]he exact degree of subsidies is unknown, because SolarWorld has not provided a detailed account of the subsidies it has received globally.”

“SolarWorld initially accused its competitors of receiving subsidies, even as SolarWorld received millions of dollars in subsidies itself,” said Shah. “When that didn’t work, SolarWorld accused its competitors of dumping products, while carrying on their own dumping activities. SolarWorld should just litigate against itself and stop putting over 100,000 American solar jobs at stake.”

CASM fired back, saying that “CASE’s claims about U.S. subsidies are false, easily disproved, and irrelevant to the trade cases against the Chinese industry” but did not elaborate further.

Meanwhile, on May 10, the newly formed Global Solar Council denied media reports that it was created specifically to weigh in on the anti-dumping and subsidy claims currently under consideration by the Department of Commerce and ITC.

The GSC simply said one of its objectives is to “create awareness among stakeholders that free and open market conditions are essential to maintain a thriving global market for solar energy.”

The post CASE: SolarWorld’s allegations against Chinese PV firms are ‘hypocritical’ appeared first on Solar Tribune.

“At the moment, the market for concentrated solar power (CSP) systems is paused — not stopped,” says the “Concentrated Solar Power” report, released May 2.

According to Pike Research, global annual revenue for CSP systems will rise from $2.1 billion this year to $5.1 billion in 2013, but will dip in 2014. However, the firm predicts that CSP revenue will rebound to at least $4.8 billion by 2020.

Credit: Pike Research

The market research firm says that part of the decline in CSP is due to falling prices of photovoltaics, and that many CSP projects in the works have been converted to PV as a result.

“A CSP revival was jump-started in 2004 as policy announcements at that time inspired investors and engineers to start developing again,” said the report. “The movement gained steam when PV prices peaked in 2008 resulting in a 300% gain in global CSP operational capacity from 2008-2011.”

But as PV prices declined – and as PV technology became accepted as a good investment – the growth in CSP halted in 2011.

The study notes a disparity between CSP projects awarded and those becoming operational in the U.S. – “while 6,886 MW have been awarded, only 1,532 MW (spread across five projects backed  by U.S. DOE loan guarantees) are under construction” says the report.

Over 1,200 MW of CSP projects have been replaced with PV, 745 MW have been canceled or “delayed to the point that project validity is questionable,” and 3,400 MW of projects are still in the pipeline.

“Solar PV is not only more attractively priced at the moment than CSP technology, but it also has an established track record that makes it more appealing to investors,” says senior analyst Peter Asmus.

“Yet, CSP may overcome these disadvantages by reducing costs as a result of larger scale and new technology models. The most promising opportunity in the near term is to link CSP with thermal energy storage, thereby increasing the value of clean electricity in a cost-effective way that solar PV cannot replicate.”

The report also finds that changes within the industry will help CSP to compete. An increase in hybrid power plants, combining CSP technology and fossil fuels, as well as utility-scale energy storage capabilities will help to prop up CSP revenue.

Global market growth, according to Pike Research, depends on “project bankability/financing, policy, cost reductions in technology, cost competitiveness with PV, and expanded transmission capabilities driving exports to other regions.”

The post Study: CSP will reach $4.8 billion global revenue in 2020 appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Scholars from the Baker Center for Public Policy at the University of Tennessee released a study titled “Assessment of Incentives and Employment Impacts of Solar Industry Deployment,” finding that the solar industry’s incentive-supported trajectory is the same as traditional energy sources before it.

This study comes after a painful year for the U.S. solar industry, with accusations that the Obama administration has been unfairly helping solar firms after high-profile bankruptcies and a brewing trade dispute.

Credit: Solar Energy Industries Association

But according to the Baker Center, solar energy “has a lower total incentive cost than the wind, ethanol, or energy efficiency industries that are further along the adoption path,” and that solar has produced more jobs per megawatt-hour than any other energy industry.

The report finds that solar incentives are working, and continued incentives could lead to “increased employment, global business opportunities, and energy supply diversity.”

The study claims that each significant energy source, such as oil, natural gas and coal, had about 30 years of innovation and early adoption before mainstream acceptance, during which these industries were aided by the government.

“Just like older energy sources like coal, oil, and gas, solar energy is providing real, tangible benefits to America today,” said Tom Kimbis, Vice President of Strategy and External Affairs for the Solar Energy Industries Association, the group that commissioned the report.

“Policies designed to increase America’s use of solar are incredibly successful and generating benefits across the nation. It would be a serious mistake for policymakers in Washington, D.C., and in statehouses across the country, to walk away from good public policy.”

Kimbis told Reuters that the findings of this report are particularly important at this time when the industry is under increased scrutiny. “What’s missing has been a fair and balanced analysis of what incentives other energy sources receive,” he said. “It seems solar is being called out because the failure of one company.”

The report emphasized the fact that no energy source has gained market share without such incentives, and that federal investment into solar energy has thus far been “modest in a long-term historical context relative to other energy technologies.”

The study stressed the need to continue support for the solar industry, as “economic growth becomes ever more dependent on abundant, affordable, and sustainable energy supplies,” solar energy would make the U.S. less sensitive to supply disruptions and price changes of other fuels.

“Rooftop solar power alone could provide 20% of our electricity needs,” said the report.

According to the study, “history shows that new industries are the source of growth in an economy and mature industries tend to either maintain or lose jobs over the long term, [so] effective incentives from an economic standpoint are those that address industries in the early adoption stage,” such as the solar industry.

The researchers estimate that the solar industry will provide between 240,000 and 965,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs by 2030. Exports could provide another 67,700 jobs if the U.S. maintains its current share of the global solar market.

According to Matt Murray, director the Baker Center, the report proves “the solar industry’s great potential for the US economy—not only in the diversification of our energy supply, but also through job creation and global business opportunities.”

Read the full report here.

The post Federal government does not give solar industry “special support” appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM) survey of looked at member firms’ purchasing activities in 2011. The survey found that four of the original coalition members purchased over $400 million in goods and services from other manufacturers and employers in 46 states in 2011.

Credit: CASM

CASM is the group of U.S. solar manufacturers that filed antidumping and countervailing duty petitions with the U.S. Department of Commerce and International Trade Commission last October.

CASM alleges that Chinese firms receive illegal government support, which has caused “a dozen U.S. solar manufacturers to shut down, declare bankruptcy or lay off employees in all U.S. regions since 2010.”

The group is comprised of 190 U.S. firms who employ over 16,000 American workers. Of the seven founding members, four participated in the survey: SolarWorld, Helios Solar Works, MX Solar USA and one anonymous member.

Some members of CASM have chosen to remain anonymous to avoid business retaliation.

The firms surveyed purchased a total of over $1 million in goods and services in 21 states, and at least $50 million in four states: Oregon ($86 million) and Pennsylvania ($74 million), Michigan ($60.8 million) and California ($50 million).

CASM contends that these figures highlight “just one dimension of solar manufacturing’s multiplier effect in supporting jobs and spurring activity across the U.S. economy.” The group argues that advanced manufacturing generates “high-paying and stable jobs and beneficial ripple effects, including research and innovation,” and thus should be protected from unfair competition.

CASM cited a National Association of Manufacturing study that found that “each dollar’s worth of manufactured goods creates another $1.43 of activity in other sectors, twice the $.71 multiplier for services.”

But the president of the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE), the group opposing action against Chinese imports, said CASM’s “effort to raise the price of solar energy to America’s consumers and businesses is selfish, short-sighted and senseless.”

In an op-ed in The Hill, Jigar Shah noted that all governments looking to spur domestic solar demand have implemented support mechanisms, and that the drop in the cost of solar cells and panels has been a fundamentally good thing.

“Thousands of workers who lost jobs when the housing market collapsed are now gainfully employed in jobs — that can’t be outsourced — installing solar systems on homes, box stores, office buildings and at sites for utility-scale generation,” he wrote.

“The sharp drop in the cost of solar cells and panels has led to the greatest expansion of solar installations that the U.S. has ever seen.”

Last month, the Department of Commerce issued a preliminary decision to impose countervailing duties on Chinese PV imports. The Department will issue a preliminary decision on whether to impose antidumping duties on Chinese imports. The final rulings are expected in July 2012.

The post CASM: solar manufacturing spurs U.S. jobs and innovation appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Currently, a cap limits customers’ access to to the net metering program implemented in 1995. Customers can sell back excess energy from PV panels only until the capacity used by those customers exceeds five percent of the utility’s “aggregate customer peak demand.”

But solar advocates have argued that utilities are using a calculation that is very restrictive and leads to almost 50 percent less solar (and other renewable energy) than would otherwise be allowed. A group of solar industry supporters filed a suggestion for a new methodology to calculate five percent of “aggregate customer peak demand” that has been accepted by CPUC Chairman Michael Peevey.

Photo Credit: Go Solar California

“When we crafted California’s original net metering law, the goal was maximize the amount of clean distributed energy on the grid,” said former Assemblyman Fred Keeley, author of California’s net metering law.

“By proposing this methodology, the CPUC is complying with the original legislative intent and helping California lead the way toward a clean energy economy.”

“The PUC’s proposed decision is a positive step in maintaining the growth of solar in California by clarifying the amount of net metering allowed under current law,” said Joseph Wiedman, a partner at Keyes, Fox & Wiedman LLP who represents the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC), one of the groups who proposed the new methodology.

The groups supporting the change argue that the less restrictive cap on net metering will increase renewable energy use in California, and lower energy costs for all.

“If adopted, this decision will ultimately allow more ratepayers to benefit from net metering — creating even more job growth in one of our state’s thriving industries while lowering costs for solar users and all energy customers,” said Wiedman.

“This is about choice,” said Vote Solar Initiative Executive Director Adam Browning. “Do we want to allow Californians to generate their own electricity using clean, renewable power or stay beholden to the utilities? Do we want to allow people to put panels on their own roof and get fair credit for that power? Schools across the state are already saving $1.5 billion on their electricity bills thanks to net metering. Do we want more of that, or less? This proposed decision comes down on the side of more.”

Peevey’s proposal will be considered by the entire Commission some time after the 30 day comment period.

The post California regulator proposes change to net metering program appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The installations, owned and operated by SolarCity, will total 2 MW and power stores located in the Denver metro area. Walmart expects that these installations will generate almost 3 million kWh of energy annually, enough to power over 225 homes and offset over 5 million pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per year.

“With these six solar power systems in Colorado, we reach an exciting milestone of 100 solar power installations on U.S. Walmart stores, clubs, and distribution centers,” said Marty Gilbert, Walmart director of energy.

“While Walmart’s investment in solar technology has significantly grown in recent years, we know there is still much work to be done to reach our environmental goals and look forward to continuing to work with states like Colorado and suppliers like SolarCity to take full advantage of solar power.”

A solar installation at a Walmart store in Mountain View, CA. Credit: Walmart

Back in March 2010, then-Governor Bill Ritter signed into law legislation requiring large utilities to obtain 30% of their power from renewable sources by 2020. The state is ranked fifth among the country’s top 10 states for the total amount of solar capacity installed. SolarCity has operations in Denver and Parker, CO, and Walmart operates 86 facilities and employs 25,238 people in the state.

“Like the state of Colorado, Walmart has set ambitious renewable energy goals and these solar installations are another step in that journey,” said Kim Saylors-Laster, Walmart vice president of energy.

The retail giant notes that these installations “demonstrate that solar can be cost-effective even in the large flat-roof environment where high wind and snow can pose challenges for solar projects.”

In September 2011, SolarCity announced plans to install solar panels on up to 60 Walmart stores in California. At the time, SolarCity CEO Lyndon Rive said that Walmart was “setting an example that far more companies in the U.S. can follow; it is possible for many businesses to pay less for solar power than they currently pay for electricity.”

And with these new installations in Colorado, “Walmart continues to show the kind of leadership that makes solar adoption easier and more affordable for other companies in the U.S.,” according to Toby Corey, SolarCity’s chief revenue officer.

“SolarCity has now installed solar panels on Walmart stores in California, Arizona and Colorado, helping the company to boost both renewable energy and employment in these states and demonstrating that businesses can pay less for solar power than they currently pay for electricity.”

The post Walmart to install 100th solar power project appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The report, titled “Clean & Green: Best Practices in Photovoltaics,” was released by As You Sow, a non-profit that promotes environmental and social corporate responsibility. The study was based on a survey of over 100 PV manufacturers worldwide.

As You Sow looked at the manufacturing process for PV panels, the risks involved, and the practices firms have in place to “mitigate risks from hazardous compounds, reduce environmental impact, and responsibly manage their supply chains.”

The report found that PV manufacturers “are often not only meeting but outperforming standards set for emissions, are reducing water use and reusing water on their own initiatives, and are participating in voluntary international programs related to worker safety.”

Credit: "Clean & Green: Best Practices in Photovoltaics" As You Sow

The study went on to state that “the generation of electricity from solar energy is significantly safer to the environment and workers than production of electricity from coal and natural gas.”

“This report confirms that solar PV manufacturers take their responsibility as members of our communities seriously,” said John Smirnow, Vice President of Trade and Competitiveness for the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).

“SEIA will continue to work with companies throughout the solar supply-chain to establish standards that allow companies to compete in an environmentally and socially responsible way.”

Setting Industry Standards

“Clean and Green” comes a week after the SEIA released a document that promotes environmental and social responsibility standards for the solar industry. The Solar Industry Commitment to Environmental and Social Responsibility (Solar Commitment) focuses on company and supplier requirements in the areas of labor, ethics, health and safety, environmental responsibility, human rights, and management systems.

“Solar is the cleanest, safest source of energy and the solar industry is committed to ensuring social and environmental responsibility for our supply chain,” said Rhone Resch, president and CEO of SEIA.

“The release of SEIA’s Solar Commitment marks an important, proactive step toward a sustainable future for solar.”

The Solar Commitment started back in 2010, when the SEIA created an Environment, Health & Safety (EHS) Committee. The founding participants of this framework of voluntary standards include Dow Solar, SunPower, Suntech, Trina Solar, and Yingli Solar.

“The Solar Commitment received unanimous support from SEIA’s Board of Directors to promote the industry’s continued environmental and social responsibility,” said Julie Blunden, Chair of SEIA’s EHS Committee, Vice Chair of SEIA’s board and SVP at SunPower.

“We applaud the founding participant companies, including my own, that have already endorsed the Solar Commitment and are actively working to develop a governance model and accountability mechanisms.”

Going forward, the SEIA is establishing an Advisory Group to work on accountability mechanisms and governance structures to support the implementation of the Solar Commitment.

The post Report lauds PV industry environmental and social responsibility practices appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Similar to online banking, the Green Button allows consumers to see their energy consumption levels online in an easy-to-understand format.

At present, consumers can click the green button on a utility’s website to see their energy consumption data (you can see it at Pacific Gas & Electric). But 21 technology firms have committed to developing smart-phone applications with the same functionality.

According to the Green Button website, the program will allow consumers to “make more informed energy decisions, optimize the size and cost-effectiveness of solar panels for their home, or verify that energy-efficiency retrofit investments are performing as promised.”

“Empowering American families to shrink their own utility bills is an important part of this Administration’s all-of-the-above energy strategy,” said Dr. John P. Holdren, Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Credit: greenbuttondata.org

“With new online tools made possible by the Green Button, families will have easy access to information on how they can reduce their energy use and put more money in their pocket.”

This project goes back to 2010, when President Obama unveiled the Blue Button. Launched by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Blue Button allows consumers to download information about their healthcare plans and share it health providers and care givers.

Then in September 2011, US Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra called on utilities to develop a Green Button. “With this information at their fingertips, consumers would be enabled to make more informed decisions about their energy use and, when coupled with opportunities to take action, empowered to actively manage their energy use,” said Chopra.

“[M]aking this information available—in simple standard formats—will help spur innovative new consumer applications and devices from entrepreneurs, big companies, and even students,” he continued.

“The Green Button is a milestone in a much larger story about transparency and empowering citizens, a narrative which resonates with Americans who want to build a future around sustainability and equity,” said Adam James, a Special Assistant on the Energy Policy Team at the Center for American Progress.

So far, 15 utilities and energy suppliers have joined the voluntary initiative, providing access to consumption information to an estimated 27 million households. The Green Buttons are based on a common technical standard, which ensures that software developers have a large enough market to warrant creating innovative apps.

The Department of Energy simultaneously announced the Apps for Energy contest for the development of energy-related apps, with $100,000 in cash prizes.

“Our top priority is to help consumers save money on their energy bills by providing them with easy access to data on how they use energy in their homes,” said Energy Secretary Steven Chu. “Apps for Energy will challenge our nation’s talented software developers to create apps that provide energy usage data in the most comprehensive and accessible formats.”

Learn more about the Green Button Initiative here.

The post White House announces public-private partnership to reduce energy consumption appeared first on Solar Tribune.

R. Todd Neilson, the chief restructuring officer, and currently a director at Berkeley Research Group, authored a report filed March 27 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware.

After reviewing submitted documents and communications between the DOE and Solyndra, Nielson concluded that “the DOE had sufficient information to understand the risks and challenges associated with the guarantee…and make an informed decision as to the ongoing financial condition of Solyndra.”

Further, “all of the funds drawn under the DOE Loan Guarantee were spent in accordance with the relevant loan documents,” Solyndra submitted “materially correct” financial data, and that “no material funds were diverted from their original intended use.”

Finding Fault

The report supported the claim that price pressures played a pivotal role in the firm’s failure. When Solyndra entered the market, the average sale price per watt (ASP) was $3.30, but by 2011 the ASP had dropped to about $1. “This rapid drop in ASP was probably the single greatest contributor to Solyndra’s failure,” said Neilson.

Neilson attributed this drop, for the most part, to China’s “aggressive” entry into the market, thanks to “subsidized funds from the Chinese government.”

Photo Credit: Solyndra

“Panel manufacturers using polysilicon were able to reduce the cost and price of their panels substantially,” Neilson said. Solyndra’s product was based on thin-film technology.

“Unfortunately Solyndra’s total costs of production, including materials, did not experience a commensurate reduction, which was devastating.”

To stay in the market, Solyndra had to drop the price, essentially operating at a loss. But Solyndra could not “rapidly adapt to changing market conditions,” the report said.

Neilson also noted the negative impact of the European debt crisis, which slowed growth in demand for solar panels and forced the government to reduce support for the industry.

Between 2009 and 2011, the European market accounted for 60 percent of Solyndra’s sales. The reduction of feed-in-tariffs, coupled with the falling ASP, had a “serious effect.”

If the ASP had stabilized, and government subsidies remained, “it is possible that Solyndra might have continued its operations and ultimately, may have become a successful company.”

“Given its unique technology, the company may have had a significant impact on the solar industry.”

Ongoing Investigation

Neilson’s report, however, did not refer to the Congressional investigation into whether approval and restructuring of Solyndra’s loan guarantee was politically motivated, nor did it comment on the pending federal criminal inquiry by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in San Francisco and the Justice Department.

“I have no intention of involving myself in political discussions why this was done, or whether it should have been done,” Neilson told Fortune.

The report comes hot on the heels of a March 20 Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, where Energy Secretary Steven Chu answered questions regarding the DOE loan guarantee program.

According to POLITICO, Chu told reporters that “After hundreds of thousands of pages of documents sent over, there’s not any whiff that [Solyndra] was a politically influenced decision. That’s true of all the loans.”

Meanwhile, Republicans on the case have indicated that perhaps their investigation may not confirm allegations, including that the White House aided George Kaiser by securing the loan guarantee. A donor to President Obama’s 2008 election campaign, Kaiser had also invested in Solyndra.

“Is there a criminal activity? Perhaps not,” Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) told POLITICO. “Is there a political influence and connections? Perhaps not. Did they bend the rules for an agenda, an agenda not covered within the statute? Absolutely.”

Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) told Environment & Energy Daily that the Republican pressure on the White House is essentially part of a campaign strategy to get a Republican President elected this fall.

“Ultimately, we’ll stop it on Election Day, hopefully,” he said. “And bringing attention to these things helps the voters and citizens of the country make the kind of decision that I hope helps them as they evaluate who they are going to vote for in November.”

The post Restructuring Officer: Solyndra provided accurate information to DOE appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The ruling is in response to a petition filed by the Coalition for American Manufacturing (CASM), an industry group alleging that Chinese firms have profited from illegal government subsidies, and that Chinese firms have been dumping panels on the U.S. market below cost.

The tariffs – of between 2.9 and 5 percent –  only address the first complaint, and apply only to Chinese made solar cells. Panels assembled in China using cells produced elsewhere will not be subject to tariffs.

China’s biggest solar manufacturers quickly came out to claim that the low tariff levels indicate U.S. reluctance to impose measures considered to be too punishing.

“This initial decision reflects the reality that Suntech’s global success is based on free and fair competition. Nonetheless, unilateral trade barriers, large or small, will further delay our transition away from fossil fuels,” said Andrew Beebe, Suntech’s Chief Commercial Officer, whose firm was slapped with countervailing duties of 2.9 percent.

Beebe went on to highlight the firm’s links to the U.S. “As a local manufacturer with production in Arizona, we will continue to remain an active member of the American solar industry and maintain focus on making solar energy affordable for everyone, everywhere,” he said.

An employee at a Suntech facility in China. Credit: Suntech

Yingli Green Energy, whose PV cells face a 3.6 percent import tariff, also emphasized the firm’s job creation efforts in the U.S., and downplayed the efficacy of tariffs as a method to impact Chinese producers only.

“The important thing to remember is that tariffs are bad for the entire solar industry,” said Mr. Liansheng Miao, Chairman and CEO of Yingli Green Energy. “We will continue to support the U.S. as an important solar market, and believe that global trade and fair competition will persevere. Today’s decision validates that.”

Trina Solar, whose PV products may face a 4.73 percent tariff, echoed the other firms’ sentiments, and focused on the fact that the Commerce ruling was only preliminary.

An Official Response

A commentary on Xinhua, the official Chinese government news agency, said that the “lighter than expected tariffs” really aim to keep the U.S.-China trade relationship from going sour. Nevertheless, the commentary said, the U.S. is acting in a protectionist manner.

“Although the solar panel case has proven to be less devastating than expected, the U.S. government recently intensified shots against a range of Chinese imports… recalling the phantom of protectionism in an election year.”

“When conducting subsidy and dumping probes, the U.S. government should make decisions based on facts,” the commentary continued. “Punitive duties, big or small, will distort normal trade relations and risk disturbing the fragile global economic recovery process”

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei echoed this view, according to AFP. “It is normal for the two sides to have friction and differences of views,” he said.

“We should not allow such friction to impair the sound development of Sino-US economic relations.”

But some believe that China’s solar supply boom may slow down, taking pressure off PV producers in the U.S. and elsewhere. Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Huang Ming, chairman of Himin Solar Energy Group, predicted that half of China’s panel producers will soon shut down, and that 95 percent of firms are now operating at a loss.

According to Xinhua, the China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products said the ruling was unfair, and that “Chinese solar panel makers firmly believe that their commercial success resulted from fair competition rather than unfair trade practices and violations to WTO rules.”

Ming agrees that government subsidies were not the source of these firms’ success. “Why are Chinese products so cheap? You can ask the same question in the textile industry, automobile industry and machinery industry,” he said. “It’s all the same.”

Looking Forward

According to the Los Angeles Times, Liu Baocheng, a professor at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, believes that the tariffs will lower the temperature of the brewing trade war.

“I don’t think China will retaliate,” Liu said. “They won’t politicize this issue. They’ll probably play this down as a technical issue.”

With all sides claiming victory in the U.S., and the Chinese expressing only limited outrage, the end of this chapter is not yet near. On May 17, Commerce will announce a preliminary ruling on whether to levy an anti-dumping tariff on Chinese imports, too. CASM has requested a tariff of up to 100 percent.

But these decisions will remain tentative until the U.S. International Trade Commission also completes its investigation by the end of 2012.

The post Chinese stakeholders react to potential PV tariffs appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The tariffs come after a review of Chinese subsidies to domestic solar firms, at the request of the Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM). The group, comprised of seven firms led by SolarWorld, filed complaints of unfair subsidies and dumping from Chinese firms back in October.

The Department of Commerce intends to impose a tariff of 4.73 percent on imports from Trina Solar, 2.9 percent from Suntech, and 3.6 percent from all other Chinese manufacturers.

These tariff rates will apply to Chinese-manufactured solar cells, regardless of where the panels using those cells are assmbled. Further, panels assembled in China using non-Chinese cells are not covered by this ruling.

“Today’s announcement affirms what U.S. manufacturers have long known: Chinese manufacturers have received unfair and WTO-illegal subsidies,” said Steve Ostrenga, CEO of Helios Solar Works, one of the members of CASM to recently lift the veil of anonymity.

“We appreciate the Commerce Department’s hard work in bringing these subsidies to light, and we look forward to addressing all of China’s unfair trade practices in the solar industry.”

A worker at a Suntech facility. Photo Credit: Suntech

But these rates are much lower than many in the industry had expected, pleasing opponents of the petitions. Jigar Shah, President of the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE), the group that formed to oppose CASM, called it a “relatively positive outcome.”

“However, tariffs large or small will hurt American jobs and prolong our world’s reliance on fossil fuels. Fortunately, this decision will not significantly raise solar prices in the United States as SolarWorld has sought,” said Shah.

“This decision clearly demonstrates that the Commerce Department did not find the Chinese government engaged in massive subsidization, as SolarWorld and CASM claim.”

According to Melanie Hart, China Energy and Climate Policy Analyst at the Center for American Progress, the Department of Commerce based tariffs only on what it could prove, rather than applying punitive duties.

“Chinese companies and officials are watching this case very closely, and hopefully this action will serve as an example in China for how these cases can and should be handled impartially and according to law,” she said.

Hart also argued that SolarWorld took the right step in filing the petitions – rather than standing down out of fear of retaliation, which leads to “tacit accommodation to illegal trade behavior.”

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) came out in support of a balanced approach, including both standing up for U.S. firms and playing by the global trade rules, but also fostering collaboration.

Rhone Resch, president and CEO of SEIA, called the Commerce action a sign of “a growing trend of trade conflict in the global solar energy industry that threatens to curtail the rapid growth we have seen in this market – both in the U.S. and abroad.”

“Governments and industry must recognize that while trade remedy proceedings such as antidumping and countervailing duty investigations are an important part of the global trade rules, so too are collaboration and negotiations.”

On May 17, the Department of Commerce will issue a preliminary ruling on CASM’s allegation that Chinese firms are dumping solar products on the U.S. market below cost. If Commerce finds the claim to be true, further anti-dumping duties could be levied.

Commerce will make its final determinations in June 2012, and the International Trade Commission will issue a final ruling in July 2012.

The post US to impose import duties on Chinese solar cells appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The U.S. Solar Market Insight: Year-in-Review 2011 report, from the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and GTM Research, found that the U.S. solar industry grew by 109 percent from 2010 to 2011.

The U.S. market now makes up seven percent of PV globally, with a total value of over $8.4 billion in 2011. Last year’s installations represent enough installed capacity to power over 370,000 homes, bringing the cumulative solar capacity in the U.S. to a level enough to power almost a million homes.

GTM Research and SEIA attribute the record growth to the following factors:

• lower installed PV system costs: costs dropped by 20 percent in 2011 due to lower component costs, improved installation efficiency, expanded financing options, and a shift toward larger systems nationwide
• the expiration of the 1603 Treasury Program, which pushed project finalization before the Dec 31, 2011 expiration deadline
• more utility-scale projects were completed in 2011 than ever before

“In 2011, the market demonstrated why the U.S. is becoming a center of attention for global solar,” said Shayle Kann, Managing Director of GTM Research’s solar practice.

“It was the first year with meaningful volumes of large-scale PV installations; there were 28 individual PV projects over 10 megawatts in 2011, up from only two in 2009. Furthermore, the market continued to diversify nationally; eight states installed more than 50 megawatts of solar each last year, compared to just five in 2010. These are all indicators of a vibrant market.”

U.S. installations and global market share to 2016. Credit: SEIA and GTM Research

But the report also highlighted problem areas in the U.S. market, including the impact of the expiration of 1603 Treasury and falling prices – with solar panel prices dropping over 50 percent during the year – on PV firms.

“As a result [of lower panel prices], multiple U.S. module manufacturing plants closed over the course of 2011. Despite these closures, U.S. module manufacturing capacity expanded 28% and production remained flat for the year when compared to 2010,” said the report.

Looking Ahead

SEIA and GTM Research are nevertheless positive about 2012, in part because of the many projects in the pipeline as part of the Section 1603 Treasury Program, most of which will be completed in 2012.

But the report notes that “2012 market size will still be largely determined by factors that have not yet been decided, such as the final outcome of the trade petition and market dynamics in Germany and Italy.”

The analysis also predicts that U.S. market share will increase over the next five years to almost 15 percent in 2016, when U.S. and China will be the leading markets as European markets slow down.

Regarding the political scrutiny surrounding the Solyndra bankruptcy, the report said “an industry blessed with overwhelming public support suddenly became a target for those who sought to admonish the loan guarantee program or clean energy policy in general.”

But SEIA and GTM Research still believe that the government support of the solar industry has been a success.

The report also addresses the brewing trade dispute with China spearheaded by SolarWorld, who filed a petition for tariffs to be applied to Chinese PV imports. “[I]t would be unreasonable to expect all (or even most) solar manufacturing to come from the U.S.,” the report said.

“The U.S. certainly has a role to play, but it will be over the next decade that the nature of that role will be determined. As the industry continues to mature, successful and sustainable companies will be separated from hopeful but ultimately unsuccessful ventures.”

Read the full report here.

The post U.S. solar industry grew by 109% in 2011 appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The report, from clean-tech research and advisory firm Clean Edge, shows that revenue was $246.1 billion in 2011, up from $188.1 billion in 2010. Most of this growth was from increase wind and solar deployment.

But this expansion came in a year of continued economic stagnation, with falling prices putting pressure on manufacturers. And it was Solyndra’s high-profile bankruptcy – not the record growth – that put cleantech into the spotlight.

“Last year saw many in the clean-tech community caught off guard, as the industry became a modern-day whipping boy,” said Ron Pernick, Clean Edge co-founder and managing director.

“The attacks, offered up in sound bite-sized nuggets delivered more for impact than accuracy, overlooked the fact that many clean-energy technologies are becoming increasingly cost-competitive.”

The report found the global PV market rose to $91.6 billion in 2011, up by over $20 billion from the previous year. PV installations increased by almost 70 percent over the same time period. With PV module prices dropping by 40 percent from 2010 to 2011, installation growth significantly outpaced revenue growth.

“Clean tech isn’t withering on the vine as some would proclaim, but instead is continuing its rapid expansion,” said the report.

“There have been growing pains for many firms, with low-cost manufacturing in China and elsewhere giving U.S. and European manufacturers a not-soinsignificant run for their money, but the industry as a whole has continued to expand throughout the economic downturn of recent years.”

Looking Ahead

According to Clean Edge, this price decline will continue, with the the installed costs for PV falling to almost one-third of current levels by 2021. The market will continue to expand to $130.5 billion by 2021.

The report also projects that:

• in 13 states (Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont) residential PV will be cost-competitive without subsidies by 2021.
• solar will become increasingly attractive with a likely explosion in a new breed of power providers (such as solar installers/financiers SolarCity, SunEdison, and SunRun) providing residential, commercial, and industrial customers with a hedge against fluctuating retail electricity rates tied to volatile prices of fossil fuels

Credit: Clean Energy Trends 2012 © Clean Edge

Clean Edge builds upon Bloomberg’s January finding that solar was seeing most growth out of all investments in renewables. A record 23.2 percent of U.S. venture capital investment went to clean technologies.

The analysis predicted trends that will expand cleantech deployment for the coming years, including:

• the military will be the leader in clean energy deployment
• Japan will see an expansion in renewables in a “post-nuclear future”
• growth in commercial building retrofits
• investment in waste-to-resource breakthroughs, and
• energy storage solutions for utility-scale cleantech

Clean Edge suggested policy changes that will support cleantech growth in the coming years. “The next few years, we believe, will be clearly defined by those nations that provide the infrastructure for the deployment of innovative and effective financing tools,” the report said.

“Just like Google and Warren Buffett, retail investors should be able to tap the relatively steady, reliable, and secure returns that can be offered by these types of clean-energy project investments.”

Read the full report here.

The post Report: cleantech revenue up $58 billion in 2011 appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) introduced an amendment to extend the Section 1603 Treasury Grant for one year as part of the highway bill (S. 1813) currently under consideration in Congress.

Covering not only solar, but also cellulosic biofuel, biodiesel and renewable diesel, the 1603 program reimburses companies for up to 30 percent of the cost of renewable energy installations in lieu of tax credits. Introduced in the 2009 stimulus package, Section 1603 was extended in 2010, but expired at the end of 2011.

Section 1603 Stabenow’s amendment also includes a one-year extension of the Production Tax Credit that has contributed to the growth of the wind industry.

Solar industry players have touted the 1603 program as a key driver of industry growth, and argue that discontinuing the program will decrease available financing for energy projects by 52 percent in 2012, while a year-long extension will create an additional 37,000 jobs in the solar industry alone.

“These entrepreneurs are inventing new technology, hiring workers, and producing cutting-edge new products that save consumers money and reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” said Senator Stabenow. “Especially when gas prices are rising, we shouldn’t be raising taxes on innovators and job creators who are helping to lower America’s energy bills.”

Senator Stabenow. Photo Credit: AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

Back in February, Congress passed a bill extending payroll tax cuts and unemployment benefits until the end of 2012. Solar industry stakeholders had hoped that an extension of the 1603 Treasury program would also be included in the bill. But the 1603 program extension failed to pass.

At the time, Rhone Resch, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, expressed disappointment. “While larger energy developers have the scale and resources to receive tax equity from Wall Street, small businesses don’t and are hurt most by Congress’ inaction,” he said.

“Small businesses are the engine of economic growth in America, and the result of a continued lapse of the 1603 program will be job losses and undue economic hardship for the entrepreneurs we are relying on to create jobs and get our economy back in order.”

But despite support from the Obama administration – an extension of the program was included in the President’s budget for 2013 — whether 1603 will be extended this time is uncertain.

The Senate is set to vote on the 30 amendments to the bill tomorrow, and Stabenow’s amendment needs 60 votes to pass. Since the Democrats only have 51 members in the Senate, the bill would need some Republican support. And among the other amendments up for vote are measures by Republicans to kill energy tax credits.  

According to Renewable Energy World, Timothy Arcuri, a research analyst with CitiGroup, said that his Capitol Hill sources believe it is unlikely enough Republicans would sign onto the current version of the legislation. Further, the House highway bill differs significantly from the Senate bill, making it unlikely that the Senate bill will pass in its current form.

The post Congress to once again consider extension of key renewable energy program appeared first on Solar Tribune.

According to analysts at Bloomberg News, 24.8 GW of PV panels will be installed worldwide in 2012, down ten percent from the 27.7 GW installed in 2011. Since 1999, installations have grown on average 61 percent annually, making this year the first decline in over a decade.

On a global scale, Germany and Italy – the world’s biggest PV markets – recently reduced subsidies that not only ramped up installations in those countries, but had also contributed to the precipitous fall in panel prices over the past years.

Analysts say that these subsidy cuts are likely to reduce demand for PV panels in Europe, which is bad news during the period of global oversupply.

“Overcapacity has been an overhang for this industry, and with Germany tightening it doesn’t seem like it will ease,” said Amir Rozwadowski, an analyst at Barclays Capital Inc., told Bloomberg.

“It’s difficult to assess where there’s a significant push-out that would lead to accelerating demand, given the anticipated decline in Europe,” he said.

PV cell testing at a Trina Solar manufacturing facility. Photo Credit: Trina Solar

The Bloomberg analysts note the global oversupply of panels over the past years, which has led panel manufacturers to lower prices, and has pushed some firms into bankruptcy. Factories have the capacity to produce around 38 GW in 2012, much greater than the predicted demand for the year.

In the U.S., a key subsidy expired in December 2011 and has yet to be renewed. With this drawback of subsidies in key markets, some worry that even with record low prices, solar panels will still not be cheap enough to install the amount available to supply.

And despite the supply glut, China’s latest five-year-plan indicates that top domestic firms will expand production, a prospect that does not bode well for Western PV firms. However, China’s biggest panel manufacturers have forecast higher sales for the coming year. Whether the anticipated demand will eventuate, though, is yet to be seen.

The post Global PV panel installations to drop for first time in a decade appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Wisconsin solar firm Helios Solar Works has been involved in CASM’s operations from day one. But the company stayed anonymous until March 8, leaving SolarWorld as the only public member of the group.

“We have supported these trade cases from the beginning, and we are pleased to publicly declare that support,” said Steve Ostrenga, CEO of Helios Solar Works. “Our country can’t afford to give up manufacturing jobs in growth industries to nations that engage in illegal and harmful trade practices.”

With only seven founding firms, the coalition now includes over 150 U.S. solar manufacturers. According to CASM, the Department of Commerce supports firms’ decisions to stay anonymous in order to protect against business retaliation.

“We believe the United States holds as much promise for manufacturing production and jobs as ever, especially in an industry with such potential to promote U.S. energy security, sustainability and economic growth,” said Brent Brucker, general manager of Helios.

“First we have to enforce world trade laws so that companies can compete on business essentials like production costs and product performance. Then we can go back to filling up our plants, hiring and truly competing.”

A Helios installation in Wisconsin. Photo Credit: Helios Solar Works

Helios Solar Works started it’s first production line only about a year ago, in February, 2011. The company started seeing prices drop just months later, and was forced to lay off about 20 employees, bringing their workforce to about 30, Ostrenga told Renewable Energy World.

Once Helios joined CASM, they decided to stay anonymous to conserve resources, rather than to avoid retaliation from Chinese firms. Helios is one of the many firms that CASM claims has had to downsize thanks to illegal subsidies from the Chinese government to PV producers.

“Our core competency is in making what we believe is the best module in the world,” said Ostrenga. “We just felt we’d get a lot of inquiries from the press and other institutions, and we didn’t want our company and our managers focused on those things.”

But now, the firm has decided to go go public to show that China’s alleged unfair trade practices hit areas other than Oregon, where SolarWorld is based.

“Solar World has been getting a lot of pressure, saying it’s just them and that they stand alone,” said Ostrenga. “No. We’re a module manufacturer. We compete in the market place. We make a good module. We’re here in Milwaukee. We employ people.”

Back in December, the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled that Chinese practices are damaging the U.S. solar industry. Now CASM awaits the Department of Commerce decision of whether to apply retroactive import tariffs on Chinese PV imports, due March 20.

The post Another firm in coalition pushing for tariffs on Chinese imports goes public appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Comprised of Abengoa, BrightSource Energy, and Torresol Energy, the CSPA aims to educate U.S. regulators, utilities and grid operators about the benefits of CSP. The group will promote policies favorable to increased deployment of CSP technology in the U.S.

Concentrating solar power (CSP) technology that uses mirrors to concentrate the sun’s radiation on a large scale. The solar thermal energy is used to drive a conventional steam turbine. Proponents highlight the benefits of using a clean, renewable energy – rather than the traditional fossil fuels or nuclear power – to power utility-scale steam turbines.

“Concentrating solar power technology is the only renewable resource that is capable of harnessing the world’s most abundant fuel source — the sun — to produce reliable, cost-effective, and dispatchable electricity,” said Tex Wilkins, Executive Director of the CSP Alliance.

“We believe CSP, with the ability to dispatch electricity when it is needed, is critical in meeting the energy challenges facing the United States and the world,” he continued.

A CSP project by BrightSource Energy. Photo Credit: BrightSource Energy

The first CSP plant was built in California in the 1980s, but now there are over 500 MW of plants in the U.S., with over 1,300 MW of CSP plants in construction. But in light of the falling world prices of photovoltaics, CSP is a more expensive way to provide power than PV.

However, the Alliance is confident that CSP adoption will grow; the group cited an International Energy Agency study that claimed over ten percent of global electricity demand could be fulfilled by CSP by 2050 – but only with the right amount of investment and appropriate government policies.

The CSPA also notedthe job creation benefits of advancing the technology, citing a DOE study that found that a 100 MW CSP plant creates more than $600 million to gross state output, ten times that of a combined cycle fossil plant.

Until 2011, CSPA Executive Director Tex Wilkins was key in developing the CSP division of the Department of Energy, and also played a role in the Solar Industrial and Solar Buildings Programs at the DOE.

The CSPA will work with the newly-created World Solar Thermal Electricity Association (STELAWorld), a group that will work with international agencies to assist policy-makers and energy investors to access information on solar thermal electricity development.

The post Concentrating solar power firms form industry alliance appeared first on Solar Tribune.

Senator Rob Wyden (D-OR), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee’s Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs and Global Competitiveness, released a report documenting the U.S. loss of market share in the PV industry, primarily to China.

The report, entitled “Losing the Environmental Goods Economy to China,” looks at U.S. exports of goods and services pertaining to environmental sustainability, like wind and solar power technologies.

The key finding was that U.S., EU and Japanese exporters of environmental goods – including PV products – have been losing market share to China in most major world markets. Further, the U.S. went from a worldwide solar trade surplus of $2 billion to an almost $1.6 billion deficit in 2011.

“The report’s findings correct the contention that the U.S. continues to enjoy a trade surplus with China in solar products,” Wyden writes in the report.

Solar cells on a production line at a Trina Solar factory. Photo Credit: Trina Solar

“Overall, it supports the assertion that China’s environmental goods industries are experiencing rapid growth that industries located in other countries appear unable to duplicate, suggesting that China’s competitiveness is significantly due to its violation of norms and rules of international trade.”

Senator Wyden is a key proponent of imposing import tariffs on Chinese-made PV products. This report builds upon his contention in an October, 2011 policy brief that China’s solar manufacturers have managed to control significant world market share by charging below-market prices.

“If China is breaking trade rules to give its industries an unfair advantage, it’s important that trade rules be enforced and tariffs be applied to negate that unfair advantage,” said Senator Wyden.

Industry Group Backing

The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM), led by PV firm SolarWorld, filed complaints of illegal Chinese government subsidies to PV firms back in October, 2011. The claims are under investigation by the Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC).

This past week, the Coalition released a report supporting the one released by Senator Wyden’s office. The report uses data from the Department of Commerce and the ITC, as well as a prior study by GTM Research.

CASM found that the U.S. became a net solar importer in 2011, moving from a solar trade surplus with China of at least $250 million in 2010 to a deficit of $1.6 billion in 2011.

“Chinese importers often claim that the modest U.S. trade surplus in 2010 proved that China is not threatening the U.S. solar industry and economy. But it is no longer 2010, and any trade surplus is history,” said Gordon Brinser, president of SolarWorld Industries America Inc.

“Illegal dumping by massively subsidized Chinese solar producers, combined with curbed exports of polysilicon and manufacturing equipment, are decimating U.S. solar manufacturers, the supply chain and their export business.”

The Coalition argues that this unfair competition has led to at least 12 U.S. producers undertaking layoffs, going bankrupt or closing plants over the past two years.

“Evidence continues to mount that China is resolved to dominate the global solar energy market and destroy America’s solar manufacturing industry and jobs. Enough is enough. China’s illegal trade must stop,” Brinser said.

Meanwhile, the Department of Commerce once again extended its decision on whether to place tariffs on Chinese PV products entering the U.S. The Department was poised to issue a determination yesterday, but now will make an announcement on March 20.

The post U.S. loses 2010 PV trade surplus to China appeared first on Solar Tribune.

The Colorado-based Abound Solar manufactures cadmium telluride thin-film PV modules for commercial and utility scale installations. The current modules convert 10.5 percent of available sunlight to electricity, but the recently approved second generation modules have an efficiency of 12.5 percent.

Abound says it is stopping production of the original product in order to “accelerate the manufacturing process and equipment changes needed” for the new product.

The company had a $400 million loan guarantee from the DOE through the same program that provided Solyndra’s loan guarantee. Abound has only taken out $70 million in loans under the guarantee.

Job Cuts

The halt in production will “temporarily” eliminate 180 full-time positions at Abound’s Colorado facility, which opened in 2009. The Longmont Times-Call reports that the company also fired 100 temporary workers. Originally with about 400 employees, these cuts have reduced the company’s staff by 70 percent.

An employee at Abound Solar's Longmont, Colorado facility. Photo Credit: Abound Solar

Abound says it anticipates that once the next phase has begun, many of these jobs will return. The company expects to achieve mass production of the new product by the end of 2012.

“While this is a difficult move with regards to temporarily reducing our workforce, we know that accelerating the introduction of our next generation module will bring significant benefits to our customers and allow us to create even more jobs in the future,” said Craig Witsoe, president and CEO of Abound Solar.

When the loan guarantee was finalized, Abound had projected it would create 1,200 jobs total in Indiana and Colorado, as well as another 1,600 supply chain jobs around the country. The company says their plans to build a facility in Tipton, Indiana still stands, but it is unclear when that will occur.

Stiff Competition

The firm is but another victim of Chinese competitors’ low prices. “Abound is facing the same headwinds — cheap crystalline silicon from China — that made Solyndra a political football,” Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond James & Associates Inc., told Bloomberg.

“I think they made the right decision to conserve cash and focus on improving efficiency so they can ramp up when they’re ready,” Molchanov continued.

“The way the solar market is today, everything everyone is making they’re selling below cost,” Steve Abely, Abound’s chief financial officer, told the Wall Street Journal. “Not just small guys like us—substantial Chinese manufacturers are selling below cost. They can’t do it for a sustainable period, and we can’t either.”

A division of the DOE found that Chinese PV firms are actually at a cost disadvantage compared to U.S. firms, supporting the view that the Chinese government provides illegal subsidies. This Friday, the Commerce Department is due to announce whether Chinese PV products will be hit with import duties.

Witsoe, though, is confident that this change in strategy will allow Abound Solar to not only survive but also prosper. “By focusing our resources to accelerate scale-up of our next generation high efficiency technology, we will sustainably lower total system costs for our customers, increase our own profitability and grow U.S. jobs and energy security,” he said.

Continued DOE Support

This news comes in the midst of the Congressional investigation into Solyndra’s DOE loan guarantee, and Republicans will likely paint Abound’s case as another failed government attempt to “pick winners and losers” in energy innovation. But the administration says it still supports Abound Solar, despite the change of plan.

“While the challenges facing solar manufacturers have been widely reported, we continue to believe that supporting innovative companies like this is important to ensuring our nation has the ability to compete for the clean energy jobs of tomorrow,” said Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman.

The post DOE supported PV firm halts production appeared first on Solar Tribune.