The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? ×

Solar Stunner: America is a $1.9 Billion Exporter of Solar Products

Stephen Lacey, Climate Progress
August 29, 2011  |  25 Comments

With all the stories about China dominating the solar photovoltaics (PV) manufacturing sector, you might not think that America is a net exporter of solar products. But it is — to the tune of $1.8 billion. That's a $1 billion increase over net exports documented in the solar sector last year.

In fact, a report released this morning from GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association found that the U.S. has a $247 million trade surplus with China.

U.S. imports in 2010 were estimated at $1.4 billion, while exports were estimated to be between $1.7 billion – $2.0 billion based on the availability of data for capital equipment sales. This made the U.S. a net exporter of solar goods to China by $247 million to $539 million. Imports came predominantly from modules ($1.2 billion), while exports were driven by capital equipment ($708 million to $1 billion) and polysilicon ($873 million).

Solar isn’t just about the module. When looking at polysilicon production, equipment for manufacturing lines, power electronics, solar hot water tanks, and any number of other domestically-produced products, the U.S. actually offers a good-sized contribution to the global market.

The 2011 Solar Energy Trade Assessment is a follow up from last year’s report, which found U.S. net exports in 2009 were worth $723 million.

The $1 billion surge in net exports came during a year when the U.S. solar market grew by over 100 percent. Due to the successful Treasury Grant Program and Loan Guarantee Program that made it easier for developers and manufacturers to finance facilities, the solar sector grew faster than ever before.

And all that solar — particularly solar PV — brings immense value to the domestic economy.

According to the trade assessment report, around 73 percent of the value of an installed solar system (equipment, labor, site management) is created domestically. When looking at the total solar-sector contribution to the economy, solar PV represents about 82 percent of the domestic value, with concentrating solar power and solar heating and cooling representing about nine percent a piece.

And these calculations don’t even consider the potential value to the electricity system. A report released in June by three solar researchers found that solar PV offers 15-40 cents per kilowatt-hour in added “value” due to its ability to match peak demand, reduce the need to build expensive transmission lines and provide local environmental benefits.

But whether or not policymakers will recognize these tangible benefits is very uncertain. With basic support mechanisms like the Treasury Grant and Loan Guarantee programs set to expire, and the House set to slash funding for various energy programs, America’s solar trade surplus could close quickly.

The findings of today’s GTM Research/SEIA report may surprise a lot of people, especially those who have focused on the Evergreen Solar bankruptcy story or the uncertain fate of thin-film manufacturer Solyndra as reasons not to invest in solar. In reality, solar is a very diverse sector — the $5.6 billion in equipment exports from the U.S. is an important reminder of its diversity and economic potential.

This article was originally published by Climate Progress and was reprinted with permission.

25 Comments

Register To Comment
Sam Harriman
Sam Harriman
October 6, 2011
@FreeMarketeer,

What are your thoughts on the recent piece:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/10/strength-in-numbers-5-partnerships-that-could-expand-renewable-energy#readercomments

?
I'm interested in your input
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
September 19, 2011
@WillWilkin

Will you may be beating a dead horse
Hard to say
I would guess FreeMarketeer is a Republican and he lives in Georgia and more than likely he watches Fox.

All of these issues if true means he lives in a bubble
See the one on Bill Marhes show?

Telling a Republican who is a true believer that their position is incorrect based on logic and reasoning is similar to telling a Taliban member that his obedience to Ala's rules is a bad thing or telling our American version of the Taliban (evangelicals,Pat Roberston etc etc) that they live in La La land and believe in spooks is a lost cause. They drink the Kool Aid and they are as lost as Alice in Wonderland ever was.
Only thing is they generally never recover their senses.Lost forever.
Will Wilkin
Will Wilkin
September 19, 2011
Mr Freemarketeer, surely you will admit the military and its contractors are the Mother-of-All-Corporate-Welfare-Queens.

I asked you this on another thread but got no answer, yet it seems pertinent to your stated concern regarding the "economic or moral sense" (as you say) in how we spend taxpayer monies. So I ask you again:

Considering the mammoth proportions of military spending ($3Trillion+ for Iraq War alone, plus Afghanistan, plus multiple other conflicts never even approved by Congress, not to mention the additional expenses of 750+ US military bases on foreign soil, the deployment of US military personnel in 150+ countries simultaneously), and considering waste of taxpayer money is what you are opposing, do you spend proportionately more time & energy arguing for a drastic reduction in the military budget? It seems militarism a lot bigger economic & moral problem than federal policies (and yes, money) to promote American transition to renewable energy independence Made In USA.

The other main cause of current federal fiscal problems is the historically low tax rates on the income of the rich, particularly capital gains taxes. Put those rates back to where they were before Reagan, and phase out 80% of the bloated military budget over 20 years, and you'll see a positive cash flow in Washington DC allowing the American people to rebuild an infrastructure that will support our 21st century manufacturing and technical economy. Start with the electrical grid, fix our highways and bridges, encourage the manufacture & use of EV's throughout the USA...

I see possibilities for reviving our country and giving the generations after us something better than acidified oceans & mass extinctions of species & rusty abandoned factories and no hope for employment or prosperity. That's where "free markets" & "free trade" are taking us, sad to say.

But please, answer me on whether militarism bothers your taxpaying soul more or less than promoting solar?
James Desmond
James Desmond
September 11, 2011
Your snarkiness aside, sure I 'dug into' brown power subsidization. My conclusion is the same as yours, if you're intellectually honest: Just because brown power corrupted Congress for subsidy goodies does not mean it makes sense, economically or morally, to keep raiding the treasury and adding to our $14 Trillion debt to similarly subsidize green power, ESPECIALLY since we now have a subsidy-disaster trifecta unfolding (the half BILLION in Corporate Solar Welfare Queen subsidy failures that you just read about in my last post).

But you've known that since age 4, when your momma taught you that two wrongs don't make a right.

Look, I deal with facts, evidence, and reality. I'm also working on solutions. Other than obstinately hawking 'any solar's good solar, no matter what the cost' subsidization, what are YOU doing?

How about you join me in injecting some rationality, rather than Solar Fanboyism, into this area, where (if done right), free-market-priced Solar PV (as assisted by crowd-sourced, cost-reducing efforts) can foment an epic economic/ecologic change?

Thanks for listening. I trust your ego won't upstage your reason, and that you believe in The Rule of Reason (that a good reason must yield to a better one). Ergo, you will re-think your beliefs here, and help change the national conversation/drumbeat toward a saner national energy policy. Don't let politicians and Solar Welfare Queens play you and other well-meaning greenies anymore. Ask questions, demand the truth. Untangle all the subsidy layers and turf-protective legislation and let the free market (freedom!) ring!
James Desmond
James Desmond
September 11, 2011
I invested in my array and copped the subsidies, then started studying this area intensively. Honestly I probably would have (yes, hypocritically) done it had I studied the national policy scene first.

Why? Because everyone deals in hypotheticals, and I wanted an actual working model with documentable cost-benefit output. I thus can back up what I say, not just hypothesize.

More importantly, I wanted a 'working lab' model to experiment with, and hopefully develop, Solar PV cost-reducing, open source products. Here's one of them: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/a-crowdsource-invitation

BTW, did you not notice the building prototype that my array is sitting on (another design of mine?): https://picasaweb.google.com/115162333107690986192/55KWHDayANewRecord

Inside it is America's only solar-foil ceiling (prolongs natural indoor lighting, thus reducing the need for artificial lighting) -- yet another innovation that I'm open-sourcing: https://picasaweb.google.com/115162333107690986192/SolarFoilCeiling

All of this figures into an effort to present the first positive energy home/business model at sub-conventional building prices (hence, a double-recyclable, positive-energy building that enables home/business living, for LESS than the cost of a conventional, negative energy home).

(Cont'd next post).
Sam Harriman
Sam Harriman
September 11, 2011
Great work with that DIY install Mr. Desmond,

And i'm impressed by your essay. You make some valid points. But you took it upon yourself to install your own 10kW pv system, Why did you invest that $ and personal 'sweat equity' if you don't think pv is a financially viable investment?

Your research into the matter of renewable energy subsidies is impressive. Have you considered digging into the subsidization of the fossil-fuel industry?
James Desmond
James Desmond
September 10, 2011
Friends, I find your views unsupported and largely misinformed.

My response to them is here: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/home/if-we-must-have-subsidies/subsidized-exports----make-sense
Sam Harriman
Sam Harriman
September 1, 2011
@Everyone,

Thank you for the excellent discussion! I belong to the camp that profoundly disagrees with FreeMarketeer's premise of libertine de-subsidization. With all due respect sir, I'm pretty sure they take people like you hostage in Somalia to reap the economic benefits of their 'free' market. But all smart-ass quips aside. Your 10kW system looks sharp! and you did well to find a contractor that could install it for $3.5/W! Did you ask the guys on the roof what their hourly was? I know licensed journeymen don't torque a termination for less than $50/hr. up here in Oregon.
ANONYMOUS
September 1, 2011
China's on the rise. The Usa's on the decline. And that's ok. Let China be the arbiter of Global Ethics — Lord knows "the west" has been corrupt from pre-Columbian times.
Ken Chan
Ken Chan
September 1, 2011
Thats the reports I am hearing with many technology companies that are successful in China, their main components are manufactured back in their home country. They distribute and sell into the local markets in China as well as export and are doing very well. Senators Clinton and Locke were in China last year with over 100 US corporations promoting such initiatives. The Australian government is promoting such export incentives as well. China has thinkers too, and then we can find someone to drill the holes.
Steve Poppitz
Steve Poppitz
August 31, 2011
to Mr.FreeMarketeer,
Maybe you didn't read the article.We are a net EXPORTER in this market. We are MAKING MONEY here. Let's examine oil now. In a bad year we import some $700 B.
Let's hope we can triple our solar output a few times (while reducing our oil consumption a few times) Now what would our free market look like? Power production without paying someone else for fuel.Greatly improved trade imbalance. HEY ! ....? Maybe we could pay off some debt.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
August 31, 2011
Mr Chan. Nice try but it won't fly.

"China is manufacturing base and the US, Australia and Eu are technology based,"

This scenario is fantasy. What came first. Manufacturing or technology? It is hard to argue that one actually came before the other since there is such a synergy between the two but I would argue that the manufacturing takes the lead. When Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin he did not just get a revelation or vision nor did he gain the knowledge by attending Yale. He was asked by a friends mother to find a way to remove seeds from cotton balls.He built a crude wooden drum and used wire bought to make a bird cage to use as the pins that removed the seeds. He first manufactured using what ever was available. Others quickly recognized that the 'gin' was a profitable thing to manufacture and the race was on. We became a manufacturing power house. Manufacturing begets technology and technology can beget more manufacturing. And please don't try the lame argument so many use that the 'internet, IT revolution' means China can do the labor and American's can do the thinking.That is nonsense and always will be.Already I'm seeing increasingly that American's who call themselves technologists and engineers are struggling to make the abstract knowledge they have translate into actual working products. I deal with engineers all the time who eat calculus for breakfast but are one legged cripples when it comes to putting that knowledge into real advancements. In short 'they have never built anything Most of them have never even built with an erector set. They draw up plans that look pretty but quite often the part cannot be built as drawn. Since they never drilled a hole or welded a plate they have only virtual knowledge of how things go together. As America loses its manufacturing base it will continue to lose any edge it ever had. And just what do we do with the millions of people who don't or can't aspire to be a knowledge person? Let them eat dirt?
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
August 31, 2011
@freeMarketer
Wow! Talk about softball challenges.Mr Ballek already made a good dent in your arguments armor.
Try these.
Railroads.
Aircraft.
Telegraph
Telephone
Medicine
Hoover dam and all the hydro on the Columbia that helped smelt aluminum to build bombers in WW11 and win the war so you can now have aluminum siding and light weight cars saving more energy and on and on and on infinitum.When taking a position,and engaging in a debate,it is always best to stick with facts only. Ideology as a substitute for facts simply relegates you to essentially debating about how many angles dance on the head of a pin. The present Tea Party adherents and their masters (Republican operatives and THEIR masters,the filthy rich)constantly take a stand on ideology and some fool will always get suckered in but only until they recognize that water in fact does not flow uphill in spite of others insisting in a loud voice and wearing silly clothing,that it does. Truth always wins out eventually. There are many thousands of things wrong with our present system but expecting solutions to problems created by the same people who created them is like expecting to find gold in a silver mine. Free markets have never existed even in primitive times since the cave man with the bigger club made the rules on who ate the Mastodon's meaty leg and who got the bony tail. "Free market" in a context preached by today's true believers is just a smoke screen created by those who wish to steal what ever they can without being seen for the thieves they really are. Lately though winds of discontent on the side of truth are blowing and the real thieves are beginning to show more clearly.
ANONYMOUS
August 31, 2011
In short: by 2060 about 50% of all electricity will come from solar energy (and do check the sources, includes Bloomberg)


31.08.2011
________________________________________
Prognose
IEA: Solarenergie deckt bis 2060 die Hälfte des Strombedarfs
Sources:
http://www.photon.de
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-29/solar-may-produce-most-of-world-s-power-by-2060-iea-says.html
Ken Chan
Ken Chan
August 31, 2011
It is now commonly called the New China, since at least 10 years ago and China has less social benefits than Australia or the Scandinavian countries. The roots are slowly changing as big wheels take time to turn. Last year they had the first western style democratic election in one southern province with 3 candidates campaigning to be Mayor, and the results were truly democratic. China is manufacturing base and the US, Australia and Eu are technology based, thats a great marriage for job creation in both countries, jobs, jobs, and more jobs, which I believe would help revive the economy where its tilting.
I am promoting western CleanTechnology here in China. Label it: "Sold in China".. instead..
Brian Ballek
Brian Ballek
August 31, 2011
Free-Marketer,

I'm no expert on history but I believe there are several good examples of subsidized mass-consumer products...or at least products that would never have seen the light of day without mass subsidization:
- the federal highway system (built with your tax dollars, parts of it maintained now by private enterprise)
- the federal aviation system (the administration, rules and processes, but also scads of subsidies for Boeing and other aircraft manufacturers)
- (do I really have to say it?)the INTERNET: a product of the federal DARPA program
- If that's not enough, consider the products that were invented for the (100% subsidized) US Space programs and then commercialized...ever heard of Teflon?

I'm glad you support solar but the idea that all products must be able to survive without support from the word "go" is uninformed conservative dogma. You want renewables to fly without subsidies? Then END all subsidies of every kind for conventional energy. Then electricity prices go through the roof (nuclear and supposedly inexhaustible nat gas supplies notwithstanding) and renewables become competitive within 12 months. Since we both know that's not politically viable, we'll have to accept that subsidies for renewables are necessary.

As for companies like MAGE, what do I care if a few Chinese made some money manufacturing the panels as long as my countrymen have good jobs installing them and more countrymen (like you) lower your electric bills so you've got more money in your pocket to spend in the USA? If MAGE made the modules 100% locally (with higher labor costs) and nobody could afford them (gotta keep those subsidies as low as possible, right?) then MAGE goes out of business and EVERYONE loses. "White label" (your brand here) solar modules are a good thing, provided they have sufficient quality. If not, the white label supplier gets quickly and brutally replaced. THAT at least, is true free market policy.
James Desmond
James Desmond
August 30, 2011
Friends, it is my great hope that Solar PV will be the one subsidized mass-consumer product that takes off and changes the world for the better. In that regard, here's my 10KW system in Gillis Springs GA ($3.5/watt installed price, $1.4/watt after tax credits; negative-$100/month power bill): https://picasaweb.google.com/115162333107690986192/A54KWHDay

Yet, when was the last time you've seen a subsidized mass-consumer product succeed? Did Apple need subsidies for its I-products? Did PCs?

Look, solar manufacturers inflate prices to cop the subsidies doled out to them by local, state, federal and sometimes 'utility' governments. Subsidies inhibit price competition and thus higher efficiencies.

Example: MAGE Solar, the company that sold me my system, arrived in Georgia in 2009 and has YET to manufacture a solar panel from the ground up. Instead, it imports foreign panels and slaps its name on them, then ships them to high-subsidy states (Georgia's a low-subsidy state).

Only this past June did it start 'making' its own panels, but when pressed will admit that it's just hiring some local bubbas to put the final wrench turn on pre-assembled parts from afar. No doubt it's doing that solely to satisfy content-standards for ... you guessed it, federal subsidies.

MAGE and other Solar Corporate Welfare Queens thus have no incentive to innovate -- why get off that gravy train?

Bottom Line: American subsidies; Asian jobs.

Yes, 'everything is subsidized.' Well, no. For that matter, two wrongs don't make a right.

I want to be wrong on this. I want Solar PV to succeed. But I'm not. Otherwise the Fed could just print $10 trillion and hand it over to the solar industry to create 0% unemployment and 'green' all our electricity. It'd be that simple. It's not.

Doubters, please cite me known historic examples of subsidized mass-consumer products, OK?

More on this here: https://sites.google.com/site/freemarketsolarpower/
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
August 30, 2011
http://evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1994

I suggest you all read this article
I read it twice and it finally sunk in
What we call money is just worthless paper until we all agree that it has value as a medium of exchange. Even Gold and Silver are useless except for their metallurgical properties if we don't assign a value relative to what we call a dollar.

The government (we the people)set the value of that piece of paper.Just refuse to accept a truck load of hundred dollar bills in exchange for a loaf of bread to see who sets the value. The government generates the medium of exchange (the paper in other words ) and therefore acts as essentially the heart of the economic body. In other words it's the pump that feeds the rest of the economy that we then generate by virtue of having paper to exchange for our labors. Instead of a cow for a load of wheat or a shovel in exchange for a hammer we use paper. It then stands to reason that if we have an entity (corporations,banks etc) that just sit on the money without allowing it to circulate, (done every day at all levels) then the money supply contracts and we have a depression since no one is raising cows in exchange for the paper and instead trade for a load of wood. We are there now as the top %1 controls and manipulates over %50 of the wealth and could care less if their money generates any additional wealth.They have other motives such as ultimate power and control of the masses.The power trip is a bigger high than LSD so money takes a back seat. Best thing the government could do would be to take back the paper they generated in the first place (taxes,zero interest treasury bills etc)and re inject it into the economy. The devil's in the details of whose ox get gored in doing this and who gets rewarded when the money is re injected. The FED is a gate keeper who has an eternal job.Not elected or answerable to anything the masses want. The only difference between the FED and a King is the crown.
Drew Cannon
Drew Cannon
August 30, 2011
@free-marketeer
- I think you might want to rethink your handle, considering the fact that since the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank , what part of our market is a FREE Market, ONCE you go to a FIAT monetary policy, in addition to fractional-reserve banking, and controlling of the interest rates, reserve ratios. From 2007 to 2009, you have an increase of some 142% of the M1 Supply of US$, where again do you see a "Free Market" economy in decades in this country?
Brian Ballek
Brian Ballek
August 30, 2011
Hi Larry,

ya gotta pick one side or the other: either you want to see a rise of capitalism (or something close enough to it) to replace communism or you want to see China remain a communist regime. You would prefer capitalism, right? If so, you must accept China will *compete* with the US wherever it has an advantage. And it does: among other things China has lower labor costs...for now: in case you missed it, all that money we spend there has spread quite a bit of wealth - so much that wages have increased and China is now facing competition from other Asian countries who are now the low-labour-cost leaders.

But things are not as bad as you think. First of all some things just can't be easily copied, e.g. module production lines and some thin-film modules (think First Solar). If they could, we wouldn't have a trade surplus in solar products to discuss. Secondly, the Chinese and their low cost solar modules are partly what allow us Americans to continue buying PV systems (and clothes, iPhones, laptops, etc. etc...) even after the financial crisis (which was caused by US not them) decimated our economy. This in turn allows us to clean up our power grid so we can stop losing so much money on pollution-induced productivity losses. Finally, with rising wages in China comes an appetite for Western goods. The Germans are making scads of money there with Audi and Volkswagen. We missed that train by intentionally making *crap* cars for decades. But we *don't* have to miss out in the solar business. We just have to play to OUR strengths: quality and innovation.

I say: "Bring it on". We made them rich, now let's give them a reason to spend their money on US products so WE can get rich again.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
August 30, 2011
Wow! Mention free market and we get two folks who feel this blog site is their own private marketing arm. Please go away.

As Vladimir Ilyich Lenin said after establishing communist rule in Russia "we will sell the capitalists the rope to hang themselves"
This gross misrepresentation of 'a solar surplus to China' just proves the old maxim that liars can figure and figures can lie.
Selling capital equipment to a Chinese Communist (yes they are still communists in case you forgot) Country that by the way we were told on a daily basis was evil for supplying arms to the North Vietnamese freedom fighters killing our young men,is now fulfilling Lenin's dream. The Chinese will easily copy the equipment (I just opened two boxes containing inverters that are exact copies of SMA 6000's from China.They even copied the 'knock on' display light feature)and sell us back the copy.Of course that will only go on until our own consumers no longer have a job with enough disposable income left each month to buy the junk. I think America is quickly becoming a collection of suicidal self loathing fools. Please wake up soon.
Chris Thompson
Chris Thompson
August 30, 2011
This is such wonderful news, as my company, RETNEK, LLC just acquired a distributorship contract to market and sell micro-inverters to manufacturers of Solar modules. I own & operate a renewable energy company marketing & installing residential-sized Wind Turbines, Solar PV systems, Solar water-heating systems, D/C-powered air-to-air heat-pumps, and many more products. You can look at our website at www.retnekllc.com or our Facebook business page listed under Renewable Energy Technologies Northeast Kansas.
ANONYMOUS
August 30, 2011
@free-marketeer

read the numbers...15-40c added value per kWh speaks for itself.

and FYI: the free market does NOT exist. Not for bananas or cars and also not for solar.

what the incentives did do for the USA, is create an entierly new business creating entirely new jobs in what may be the single largest growth sector in the world.
I bet that if you carefully do all the numbers, the benefits outweigh the costs, as they did in Germany.
Keith Campbell
Keith Campbell
August 29, 2011
@Free-Marketeer
Just for your information ... virtually all of this surplus exists because of Solar equipment manufacturers supporting ASIAN solar panel manufacturers who are ramping up to meet ASIAN demand. GT Advanced Technologies alone earned nearly $1B in revenues from Korean and Chinese panel manufacturers who operate almost entirely in Asia. This had very little to do with US government subsidies.

American Superconductor had over 300 million revenues selling components to Chinese Wind turbine manufacturers selling turbines in China to meet Chinese demand. This had very little to do with US government subsides.

Learn the facts before you embarrass yourself.
James Desmond
James Desmond
August 29, 2011
How much of that export number would exist if the Amerian taxpayer had not been funding the production of those products via tax credits, deductions, and outright grants? Anyone work the numbers to ensure that we're not simply handing (indirectly, via lower solar prices) our wealth over to foreigners? This would be a much more encouraging spot of news if we had "free market" data here, not subsidized end-results and the artificially inflated, "feel-good" numbers solar fanboys tout.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Stephen Lacey

Stephen Lacey

I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, where I contributed stories and hosted the Inside Renewable Energy Podcast. Keep...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 11
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 4
    China Solar Update: Trina Improves, Suntech Scores Extension, Beijing Awaits EU Tariff Decision

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • SRECTrade, Inc.
  • Festo
  • Enerquip
  • Karbone
  • Magnum Energy Inc.
  • Martifer Solar USA, Inc.
  • EcoFasten Solar
  • American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE)
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information