The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Wednesday, May 22, 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? ×

Can We Really Blame China for Solar Manufacturer Bankruptcies?

It really is all China's fault, say most solar experts, but the Chinese government's motivations aren't necessarily malicious.

Jennifer Runyon, Managing Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
November 06, 2012  |  24 Comments

Today is the last day before the International Trade Commission makes its final ruling on the tariffs that will likely be added to solar panels that include cells that were manufactured in China. We'll report on the specifics as soon as we have them but it's a pretty safe bet that there'll be tariffs in the amount of about 24-36 percent added onto most panels that come from China.

In anticipation of the ruling, both the Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing (CASM), which is led by SolarWorld Americas who started the initial investigation and the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE), led by Jigar Shah have issued statements.  In its statement, CASM quoted an article by Matthew Stepp and Clifton Yen in which they state, “China knows it just needs to dial up the subsidies for only a little while longer until American producers give up or go bankrupt.  Once it knocks out foreign producers, Chinese solar manufacturers will dominate global production and can increase their prices.” CASM also points out that more than 24 U.S. solar manufacturers have already given up the business of making solar panels.

In conducting interviews for an article I recently wrote about mergers and acquisitions in the solar industry (to be published in the next issue of Renewable Energy World magazine and online soon), I spoke with several key solar industry players who made it very clear to me China’s actions regarding the funding it has given to solar panel manufacturers are outside of the scope of what most people would consider normal ways of doing business.

Here’s the situation as Arno Harris, CEO of Recurrent Energy, explained it to me.  Harris admits that his company as a developer has benefitted (and still is) from the low prices that have driven so many manufacturers out of business.  While he is very happy about the low module costs, he recognizes that true market dynamics are not at play. “In solar for the past 5 years, we’ve seen a cycle where the investment in capacity seems almost divorced from any conventional notion of meeting demand,” he said.

“Again, that has been a boon to solar overall, it’s enabled us to reach a price point that I don’t think any of us though we’d reach much, much quicker, but it does suggest that there is a building business problem upstream that we’re seeing reflected in the challenges that all of those businesses are facing.”

Harris explained how market dynamics work in a normal business cycle and he used a poly-silicon plant or memory chip manufacturing as an example:

The industry goes through growth phases. Supply will get tight relative to demand, and that stimulates investment in a new poly-silicon plant or a new memory chip processing facility and then the market moves into a slight overcapacity, prices come down a little bit but then it finds equilibrium again and then it grows until, you know, you reach the limits again and then you repeat that cycle.

Harris believes that the Chinese government, in continuing to lend money to solar manufacturing companies, has really skewed the way normal economics work. “I’d say we’re dealing with companies whose access to capital is somewhat separated from capital markets. So the discipline that capital markets would impose on a company in the western world is not being imposed,” he said.

Raj Prabhu, managing partner at Mercom Capital offered similar comments on the situation.  He said that Asian companies’ continuing to add capacity in the midst of an oversupplied market “defies logic.” He said so far he had tracked more than $50 billion in credit that had been given from the Chinese-owned banks to manufacturers.  He explained further:

Basically China Development Bank is saying we will provide [some large amount] of loan and credit, etc. to one of these Chinese manufacturers and then that doesn’t mean that they give them the money but they have some sort of an agreement that they can draw down upon. This cheap and easy credit being available is one of the factors why it [the solar industry] is overbuilt. You know you didn’t see overbuilding anywhere else.

Finally, GTM Research’s Shyam Mehta said he doesn’t see the situation improving anytime soon.  I asked him if he thought the Chinese government would eventually force companies to merge or consolidate and he offered the following:

At this time we haven’t seen any signs that China is going to enforce consolidation directly.  A couple of weeks ago the China Development Bank announced that it was going to renew a pledge of support for 12 Chinese manufactures and six of them were named and six weren’t.   They are borrowing more money, losing more money and continuing to get supported.  That is not sustainable, basically, not for the entire industry is what I think.

Jigar Shah: Unsustainable but Understandable and Not Illegal

The fact that what China is doing unsustainable is undisputed by all, even by staunch solar advocate Jigar Shah, who founded the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy (CASE) in order to fight against CASM.

Shah told me that many times throughout history governments have made decisions about what industries to support and then have offered that support outside of market dynamics.  “The truth of the matter is that this is exactly what country after country after country does in the solar industry,” he explained. Shah said that Japan overbuilt solar capacity in 1999 and then cut prices, “and it’s exactly what SolarWorld did in 2004 when the German government decided to provide a 50 percent subsidy to anybody who builds a plant in Germany.”

He doesn’t see this as a malicious attempt to dominate the solar manufacturing industry and put other countries out of business. Rather it’s a job creation bet made by governments all over the world who see solar as the next big moneymaker.

“They all think that they’re going to be the last country to really figure this out and they’re going win solar manufacturing for the rest of time,” said Shah.

He maintains that China will soon give up. “I think China is now saying ‘wow, that didn’t work out for us so well,’ said Shah. “And when that happens Korea is going to take over,” he said. 

Shah thinks that four years after Korea takes up the solar manufacturing torch, India will take over then maybe Brazil, he said.  “This is so common and I don’t think there is anything illegal here.”

Can the matter be boiled down to public sector interests over private sector interests? Perhaps. SolarWorld’s President Gordon Brisner said in a statement that his company would be just fine if it weren’t for the unfair trade practices being employed by the Chinese. “We have no doubt – none – about our ability to compete with Chinese producers on fair footing,” said Brinser. “But we have said all along that U.S. solar manufacturers cannot compete with the Chinese government and, as a matter of basic trade law, should not be confronted with doing so.”

But Shah counters that the public sector sometimes has other interests than the private sector. “This is about China building jobs for the millions of people that are joining urban ventures every month to make sure that they prevent riots from occurring in their country. So they do this in iPads, they do this in computer manufacturing,” he said.

Further Shah believes it’s about solving a global crisis.  He said if the Saudi Arabians decided that they wanted to provide the U.S. with oil at prices lower than the price of oil that we can recover out of the Bakkan Shale then “we would take that all day.” 

He concluded:

So this is happening in China (and I don’t think they are trying to put us out of business – we never had a vibrant solar manufacturing industry anyway) but if they are providing us with panels at a very affordable cost and therefore allowing us to decarbonize our grid, I’m just trying to figure out how this is a bad thing for all of us.

Good or bad, tomorrow it is expected that the International Trade Commission will rule that the Chinese government has indeed harmed the U.S. solar manufacturing industry. With that ruling the tariffs will go into effect and the next chapter in solar manufacturing will begin.  

24 Comments

Register To Comment
Dennis Heidner
Dennis Heidner
November 12, 2012
Because the prices of modules have been dropping so fast, it is easy to assume that all modules are commodity items and that they are all the same - no real difference between the products of the various producers. That is very incorrect. Module prices have been dropping because of the subsidized overproduction. Because of this profits for many companies are gone and many are bankrupt.

It will be difficult or impossible to estimate the damage long term caused to the industry when you consider that some very innovative companies and products are gone and no longer being produced. Yes, a truly free and correctly working market would filter out the weaker companies, but in this case even strong companies with good products, years of research, significant innovations are still being driven out of the market.

With all the companies loosing money because of the oversupply - it also means that there will be FAR LESS capital available to develop and the derivative products. For example -- 200 to 230 watt, 230 to 250 watt, 250 to 270, 270 to 300 watt... slimmer panel design, etc.

Now instead because of the oversupply - it means that for some years to come -- new materials and process research may only occur if the work is done at or funded by government research institutes.

While the oversupply of panels means cheap panels now, it also means that there will be a slowing down of new research and products that might have help to keep the momentum in the industry going for many years.

Oversupplying and dumping often freezes the innovation OR reduces the number of innovative ideas that would have become available.
Dennis Heidner
Dennis Heidner
November 12, 2012
The politics within the US or any other country have nothing to do with the simple question of "Is the Chinese PV industry causing an oversupply and dumping of solar modules?"

In any discussion of the issue - it is important to remember that virtually all of the countries that produce solar modules, China, Germany, USA, Japan, Korea, etc have signed various trade agreements and treaties (WTO for example). Those treaties define what a dumping action is and what countries such as the US and Germany can claim as dumping.

The reason for the large over capacity in the solar module market is because many companies and countries saw and believed that there would be an ENORMOUS market for solar modules. The longer established companies, Q-Cells, Solarworld, Sharp, Sanyo, Abound, would have done some pretty good market analysis of what they believe they could sell. They increased their production to meet what they saw was production that could be consumed in their current markets. And of course because they are competitors they do not talk with each other.

Then add in the Chinese producers and they saw the same ENORMOUS market opportunity and decide to produce enough panels to capture more than 50% of the demand. That floods the market. In a normal unsubsidized and competitive environment - ALL the manufactures reduce their production to bring prices back up where they make a profit. But this time no one blinked - many of of the US and European companies went bankrupt and ceased operation. Even then the flow of low cost Chinese panels continued. Keep in mind some of the Chinese producers are also having financial difficulties. The only thing saving them is low cost or subsidized loans from their government. Meanwhile they are still shipping low cost panels and the Chinese industry is still loosing money. That sounds like a pretty classical dumping case.
Richie Judas
Richie Judas
November 12, 2012
Just curious how many of you deal with foreign "anything" in regards to warranty claims or just building a generally reliable business that is clear to understand in English. This is why we have always pushed American turbines, panels, inverters, towers, racking, and everything in between.
It's rediculous to ever want your product to be considered a commodity that is no different than any other product and for anyone on the vertical the benefit is in the person on the other side of the phone and the supply chain.
Solar is yet a young enough industry as compared with oil to levy these tariffs for any country that attempts hostile takeover of our industries. In the future Direct Targeted Marketing will allow other countries to take small business away too.
ANONYMOUS
November 10, 2012
Unfortunately, there are a lot of false assumptions people who were thought to be experts made.

Yes, China is to blame for the uncontrolled growth in increasing its solar manufacturing capacity. But, there is a culprit who everybody seems to neglect. The US - economy, like it or not, the world depends on the US consumers and industries. It has been like that for the last 60 years, and will continue for a few more.

Obviously the US politicians are to be blame including the 'Green President'. Their inability to revive the US economy is giving the world a major economic flu. The world has a demand problem, the power establishment has an oversupply problem. They are generating more power than they can sell, why would they want to build solar farms?

If Germany is telling their people to keep the lights on at night to keep the wind turbines turning, there is a huge 'demand' problem. So, blame China if you want, but don't let the politicians of the hook.

kick the butts of your 'President NO' and your 'NO, Congress (both House and Senate)'. They are all responsible for the sad state of the economy.
Francisku De Silva
Francisku De Silva
November 9, 2012
Its a shame that US has decided to penalize China for subsidising Chinese manufacturers for their PV exports to US. I do not know why the US does not think that they are helping the US to reduce the carbon footprint by directly subsidising to reduce PV price. If the problem is that the US manufacturers cannot sustain, all the US govt needs to do is to provided financial or other useful assistance to keep them afloat. It will definitely create a level playing field. That way, all the jobs can be saved while becoming greener at a reduced cost due to Chinese contribution. It would then settle down to some reasonable level that can be sustained. But, might as well make hay while sun shines. This may be thought of as a simplistic solution for a complicated problem with numerous innuendoes, why not accept a simple solution by adjusting any conflicting policies accordingly while thanking China for their generosity!
Joseph Berwind
Joseph Berwind
November 8, 2012
The trade case is now exploding and the inclusion of USA, Korean and EU polysilicon envelopes the industry in unfathomable ways. These actions put at risk billions of dollars of high-purity assets. Digitimes reported that the spot price of polysilicon in China has fallen to $15/kg, which is close to the variable cost of many polysilicon providers. The contract price remains ~$20/kg. The report noted that downstream firms have been reluctant to issue orders according to contracts, causing material providers to file lawsuits. The spot price of polysilicon from international tier-one firms has been ~$15-16/kg, and $13-15/kg for tier-two firms. According to market observers, this price is below the variable cost for most tier-two polysilicon firms. (Digitimes, 7 Nov 2012). What's occurring puts at risk every c-Si module being installed today in the sense that grantees are difficult to consider as long-lived assets for developers. What's the proof? Wacker now openly admits to having to alter take-or-pay contracts with Chinese customers. Wacker's CEO said that Chinese customers are selling poly purchased from him on contract at lower prices after importing the material into China just to raise cash. The expansion of the trade case to include basic materials not only endangers polysilicon companies, but it threatens each and every single stakeholder in the crystalline supply chain down to the systems installer that has the potential to wreak havoc on the industry for years to come as substandard materials, cutting corners and defects overwhelm the unsuspecting who in the end may have worthless product warranties. aeiresearch.net
David Gower
David Gower
November 8, 2012
I actually have agree with Jigar on this one...At the end of the day the Chinese policy is no different than subsidies that we give to industry. The only difference is that we are giving the lions share to subsidies the fossil fuel industry even though it is more than established, uber-profitable, and has a diminishing product that is uniquely inelastic in demand, so we will pay whatever it costs. How we justify giving a red cent to the fossil fuel industry is only explained by the low cost for them to hire lobbyist that market false truths to our congress like jobs and domestic independence, when reality is we are giving the guys who are already sitting on the gold all of our silver too. It really comes back to having a real energy policy. However, this needs to be created without the money and influence of the fossil fuel industry. We need to start by making it clear that we are no longer going to invest in the dinosaur sauce!
Richard Jiang
Richard Jiang
November 8, 2012
Of crouse,in China,you should konw any enterprise develop and investment didn't meet market requirement and peoples demand, just for interest group and presonal profit,such as solar energy is only local profit and enconomy sources but local government didn't conside input and output issues,nothing will be think about for example environment and power gird pollution,what's concerns for the international market?
William Andrews
William Andrews
November 8, 2012
Sounds to me that the IEC are doing precisely what caused Japan to attack the USA at Pearl Harbour ie prevent Japan from trading with the US with excessive import tarrifs etc. Dont you ever learn from History.
Dennis Heidner
Dennis Heidner
November 8, 2012
In September at the 27th European PV Conference in Frankfurt Germany, officials from various Chinese universities/agencies announced that decisions were made to expand the portion of power on the electric grid generated by PV to nearly 21GW by sometime in 2015. That is significant since they had a little more than 3GW PV power generation installed in 2011. From my viewpoint it looks like China has decided to self consume some of its production for the modernization of the electric grid in China. A necessary step in reducing their output of CO2. It does mean that if the Chinese are able to keep their plants producing - while using the modules domestically -- that they will indeed be able to produce unsubsidized modules at a lower cost and high quality. In which case modules in China are likely to continue dropping in price (once their consumption needs have been met). I believe the question(s) that remains to be answered is how many modules will China import, (will the open their markets and import) as they build out their solar farms? I would hope more than a token few, after all China has been selling modules into both the US and Germany for large solar farms. I would also be interested following the size and cost of the modules that are used on those farms. Same price as the modules exported, lower or higher? Will Chinese producers increase production even further in anticipation of their domestic solar farm consumption - or will they slow production down to meet the actual global demand?
PETER TAL
PETER TAL
November 8, 2012
China's financial and political support to their local solar industry is only a repetition of other identical events - textile, TVs, VCR. small appliances, plastics, computers, LED and many others industrial products. The strange thing is that we, all the Western countries, are transferring our technology and factories to China who learned to manipulate our short term interest for their long term interests. For those who don't learn the history lessons, they are forced to live them again.
Richard Jiang
Richard Jiang
November 7, 2012
Yes,I full agree with your opinion!
China's solar energy enterprise has been control by influential officials form government,which has not totally plan and contrl,nothing but,that is a tools by vested interests,how can contributions to the world?in China,there can not be parallel in power grid about 80% by solar station,and then, Distributed solar station also have not programming,where is future for renewable energy of China?
Will Wilkin
Will Wilkin
November 7, 2012
The USA has a great solar market for its domestic producers...if only we'd get a government with the sense to protect it. Regarding China's various subsidies 'outside of the scope of what most people would consider normal ways of doing business,' that is their sovereign right to conduct their trade and commerce as they choose. Their elites seem to be doing a better job of developing their economy and improving the lot of their people. Here in the USA, our elites led by Congress and the Presidents of the Dem and Repub Parties, have made 'free trade' policies that further enrich the 1% who have staked their future with the global corporations. The offshoring of our manufacturing --across the board, not just solar-- is the looting of the long term interests of the American people for those big profits and bonuses, wrecking our future that is already here. 1/3 of our mfg jobs lost in the first decade of this century, 10,000 to 20,000 more practically every month since, the hole rippling through the wages and prosperity of the whole country. Protecting not just our solar but all our manufacturing would mean less of our wealth going abroad and more of it recirculating in country to generate multiplier effect jobs and all the revitalization of our industrial ecosystem that would bring. Soon as the prosperity returned the domestic market would grow stronger and demand accordingly. Under current trade policy, any temporary stimulus to domestic demands leaks out through imports and immense unsustainable trade deficits. Time to break that cycle.
ANONYMOUS
November 7, 2012
This is a sadly unbalanced article, as most have been in the US. Where was the acknowledgement that Abound and GE announced their new capacity development when everyone knew the industry was headed into oversupply? What about Solarworld, Helios, and MX Solar, the CASM members, opening their doors with new production as late as Feb 2011?

Where is the admission that in 2008-2010, when a lot of production decisions were being made, the FIT zealots and NREL were running around telling people that 47+ regimes around the world were opening up vast new solar markets, which drove up producers' expectations?
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
November 7, 2012
What's in a word? 'China's actions regarding the funding it has given to solar panel manufacturers are outside of the scope of what most people would consider normal ways of doing business.' - substitute USA for China and automobile for solar panel; but then, the Chinese have already thought of that and, of course, a justification for punitive tariffs. 'the discipline that capital markets would impose on a company in the western world is not being imposed,' - so is that anything like the discipline of derivatives trading backed up by government bailouts? 'we've seen a cycle where the investment in capacity seems almost divorced from any conventional notion of meeting demand' - or we could be talking about housing. SolarWorld increased its capacity from 940 MW to 1400 MW in 2011; how does that jive with the 'conventional notion' or is that just the pot calling the kettle black? Is the Chinese government foolish or just bullish on solar?
Will Wilkin
Will Wilkin
November 7, 2012
No, we in the USA cannot blame China for kicking our ass in the solar manufacturing sector. We must blame our traitorous Congress and Presidents of the Republican and Democratic Parties that have together created the "free trade" treaties and policies that incentivize the offshoring of our jobs and future, and that incentivize the use of imports by American installers. All for the quick "gain" of temporary low prices, at the larger cost of our jobs, tax base, GDP, opportunities, wages and industrial capacity itself.

WTO lawyer committees should not be able to overrule the laws and policies of sovereign nations that have every legitimate interest in protecting domestic industries, ie, the interests of their own people and country. That is why the USA should withdraw from the WTO, discard the ruinous 'free trade' policies exporting our industrial ecosystem, and launch an effective industrial policy to achieve full employment and balanced trade and renewed prosperity for our people.

These "free trade" agreements are dissolving national sovereignty and giving corporations the "right" to sue countries for the cost of complying with regulations or evading them altogether, especially in Obama's latest secret negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership:

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/07/02/trans-pacific-partnership-corporate-escape-from-accountability/

EXCERPT:

The real result is global privilege of the corporate class as a class immune to government regulation.

One of the provisions allows corporations to avoid the courts and laws of countries by creating a private tribunal that corporations can use to sue governments for the costs of complying with regulation. Essentially, the laws of countries that apply to corporations are supplanted by decisions of a private tribunal of corporate lawyers.

END EXCERPT
Hal Slater
Hal Slater
November 7, 2012
We can and should thank Solyndra and the DOE for their role in accelerating the decrease in PV prices. The half-billion dollars the taxpayers lost was repaid many times over with the tax credit savings on the lower panel prices. Would somebody please inform the right-wingers and explain to them how it works?
Rajesh Narayanan
Rajesh Narayanan
November 7, 2012
As long as grid-parity doesn't take place Solar or any Non-conventional source will be a matter of High-Subsidy and only Govts. can afford it,using taxpayers money. FIT charges have found to be un-sustainable by all those countries which started enthusiastically; and taxpayers will be bearing the brunt for the next 20 years. As far as China is concerned if the country is willing to sell below cost its a matter of time when the budget will dry up...But others can make-hay-while the sun shines without complaining.
Rich Barbarics
Rich Barbarics
November 7, 2012
Solar cells and panels have become a commodity item. There are market differentiators to be had but they need to be sought out and developed. Our history of solar success is 100% based on governmental subsidy. Those subsidies are no longer needed and we need to find ways to capitalize on the favorable low-price news. If China decided to penalize their exporters by 24-36% on all goods sold only to Walmart, many smaller US competing retailers could survive as could their US source industries. It's amazing how many 'Dollar' stores seem to compete well with Walmart w/o having their supply channel. Or if the Chinese revalued the Renminbi by doubling its value, would Walmart and it customers (and stockholders) like the resultant retail price jolt? Nuff said.
Asotos Asotar
Asotos Asotar
November 7, 2012
A simplified FIT scheme within US and EU, that will provide fair subsidization to Solar power as per Unit of Contribution to Energy production and not over subsiding the Fossil and Nuclear industries, will be the driving force to restore balance in the Solar Industry.
Bankruptcies started taking place when FITs were drastically reduced and in some countries in EU complete cut, combining with an ambiguous states policy in US, do not allow much operation flexibility especially when there are so many key players in the market.
ANONYMOUS
November 7, 2012
Comment #1 If China wants to promote solar over fossils, why does it merely promote MANUFACTURING and not (as Germany, Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Australia . . did) also large-scale INSTALLATION of solar?

Why is it killing solar panel manufacturing elsewhere?
Rainer Quitzow
Rainer Quitzow
November 7, 2012
Is the behavior of the Chinese government in any way similar to the US government's bailout of the automotive industry in recent years? Or are those activities considered the normal market dynamics at work? What about the Solyndra case? Are bank guarantees of that sort, the normal market dynamic at work? Where exactly do you draw the line between a 'normal' and a distorted market?
Len Pretorius
Len Pretorius
November 7, 2012
What the world needs is a Solar PV Industry funded by the World Bank on a basis that all ALL manufacturers receive funding on an equitable [similar] basis so they compete on the factors that do matter - cell conversion efficiency , quality of product and service and selling price globally. Competition will then ensure that only the fittest will survive surely, or am I just naive
ANONYMOUS
November 6, 2012
Suppose China is not looking to pit Chinese solar manufacturers against US and other solar manufacturers. Suppose China is looking to pit solar energy production against fossil fuel energy production. Maybe China should be lauded, not castigated, for hastening the day of grid parity.

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Jennifer Runyon

Jennifer Runyon

Jennifer Runyon is managing editor of RenewableEnergyWorld.com coordinating, writing and/or editing columns, features, news stories and blogs for the publications. She also serves as conference chair of Solar Power-Gen Conference and Exhibition...
  • 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
  • 12
    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
  • RBI Solar Inc.
  • Intertek
  • Schletter Inc.
  • Motech Industries, Inc.
  • Helios Solar Works
  • HelioSage
  • marcus evans
  • RevoluSun
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