• 1 hour LNG Glut To Continue Into 2020s, IEA Says
  • 3 hours Oil Nears $52 With Record OPEC Deal Compliance
  • 7 hours Saudi Aramco CEO Affirms IPO On Track For H2 2018
  • 9 hours Canadia Ltd. Returns To Sudan For First Time Since Oil Price Crash
  • 10 hours Syrian Rebel Group Takes Over Oil Field From IS
  • 3 days PDVSA Booted From Caribbean Terminal Over Unpaid Bills
  • 3 days Russia Warns Ukraine Against Recovering Oil Off The Coast Of Crimea
  • 3 days Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 3 days Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 3 days Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 3 days Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 3 days Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 3 days New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 3 days Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 3 days Russia’s Rosneft To Take Majority In Kurdish Oil Pipeline
  • 4 days Iraq Struggles To Replace Damaged Kirkuk Equipment As Output Falls
  • 4 days British Utility Companies Brace For Major Reforms
  • 4 days Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 4 days Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 4 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 4 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 4 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 4 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 4 days Kinder Morgan Warns About Trans Mountain Delays
  • 5 days India, China, U.S., Complain Of Venezuelan Crude Oil Quality Issues
  • 5 days Kurdish Kirkuk-Ceyhan Crude Oil Flows Plunge To 225,000 Bpd
  • 5 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 5 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 5 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 5 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 6 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 6 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 6 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 6 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 6 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 6 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 6 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 6 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
  • 6 days OPEC Oil Deal Compliance Falls To 86%
  • 7 days U.S. Oil Production To Increase in November As Rig Count Falls

Breaking News:

LNG Glut To Continue Into 2020s, IEA Says

Alt Text

Solar Costs Are Dropping Much Faster Than Expected

The U.S. Department of Energy…

Alt Text

Unusual Ruling Could Impact Cheap Solar Panel Imports

The U.S. International Trade Commission…

Gary Hunt

Gary Hunt

Gary Hunt is President, Scalable Growth Strategy Advisors, an independent energy technology and information services adviser and a partner in Tech & Creative Labs, a…

More Info

Do Anti-Dumping Duties on China PV Panels Make Any Sense?

Do Anti-Dumping Duties on China PV Panels Make Any Sense?

“Low Prices, Always Low Prices” that is the tag line of one of the world’s largest retailers. That may be why Wal-Mart is one of the world’s largest retailers. But when it comes to solar photovoltaic panels made in China the price is too low according to the US Government because the Chinese government is subsidizing them.

This is the same US government that also subsidizes solar panels to make the prices—-errr—lower!

In 2011 the US public bought more than $3.1 billion in solar photovoltaic panels from China.  Now a US Department of Commerce ruling finds that China subsidized PV panel production allowing its producers to underprice US manufacturers.  The practical result was that China captured about half of the US market share for PV panels—and customers got some REALLY good deals for putting solar panel on a lot of rooftops.

The same thing happened previously in Europe where Spain and Germany and other nations adopted feed-in-tariffs (subsidies) designed to favor domestic producers.  Later when China learned how to game the rules and suction up those feed-in-tariff subsidies to help their PV panels lower than EU domestic producers—the EU had a FiT (pardon the pun).  The EU economic crisis also brought tremendous pressure on EU governments to cut spending and deficits in waves of very unpopular austerity.  What did they cut?  They cut FiT subsidies arguing they had ballooned so large as customers snapped up cheap solar panel systems that the feed in tariffs were not sustainable.

US and EU producers screamed that China was not playing fair and a group of them filed this anti-dumping complaint in the US. So what should we make of this fine mess?

On the one hand it is a pleasant surprise that the Obama Administration is staring down Chinese trade practices that are clearly one sided.  We have put up with a lot of uneven trading practices over the years and leveling the playing field for US companies in China is a worthy goal.  But it is not clear that imposing anti-dumping duties will achieve that policy goal if it is affirmed on review certainly to take place AFTER the election.  So it could be that this is just politics acting tough now before the election and wimping out by modifying the final anti-dumping duties afterward when the President has “more flexibility’ if he still is president.

Then there is the ‘be careful what you wish for’ lesson for the solar industry. The renewable energy players never met a subsidy they didn’t like—unless it was going to someone else.  The business model of the wind, solar and ethanol crowd is built around mandated purchases and subsidies.  Does that sound like a sustainable business model to you?  The solar industry is now driving hard to close deals before year end 2012 but uncertain about the regulatory and tax policy future.

So far Congress has been unwilling to extend the subsidies—but that is more for partisan political reasons rather than policy clarity.  So now retiring Senator Bingaman’s clean energy standard bill offers a life preserver for the renewable energy industry proposing to adopt a national purchase mandate on top of the state renewable portfolio mandate.   This has long been at the top of the wish list for the wind lobby because it forces the states without RPS purchase mandate standards to comply with a Federal one.  But Bingaman’s CES plan setting a national policy for a set of very different regional power markets is a bad idea.  But it is designed to buy time for a transition to a new renewable energy business model—not yet devised—and to redefine subsidies by calling them clean energy standard mandates.  This is a great deal for solar since PV panels can be put on every rooftop.  It is not much help to wind since it depends upon transmission to bring wind energy from remote locations to load centers.  Bingaman’s bill will still not get wind energy from West Texas or Iowa to New Mexico his home state or the Southeast US  which generally have no RPS standards any easier.  But it will require utilities in to step up purchases of PV panels for rooftops.  And through 2016 the US government will continue to subsidize those solar purchases with production tax credits.  The only thing different is the price will now include 31% import duties on Chinese PV panels.

The truth is the renewable energy industry does not need more policy support.  It needs to focus on modifying its business model to profitably compete in a competitive market without subsidies.  It needs to use the time until the current state RPS goals are satisfied to reduce the balance of system costs, streamline permitting processes, advocate for dynamic pricing and position itself to beat China by offering a better product and a better deal.

I know that seems like asking a lot of the solar industry.  But let’s face it we need the solar industry to succeed not by selling us the cheapest, least efficient commodity PV panels from China but by developing the most efficient, highest value added solar technology that can compete at grid parity prices.  The latter is worth policy and price supports for a while longer—the former is not.  The better policy solution for curbing China from dumping underpriced PV panels on America is to end all subsidies.  When China gets to eat its own policy costs to give Americans low prices, always low prices without the ability to get Uncle Sam to reimburse it with taxpayer money it will moderate its behavior.

By. Gary L Hunt

Gary Hunt is President, Scalable Growth Strategy Advisors, an independent energy technology and information services adviser and a partner in Tech & Creative Labs, a disruptive innovation software collaborative of high tech companies focused on the energy vertical. He served as VP-Global Analytics & Data at IHS/CERA; global Division President at Ventyx, now an ABB company; and Assistant City Manager-Austin Texas responsible for Austin Energy and Austin Water.

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • dan on May 22 2012 said:
    If you believe the ethos of the powerful and our governments the market pressure's are the driving force in the world's economy,
    All governments have protected there own company's / country's from time to time.
    If this is about saving the world why are they complaining about the cheap products from China,
    Apart from the fact China will own the entire production of nearly everything within the next couple of generations then watch the prices climb.
    But market forces must prevail or do they?

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News