The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Wednesday, June 19, 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

Major Closures for First Solar, Sunpower

First Solar closing a German plant and idling 4 production lines in Malyasia. SunPower also shutting down part of its overseas operations.

Steve Leone, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
April 17, 2012  |  45 Comments

Print

Two American solar heavyweights built on overseas manufacturing are scaling back operations in an effort to keep up with a shifting landscape.

On Monday, San Jose, Calif.-based SunPower announced it was closing a 125-MW capacity manufacturing facility in the Philippines and pushing some of those operations to its 575-MW Fab 2 facility also in the Philippines. The company’s 600-MW plant in Malaysia remains its biggest operation.

Then on Tuesday, Arizona-based First Solar announced an even more drastic move to cut operating expenses. The world’s biggest thin-film manufacturer will close its facility in Germany and idle four of its 24 lines at its mammoth facility in Malaysia. The company will cut 2,000 jobs, or 30 percent of its workforce. The cuts and shutdowns are expected to reduce costs by $30 to 60 million this year and between $100 and 120 million annually after that.

First Solar said that through the layoffs, the company’s average manufacturing cost is expected to improve to $0.70-$0.72 per watt in 2012, below prior expectations of $0.74 per watt. In 2013 the company estimates average module manufacturing costs will range from $0.60 to $0.64 per watt.

“These restructuring actions are difficult to make and take, given all the important stakeholders involved" said Mark Widmar, First Solar's CFO, in a conference call. "The solar market has changed and so must we,” he continued.

Widmar explained that the restructuring actions are to "align our business to a demand profile that is highly reliable and predictable, which largely is our captive pipeline.”  He indicated that the market for First Solar in Europe is largely drying up. The German factory that the company is closing had primarily supplied modules to third-parties, he said. “Clearly, you should take away from the European reductions that we’re doing from an op-ex [operating expense] standpoint, largely is all third-party module business.  We’re not doing much of any systems business in Europe.”

Rumors that First Solar was looking for a buyer were shot down immediately. “I would not say that these actions are at all any indication of window dressing to position the company for sale. It is not that at all. It is integrated into a long-range plan that we feel highly confident in,” said Widmar.

First Solar continues to eye new markets in unsubsidized emerging regions of the world. “Over the next couple of years, we also intend to make progress in sustainable markets,” he said. More details will be announced during the company’s first quarter earnings call, which is scheduled for early May.

The moves by SunPower and First Solar, two of the world's biggest solar manufacturers, underscore the shift already underway in the solar industry and across much of the clean energy industries. Shifting policy, overcapacity and falling pricing coming from China continue to threaten future operations for many international players. In the past month alone, Q-Cells and Solar Trust of America have filed for bankruptcy. Also this week, reports indicated that Danish wind energy pioneer Vestas may become the target of a possible takeover from Chinese competitors.

According to Sam Wilkinson, a senior analyst at IMS Research, the moves point to the mounting pressure to reduce costs, even for a company like First Solar, long billed as a cost leader. First Solar's move also has much to do with changing policy and the overall difficulty stemming from the European market.

First Solar’s costs (per watt) had been around 50 percent lower than a typical Chinese tier-1 c-Si manufacturer in 2009. Following rapid declines in polysilicon pricing, that difference is now less than $0.10/w and is predicted to close further throughout 2012.
 
Demand continues to be extremely volatile in the European PV market. This makes managing local production and supply very challenging and often expensive for manufacturers, particularly as employment law in the West can limit flexibility. We’ve seen a number of recent examples of major Western suppliers shutting down local production (of wafers, cells and modules) in favour of sourcing products from Asian manufacturers as it is lower cost and offers greater flexibility.
 
Changes in market dynamics in Europe have been driven by severe alterations to government incentives, all made to try and control the growth of the market and limit spending in tight economic times. All of these changes have also been made in such a way as to particularly limit the growth of large ground-mount projects. This is of course further bad news to First Solar, as this is predominantly its target market.

Jennifer Runyon, managing editor of RenewableEnergyWorld.com, contributed to this story.


45 Comments

Register To Comment
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 28, 2012
Yes I'm inside. Don't go on a few MW of stories, look at 18,000MW of industry.

It is not possible to make and sell modules or cels at those prices normally or sustainably. Only possible:
1. Subsidized, but not even Trina, Yingli, etc published accounts get within 90c/watt before G&A, S&M, interest. No profits, not even Gross!
2. Liquidation sale.
3. Seller had stock on which already cashed in the penalties from a cancelled take or pay off-take agreement. Ie is receiving that 60c plus say 50c on the penalty.

None of 1,2,3 are sustainable.

It's very simple when you unpack Si module supply chain. Poly energy input cost alone is $25/kg = about 20-25c/watt without a dime of depreciation labor interest profit or overhead. Now add wafering, contacting, 2.5 square meter glass, 4 meters Alu frame, cabling, junction and another wack of overhead and capex and profits and even $1-20 is unsustainable.

There are a host of Si module cost breakdowns : do the research.
Rahul Gayam
Rahul Gayam
April 28, 2012
@Mac are you an industry insider? I know of actual quotes from one of the worlds largest solar company which sold panels just two months ago for 0.6$/watt for a megawatt order. The price im talking about is not for wafers I have a quote from a chinese solar cell manufacturer for solar cells at 0.35$/watt. All you need to do is spend for tickets for a round trip flight to a Photovoltaic trade show in china and request quotes order samples check for problems with an sun simulator as well EL tester convince yourself they are good enough panels. Btw I hate fox news :) we are on the same boat bro please be more optimistic.
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 28, 2012
Gaya, your post "the production cost of solar cells 16% efficient was 0.3$/watt the end of last year since then cell and wafer manufacturing companies have renegotiated raw material costs( electronic grade silicon ) to 1/3rd of their price the beginning of last year so dont tell me 1$/watt is unsustainable its already too high 0.5$/watt or less is the new benchmark."

is a new low in stupid. Don't attack others when you have no idea what you're talking about. You are referring to poly prices and confusing this with modules. To get from poly to a module you need to cut to wafer, contact into cells, assemble with alum frame and several square feet of glass. Did you get your research from Fox?
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 27, 2012
Hi:

Not bad, you are within a reasonable + - of being correct...
The net is definitely gone at this point. The rocks have been oiled (Ha, Ha), and a dense fog has set in. But, the only way to go is up, at least as far as we can see. There are just no other options. I am reminded of an old Star Trek. Its been a very long time but I think the title was, 'City on the edge of Forever.' Joan Collins was quite young in it. Basically Dr McCoy was on a wild, out of his head, drug overdose ride and jumped through a Time Portal and changed Earth's history so much that the Federation and all high tech progress never happened. SO, Kirk and Spock have to jump in also, to try and correct whatever Dr McCoy changed. Kirk ends up having to let beautiful and young Joan C. die, when he could save her, in order to put things back the way they were. Problem is, he fell in Love with her before the day she needs to die...
I guess the moral of the story is, sometimes corrective action has to be extremely painful, when things have been allowed to get out of control, for whatever reason...

.....Bill
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 27, 2012
So, if we, as a society, continue to be distracted from the really important issues, we're heading for a train wreck!

My hope at this point is that before that train wreck happens that we stop acting like a bunch of cancer cells run amok and address reality as it is, not as we might wish it to be!

Will it happen because the big monied interests finally realize that they're driving us off of a cliff? Possible, but based upon history, not very likely.

More likely is that things get bad enough for people to not be able to avoid the pain and as they say in AA, "nobody changes unless they experience enough pain to make them want to change"!

Hopefully, I'm wrong. I don't think so, but maybe people will wake up and smell the coffee burning. Maybe then, we'll stop hearing these nut case climate deniers and we will adapt to this new reality. So, while I might be playing my fiddle as Rome burns, I'm going to make like that little mouse and continue flipping the man off! Maybe if I and enough others do that, maybe...just maybe, enough others will join us so that we can make a difference!

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 27, 2012
William: You may indeed be right, that it's already too late to wrestle control of our democracy from the big monied interests. If it is, let me be like that little mouse in the old black light poster, "Last Act of Defiance" where the eagle is swooping in on him and the mouse has nowhere to go but up ;-) yet he's flipping the eagle off as he waits for the inevitable!

The sad part is that even if you are right, the course that the monied interests seem to be looking to take us on is totally unsustainable. Eventually, the house of cards is going to cave in and when it does, it has the potential for being really, really nasty!

We're talking Dark Ages type of nasty. Mass starvation, Wars and possibly the end of civilization as we know it.

Now I'm the one that everyone things is nuts, huh? But just look at our food system. The tomato that you're slicing to put on your blt was more than likely grown in what used to be a desert. The yield on the plot of ground that it was grown on has increased by over 600% since the area was first irrigated. This was accomplished through the use of fossil fuel based fertilizers. By the time that tomato, which has approximately 110 calories of energy makes it to your house over 1000 calories of energy were expended to grow and deliver it. And tomatoes aren't the worst culprit in this regard. Beef is even worse!

So, while a good percentage of Americans are watching The Springer Show, we're running out of the fossil fuels upon which our food house of cards is built. In addition, the exact kinds of weather events that were foretold by the climatologists when the green house theory was first proposed have started to happen.

While we can't point at any one specific weather event and say conclusively that it was caused by global warming, even the staunchest climate change deniers are being forced to shuck and jive when they folks look at them cross eyed after this past winter!

to be continued...
Rahul Gayam
Rahul Gayam
April 27, 2012
the production cost of solar cells 16% efficient was 0.3$/watt the end of last year since then cell and wafer manufacturing companies have renegotiated raw material costs( electronic grade silicon ) to 1/3rd of their price the beginning of last year so dont tell me 1$/watt is unsustainable its already too high 0.5$/watt or less is the new benchmark.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 24, 2012
Hi Bob:

A short response. I agree on the premise, that pulling back from the system favors the continued status quo. Where I disagree is that engaging the system (At this way late point) accomplishes anything different. The whole purpose of their 50 year "play" was to make the system non functional as originally intended, I.E. not a Democracy but Dystopian. The ultimate goal of capitalism is slavery. You may say that statement is insane or crazy, fine. Question, what is the cheapest form of labor? What form of labor gives the lowest cost of production? I could go on but I don't think I have too... For them, their perceived world is almost at hand. They only have to keep the illusion going a little while longer until the illusion is no longer needed. The BIG FOOLIE though is that the arrogance intrinsic for those with that need, is that they can "pull it off" this time because we have the "TOOLS" necessary that were not available in the past. Of course, each set of puppeteers at a given point in time, always think they have what is needed. If it was not so bizarre and lewd, it would be funny. I am reminded of the dog who says, "if I can just spin faster, exhibit more control to my spin and stretch just a bit further, I CAN GET THAT TAIL". Well, you keep thinking that my good dog....

.....Bill
PS: Well, maybe not short but shorter...
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 24, 2012
Bill: In the short run, I'm not very optimistic. The monied interests have succeeded in securing a lock on our political system and have done so by hood winking a large percentage of our population into voting against their own economic self interests.

They have also managed to disillusion a large percentage of the population to the point of not participating in the political realm. While I can understand this feeling and have felt it myself, to simply walk away from the fight gives the victory to the monied interests.

Renewable energy is a case in point. While it's not really that difficult a concept to grasp; Oil and coal were great, but they're killing the planet. Most people don't really care except in regards to what it costs them to fill their gas tanks.

There is an old adage that says, 'Nobody changes unless there is enough pain to make them want to change' and it's true! As long as people can still afford the deluxe cable package with all the Fox Channels, not much is going to change.

That is until the pain starts hitting home! That's when people will turn their televisions off and hit the streets!

Could we have saved ourselves some, if not most of this pain? Yeah, we could. But I don't expect us to. It's a shame, but there's always hope and as long as there is hope, I, for one, intend to keep preaching the word and working towards mobilizing the masses!

In the mean time, there are folks like you who get it and while your neighbors might think that you're a bit of a nut job for putting all that work into the scam that is solar, I think that we both know who's going to be proven right in the long haul!

Bob 'The Clean Energy Guy' Mitchell
Kim Hanna
Kim Hanna
April 24, 2012
good stuff Bill. In USA we could at least build the
real government we desire through making Constitutional Amendments
There is a process to this but it can be done.We can form an improved version of the old .....to our own desires.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 24, 2012
Hi Bob: Well, you are an optimist I think. People who are in business want optimistic world views because the counter, does not make them money, I.E. no one feels like playing. Anyway, just taking your 'ideas' at a whole, the logic requires you to have in play, system and human characteristics that you within the body of your own 'text' acknowledge as being 'void' or not available. In short, you say a concrete foundation is needed but yet no concrete is to be had. If I want to be really blunt and down right truthful, we are basically screwed for a Utopian type of world and or are not going to make it into the transition from 'primitive' (where we are now) to the next universal species layer. The evidence is everywhere for this reality. You hit a few of the truthful building blocks for this logical conclusion. Greedy little pigs, which really means we are more competitive than cooperative coupled with huge differences in physical and intellectual capabilities from the starting gate. Can not control our own population in a proactive manner. Fixed planetary resources. The ability due to our animal nature to kill ourselves not only for survival but for vindictiveness. Again to be blunt, if after a whole bunch of thousands of years we still are basically doing the same social things to one another, if there was a 'solution', don't you think we would have figured it out by now? Technology is not required to solve this aspect of ourselves. My own view would assess that a solution is only able to be had through genetic mutation. In short, the very foundation of humans needs to be changed, which we are not capable of doing correctly or otherwise, for many reasons.
SO, there you have it, my optimism for the day. I feel so much better now.. where did I put my anti-depressants.
In conclusion, as long as we feel 'the need' to build a world on currency, we will continue to war and kill, flipping between Dystopian rule and the big 'R', until we can do no longer.

.....Bill
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 24, 2012
But, that ship has done sailed. So, to bring the conversation back to solar, I feel that it's well within the role of government to provide incentives to promote solar and other renewable energy.

This is because we are headed towards a cliff and if we don't make some major freaking adjustments, we're going to fly off of that cliff and everybody is going to end up paying a lot more for our inaction than we are paying in subsidies for renewable energy.

To those of you who say that the only reason that solar works in many (most??) places is because of the subsidies. I agree one hundred percent! Very few if any times that you model a solar or any other renewable energy project does it ever pencil out without the subsidies.

That said, the fossil fuel industry, that is a mature and very profitable industry, gets $7.00 in subsidies for every $1.00 that renewable energy gets. If you took those $7.00 out of the equation, many more RE projects would pencil out without subsidies.

When you factor in the external costs such as environmental and health costs that are the result of utilizing fossil fuels and that renewable energy doesn't have (at least not nearly as much as) then the cost of fossil fuels would rise to the point where there wouldn't be any question that all costs figured in, that renewable energy would pencil out every single time!

So, to tie the two threads together. Our energy problems can be solved within a capitalistic society, BUT it's going to take getting the masses to pay more attention to energy than they do America's Got Talent! Only through the involvement of the people can we trump big money interests.

Do I think that this is going to happen? Again, I don't know. I hope so because if it doesn't, the "free markets" will eventually fix our problems, but we're not going to like it when we get the bill!

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 24, 2012
Hmmm, defend capitalism....okay, here goes! Capitalism isn't perfect by any means. If you examine it throughout history, it has a problem with wealth getting concentrated at the top to the point where the masses finally get fed up enough to bring the whole thing down in a revolution.

Honestly, I think that we're getting close to that point again and if it weren't for Fox News and other weapons of mass distraction, we might have gotten to that point already.

Anyway, all of that said, I think that it's the best system that we have available to us in that it is the only economic system that takes human nature into account. Human nature being that we tend to be greedy little pigs and while there are exceptions to this rule, for the most part, people won't do something unless they have an economic motivation to do so.

Now, the role of government in a capitalistic society is very much open to debate. Personally, I think that government does have a role to play in "promoting for the general welfare".

Does that mean that they should have stepped in to bail the banks out in 2008? Honestly, I don't know. If I trusted my elected representatives better, I'd probably feel better about how it went down, but I really think that most politicians in our country (and probably in the world) have been bought and paid for. So, my gut level was no.

That said, others might argue that by avoiding a total economic collapse they were promoting for the common welfare.

If it had been up to me, I would have given each US citizen the $440,000.00 that was our share of the bailout subject to them paying off any mortgages or other debt that they had instead of giving it to the banks.

If you think about it, it would have saved the banks because all of the bad mortgages would have been paid off and nobody would have been foreclosed upon. Also, enough people would have gone out and bought cars so that the auto industry would also have been saved....
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 24, 2012
Hi:

Thanks Sun2E, but I think I can manage....

.....Bill
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 23, 2012
Bill,

I beg to differ with you but in 2008 capitalism didn't fail until socialist got involved. Had we let the weak fail then only businesses with a good model would have survived and the economy today would be triving. Socializm is America's biggest problem today.

Capitalize is natures way, think of capitalism as Darwinism for business and then you understand why it works.

If you need help with your system or enegineering send me a email and I will be glad to help you.
Hein Oomen
Hein Oomen
April 23, 2012
Very interesting dialogue. I'm a newcomer to the solar industry so forgive my ignorance, but I am really puzzled by the fact that SunPower would close down production capacity in the Philippines because of declining demand in Europe and the US, while the Philippines themselves struggle to meet their energy demand and 95 million Filipinos are already used to paying 0.24 USD/kWh. Isn't that a huge market potential? Why not develop new markets instead of downsizing production to follow existing markets?

I recently moved to the Philippines and I am eager to explore this further.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 20, 2012
Hi:

Thank you for the comments:

"William, while I tend to agree with you more so than not, I disagree with you on your negative opinion of the profit motive. Free markets aren't perfect by any means and really don't exist in the real world very often, but capitalism is still the best system that we have in that it takes into account human nature."

Just a reminder, capitalism failed, totally in '08!! A socialist bailout was needed to power the Defib. unit to start the heart beating again. Capitalism is not the best we can do. Its very core goes against equality and freedom. Richard Wolff, "Capitalism Hits The Fan" hits the nail right smack on the head. The "castle walls" are up way beyond the half way point and people as usual, will not see it until they wake up one fine morning and say, "gee, something does not seem quite right. They just hauled away another of my neighbors...."

Change of topic. My pre 30% tax credit total cost will be somewhere between 25 and 27K for 9.1 KW sys. That should put be somewhere in the 2.90 to 3.00 range. But again, I have designed and installed the whole system myself, so there is a HUGE labor savings there, especially with the tracking involved and full backup...

.....Bill
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 20, 2012
William_Fitch, those are very good numbers. You might be a bit optimistic in the final cost / kwh but I believe you are on the right track - or at least you are as accurate as any of the people that claim coal costs 8c/kwh...!

As to the comments that the capitalist market will sort this all out and even things, Riiiight! Most Americans (and Europeans) would not recognize capitalism if it knocked down the front door - I can think of very few if any industries that are ruled by the market. Applied to my earlier comment: as long as the politicians, economists and lobbyists conspire to use my tax money to support installers that are charging about $6/watt installed, the prices will never drop. The Italians and the Germans can do it for under Eur3/watt installed, why the heck can't Americans? Because in Germany consumers get a FIT which naturally means that the market will force down capital cost as that is the only way to make a FIT work. In California the installer is paid a % capital subsidy and the consumer gets a % tax credit : so of course capex cost stays high.

If you're going to wait for the market to sort things out, then the rest of the world will have in Solar Manufacturing what they already have in clothing, toys, footwear, consumer electronics, housewares and soon will have in automotives, aircraft, etc.

Quite simple:
* People do not re-open plants that they shut-down - extremely rare.
* Name me any economy in the world that has ever imported itself to greatness
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 19, 2012
One Green Day: If you're interested in developing a solar farm on your property, I'd be happy to work with you. Please feel free to visit my profile and to drop me a line!

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
314-503-6657
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 19, 2012
Again, Wow! Step away from the computer and come back to some great comments....not necessarily accurate ones, but the conversation is great, none the less!

My first point and to answer a question that was asked, yes, solar manufacturers are indeed developing projects on their own. I believe that it's called, "Vertical Integration" and I believe that you will see more companies moving to it as the margins for solar panels remains so tight.

That said, as someone with a background in economics, I don't feel sorry for manufacturers. Nobody forced them to get into that business and nobody is forcing them to stay there. If installer's profit margins are too high, then the markets will react and more people will get into that field (including manufacturers) and competition will force those margins back down (that's a heads up to anybody who is feeling cocky!)

Regarding the point that solar doesn't address transportation fuel needs. That is true at the moment, but unlikely to remain so, as has been pointed out, electric vehicles come into play in a major way.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of electric vehicles except in certain applications, but not as a replacement for gasoline powered vehicles. My belief is that hydrogen will win out in the long run in that regard. I also like bio-diesel.

William, while I tend to agree with you more so than not, I disagree with you on your negative opinion of the profit motive. Free markets aren't perfect by any means and really don't exist in the real world very often, but capitalism is still the best system that we have in that it takes into account human nature.

Now, one of the down sides is that issues that need long term planning tend to get sacrificed to short term profits, but that's where leadership and creativity come into play. Our challenge as leaders in this industry is to be creative in getting people to understand the importance of planning for the future!

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
alfred odum
alfred odum
April 19, 2012
There is a company that just might change the way everyone looks
at Solar as a GREAT source of energy. Check it out for yourself--
NATCORE TECHNOLOGY--Just developed "BLACK SILICON", and is now
working on a tandem cell that will DRAMATICALLY improve energy
from Solar Wafers...
Kim Hanna
Kim Hanna
April 19, 2012
Thanks William. For a small 100 acre solar farm , I have a Home Depot about a mile away and a Central Trade School and a small Downtown with Town Hall, Police, Etc. I assume I'd be supplying these entities
with electricity if that's distributed solar.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 19, 2012
Hi:

Sun2E either misses my point or does not want to discuss. So, returning to PV specifically, of course distributed solar PV is better then centralized. It cuts grid load which is a huge plus, just for starters. I will have my 9.1 KW tracking arrays on line by Aug (that's the end of my 1 year time frame). I currently pay .10 per KWH. Even with my included backup for off grid, my 25 year LCOE is below what I AM PAYING NOW per KWH!! My total installed cost per KWH after only a 30% fed tax credit will be about 2.95 a watt. That does not even count the major reason I am doing the whole thing, which is not money but to de-leverage myself from anyone down the road who for WHATEVER reason might want to leverage my need for power access. Once my system is up, I will be able, if desired, to be off-grid for any period of time. Additionally I will be producing enough extra power to charge EV's, up to two vehicles and be about net zero, eliminating my dependence on oil as well.. SO to me, even if you were ONLY looking at the dollars its makes plenty of since, because I doubt elect will still be .10 per KWH 25 years out, or gas at $4 a gallon....

.....Bill
Kim Hanna
Kim Hanna
April 19, 2012
So ssmall local solar farm for distributed power are a good way to go Mac??
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 19, 2012
While I agree that it is dumb policy to prop up unsustainable PV projects with taxpayer funded premium FIT, it is wrong to assume that PV can only work in places that burn oil for electricity.

In CA for example daytime peak power is VERY expensive and delivered from either peaking power not base load stations, or imported to state. Last summer Texas at times were forced to buy spot energy at 6 times normal.

Those prices match well with PV time of day and LCOE today, never mind guaranteed prices for 20+ years

Besides, I don't get how the nation of tea party politics do not embrace an energy source that makes the owner at least partially energy independent. The utilities will charge consumers as much as they can regardless of the type or cost of their future energy sources. Distributed is why PV makes sense, not that 200MW utility owned taxpayer subsidized farm. Farm owners take their 20% IRR and don't give a hoot.
stephen christy
stephen christy
April 18, 2012
The sun will have the last laugh but I digress. Does anyone know what happened to Nanosolar? The German market/ feed in tariff gave these companies false hope it seems. The dominant solar market was built on a house of cards, being Europe with a crappy solar resource propped up by FITs.

China will implode on itself in due time with their non regulations, contamination and accounting practices.

That's been my personal opinion for years.

P.S. Gotta hit Walmart for a few things, see you guys later.
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 18, 2012
Let look at what started this discussion, it was the lay off of 2000 people at First Solar.

If climate change is the problem then lossing production at First Solar is a step backwards. Why is First Solar cutting its workforce? Because First Solar has to make a profit to stay in business. When Germany no longer had the taxes to support solar the FIT scheme of subsidy failed. Thus another building block to support climate change is gone.

If First Solar could make a profit in Germany they would still be there creating jobs, making solar panel to convert the sun energy a natural resource.

We need to see that without profit we will never suceed in our goal. Solar proponents need business and their profits to reach our goal.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 18, 2012
Hi: Excuse me!!!... so if man has the natural resources to save himself but can not make money in the process, his only alternative is to die??? Did I miss something here???
I see a distinct difference between resources (physical world, mental - knowledge) and capital (I.E. money). Perhaps your def is different...

.....Bill
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 18, 2012
If climate change is our goal because life as we know it hangs in the balance, one has then to calculate if mankind has the resouces/capital to impliment the desired outcome. I submit that we do not have the capital today to effect the desired change. The way only to increase our capital is through business and profit/capital they create.

Government does not create capital, capital is only created by business. We as a industry or believer need business to effect our goals.
Kim Hanna
Kim Hanna
April 18, 2012
I'm curious about these solar panel manufacturers and the drop in price. Do any of the panel makers develop solar fields themselves for power production. I have a l00 acres in central Massachusetts I'd like to develop into a solar farm. Thanks for any help.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 18, 2012
Hi #14:

I could go for a year on this... in so many different directions... It all depends which pair of glasses OR blinders I choose to wear. One of my "thoughts for the day" on my website goes like this:

"Mankind will not go, "the way of the dinosaur", for lack of "the saving" technologies, but for the inability to make money on it, i.e., Capitalism does not bring the best goods and services to market but the ones that make the most money."

The minute you use the word business, you lock yourself into profit. It then becomes only the "money metric" of choice, ROI, LCOE, Total cost of return, etc. you want to use to define your goal and or success in your commoditable life cycle.

When you use a business paradigm to solve a problem that is non life threatening, the result of its success or failure becomes more of an observation of profit over anything else. However, if the problem is life threatening to one or many, the result of its success or failure becomes far more tangible than a bar of gold, silver or the closing price of the dollar, yen or euro. Since anthropologic climate change is a reality with a more than likely "species terminating" outcome, or at the very least a completely different reality for those who inhabit earth, one MIGHT think that we believe enough of ourselves not to limit our choices on solving a problem that can end the human existence experiment.

.....Bill
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 18, 2012
Bill,

What have we learned from First Solar and Sunpower? That solar PV business works only where the market does not need to be subsidized. These market are primarily where oil is used to generate power.

Solar as a industry can make the most profit and the greatest impact on climate change and social good today and far into the future by concentrating our efforts in countries or regions where oil is used for electric power generating. These areas are generally third world countries and states like Hawaii.

As a supporter of solar and a business consultant my goal is to see that our efforts in solar are directed where the greatest ROI can be made.

What do you think?
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 18, 2012
Hi:

#12: "...Oil in the continental U.S. is largely a transportation fuel.." Yes, at the moment that is true, until electric vehicles gain market penetration. Vinyl ruled the music area when CD's were just starting. Then, replacement occurred at an exponential pace. I am not suggesting that the "electric auto" will follow the same "time" curve, only that it will follow... Then we can continue to use oil's attributes for non burning Mfg until alternatives overtake that as well...

The only question is which will come first, "Hunger Games" or wellness for all.....

.....Bill
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 18, 2012
The point of my comments are to make the solar industry and fellow blogger think. To just repeat the current talking points of the solar marketers does nothing to promote real sustainable growth in our industry.

To continue to promote solar as a replacement for oil in the continental U.S. is folly. Oil in the continental U.S. is largely a transportation fuel not a electrical generation fuel. Coal, NG, nuclear and hydro are electrical energy fuels.

When we make examples of the guy in the big jacked up F350 we are making a emotional argument which does not advance our cause or business.
John Millard
John Millard
April 18, 2012
Let me leave you- "Free as the Wind" and "Sun2Energy" with this:

Take the ant... when he wants to get from one place to another, he will solicit the cooperation of other ants to get there. The other ants form rank and file columns of determination that astound. When an obstacle prevents passage to their destination, such as a body of water- they form a bridge of their carcasses for the others to cross and plod forward to the destination. The fallen, the drowned, the broken ants may perish or they may simply climb out from under the corpses of their comrades in order to complete the same journey.

I for one, am climbing out from under the carcasses of the others and trying to maintain a game face- plodding on as a foot soldier though once a capt.
John Millard
John Millard
April 18, 2012
I like "Free as the Wind"- his observation about grave dancers is astute.
I also like "Sun2Energy"- his observations about China are pragmatic.

The prize for the contributor "most acquainted with grief" goes to MacAfrican with his observations about the disproportionate amount of risk that the module manufacturer must take in order to positively alter the race's ecological footprint. My hat goes off to you sir. I feel your pain...especially knowing the cultural differences between the highly committed, and well educated, pains taken and underpaid people in the R&D field as well as the Manufacturing Individual Participant Profile. These people and the companies that they represented such as Evergreen, to name one, are "the salt of the earth".

On the other hand, the solar bozo, who must mark up the messianic narcissism that is built into his "gift to the earth" at the expense of a sustainable industry is choking the market place with libertarians who are grave dancing and pointing at the profitteers' high cost of energy. This bozo who rides around in his F350 with the off road suspension and the "SolarBozosAreUs" decal on the door are raking in stolen profit from the module manufacturing industry who are being crucified.
Stephen Bjorgan
Stephen Bjorgan
April 18, 2012
I'm with you, Bob. These guys have been eating at the pig trough with 15-20% margins for years. Time for a reality check.

Besides the typical margin decline on a maturing technology, the future doesn't bode well for the manufacture of 720,000 panels just for one job (Sunpower's 4800 acre, 250 MW California Valley Solar Ranch). There are just too many environmental and financing issues to solar farm development.

Let's hope that FSLR and SPWR use the moment to swtich to sustainable business models with less environmental impact such as those for DG and FIT's.
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 18, 2012
Honestly, I don't see that happening Sun. What I see happening is that China will undercut their competition out of the business by paying slightly better than slave wages and ignoring environmental concerns. Then, they will attempt to raise prices.

Then other countries, the US included, will get back in the business (probably by attempting to pay slightly better than slave wages in countries like Malaysia)and prices will be forced back (So, I guess that you may be right after all).

Eventually though, I think that the workers in these countries are going to have their fill and start standing up to the monied powers (just as has happened in the western world) and will start demanding better wages.

When it gets to the point where our wages drop enough and their wages rise enough, and the cost of shipping things here goes up, THEN we'll be able to have domestic manufacturing again!

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
BaBa Gates
BaBa Gates
April 18, 2012
My two cents. China is now the OPEC of solar manufacturing.

China saw the future in solar as the mandated replacement for oil and now has control of solar as a energy resource. Get ready to have the pricing of solar PV whipsaw like oil.
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
April 18, 2012
Wow, I'm late to this conversation and was surprised that I didn't see one or more of those folks that seem so eager to dance on the grave of solar and renewable energies in general.

Come on guys, you're slacking!

To address the point that they haven't made yet (;0), this sort of thing is pretty typical of emerging industries. The auto industry went through the exact same thing, as did most new manufacturing industries.

This isn't the end of solar, just market adjustments and the fact that these companies seem to be taking proactive steps in an effort to remain competitive, is admirable.

Bob "The Clean Energy Guy" Mitchell
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 18, 2012
Never meant PV is not sustainable, just that the recent module selling prices are not sustainable for the industry. If we lose 4000MW of manufacturing capacity prices will just skyrocket again, because demand is still growing at huge rate.

I know the capital and operating cost structure of xSi as well as thin film VERY well. Nobody can make normal returns sufficient to service debt and capital and re-investment and sell at below $1-20/watt. I welcome any arguments. Yes, new technologies will help, but refer below in regard the diminishing role of the module and remember also that the semiconductor is not the major portion of a module's cost either.

What really gets my goat is the downstream market. So:
* as module producer that invested $800,000,000 in a 300MW production facility I should be satisfied with say 6c/watt profit at the module level.
* two former home builders, a banker and a lawyer can put up $800k to set up six pickup trucks with 4 crew each and make 260c/watt installing the systems on US rooftops at $5-80/watt total installed price - with my taxes making all this possible.

it sucks...
Scott Hare
Scott Hare
April 18, 2012
I agree with MacAfrican that the sub $1/watt selling price is unsustainable in the near term until technology catches up. But the industry is faced with overcapacity which was driven primarily by over-generous government subsidies (which are also unsustainable).
As in most commoditised industries, overcapacity results in agressive price wars with the higher cost providers exiting the business as we are seeing here. While bad for producers, this has been great for installers and end users. Pew reported that installations are up 54% YOY from 2010.
Steve White
Steve White
April 18, 2012
I don't think this is a stupid and unsustainable game. Over the next few years, the adoption of new manufacturing technologies will reduce the cost of silicon modules even more (see twincreekstechnologies for an example) to the point where solar is genuinely competitive with or without government subsidies. Ten years from now solar will be everywhere, it hasn't really got going yet.
Johan Buys
Johan Buys
April 18, 2012
FSLR is the largest, most profitable producer in the world and they're closing their more expensive sites. What more proof does anybody need that (1) the $1/watt module selling price game is a stupid unsustainable game (2) the Chinese producers are dumping if they sell at $1/watt.

Even with manufacturing cost (go and look very carefully at that definition and then go look again) at 72c there is no sustainable business model at $1 selling price.
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 17, 2012
Hi: The world should be tapping every ounce of production out there, world wide. I wonder if O&G is hurting for revenue...
Our chance to avoid catastrophic climate change is slipping through our greedy fingers. I think population control, shortly, will not be an issue... Hello "Hunger Games"...

.....Bill

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create an Account!
  • Sign-In
Steve Leone

Steve Leone

Steve Leone has been a journalist for more than 15 years and has worked for news organizations in Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia and California.
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • Residential Demand Spurs US Solar Installations in 1Q13 Residential Demand Spurs US Solar Installations in 1Q13
  • Ocean Energy Development: Apply Common Sense to Common Problems Ocean Energy Development: Apply Common Sense to Common Problems
  • Severn Barrage “No Knight in Shining Armour for UK Renewables” Severn Barrage “No Knight in Shining Armour for UK Renewables”
  • Project Permit: Cutting Red Tape for Green Energy Project Permit: Cutting Red Tape for Green Energy
  • Solar CHP Innovations Offer Efficiency Kick, Future Energy Storage Options Solar CHP Innovations Offer Efficiency Kick, Future Energy Storage Options

Most Commented

  • 4
    California Energy Storage Plan May Require $3 Billion Investment
  • 4
    Women in Power – It’s a Natural Fit
  • 4
    Renewable Energy in Myanmar: Not Just Clean, It’s Necessary
  • 3
    Big Apple Anticipates Solar Explosion for 2013

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • HelioSage
  • Creotecc Solar Mounting Systems
  • Martifer Solar USA, Inc.
  • Solaire Generation
  • Admirals Bank
  • Ambient Technologies, Inc.
  • Rotork plc
  • Northern Lights Solar Solutions
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hydro 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