• 4 hours Midwestern Refiners Seek Canadian Oil To Expand Output
  • 9 hours UK On Track To Approve Construction of “Mini” Nuclear Reactors
  • 13 hours LNG Glut To Continue Into 2020s, IEA Says
  • 15 hours Oil Nears $52 With Record OPEC Deal Compliance
  • 18 hours Saudi Aramco CEO Affirms IPO On Track For H2 2018
  • 20 hours Canadia Ltd. Returns To Sudan For First Time Since Oil Price Crash
  • 21 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
  • 4 days Syrian Rebels Relinquish Control Of Major Gas Field
  • 4 days Schlumberger Warns Of Moderating Investment In North America
  • 4 days Oil Prices Set For Weekly Loss As Profit Taking Trumps Mideast Tensions
  • 4 days Energy Regulators Look To Guard Grid From Cyberattacks
  • 4 days Mexico Says OPEC Has Not Approached It For Deal Extension
  • 4 days New Video Game Targets Oil Infrastructure
  • 4 days Shell Restarts Bonny Light Exports
  • 4 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
  • 5 days Montenegro A ‘Sweet Spot’ Of Untapped Oil, Gas In The Adriatic
  • 5 days Rosneft CEO: Rising U.S. Shale A Downside Risk To Oil Prices
  • 5 days Brazil Could Invite More Bids For Unsold Pre-Salt Oil Blocks
  • 5 days OPEC/Non-OPEC Seek Consensus On Deal Before Nov Summit
  • 5 days London Stock Exchange Boss Defends Push To Win Aramco IPO
  • 5 days Rosneft Signs $400M Deal With Kurdistan
  • 5 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
  • 6 days Russia, Saudis Team Up To Boost Fracking Tech
  • 6 days Conflicting News Spurs Doubt On Aramco IPO
  • 6 days Exxon Starts Production At New Refinery In Texas
  • 6 days Iraq Asks BP To Redevelop Kirkuk Oil Fields
  • 7 days Oil Prices Rise After U.S. API Reports Strong Crude Inventory Draw
  • 7 days Oil Gains Spur Growth In Canada’s Oil Cities
  • 7 days China To Take 5% Of Rosneft’s Output In New Deal
  • 7 days UAE Oil Giant Seeks Partnership For Possible IPO
  • 7 days Planting Trees Could Cut Emissions As Much As Quitting Oil
  • 7 days VW Fails To Secure Critical Commodity For EVs
  • 7 days Enbridge Pipeline Expansion Finally Approved
  • 7 days Iraqi Forces Seize Control Of North Oil Co Fields In Kirkuk
Alt Text

Solar Costs Are Dropping Much Faster Than Expected

The U.S. Department of Energy…

Alt Text

Ambitious Solar Project Takes Root In Tunisia

This small northern-African nation could…

Trump’s Solar Tariff Confusion Creates An Opportunity

Solar

The solar sector is reeling from confusion, and stock prices are reeling right along with it. The time it has taken investors and traders to wrap their heads around Trump’s industry tariffs and the pyrrhic victory of two solar companies in a case against cheap Chinese imports has seen stocks rally in a big way, and then fall just as hard.

When the International Trade Court ruled in favor of plaintiffs Suniva and SolarWorld in their case against cheap Chinese solar module and cell imports, reactions were polarized: the U.S. solar industry was outraged—as it had been for most of the duration of the court investigation—and investors, apparently, were extremely upbeat for the future of this same outraged industry, sending solar stocks sky-high.

The rally did not last long, though. While investors’ immediate reaction to the court ruling was of the unsurprising knee-jerk variety, reality started to set in over the last few days and solar stocks took a nosedive as sharp as the rally they enjoyed last week. Just what the solar companies needed after the ruling that threatened their chances of survival.

On the face of it, the court case doesn’t seem like such a big deal, but nothing could be further from the truth. Narrowly speaking, bankrupt Suniva filed a complaint with the ITC claiming that cheap Chinese solar panels and cells were instrumental in the company’s declining performance. Suniva, whose owners are Chinese, was quickly joined by German-based SolarWorld in its claim. The key word in the case was “flooded”: the U.S. market, the plaintiffs claimed, was flooded with Chinese-made cells and panels. The solution? A floor price of US$0.78/W for modules and a US$0.40/W tariff for solar cells—enter the broader picture.

Related: What Happens If Trump Trashes The Iran Nuclear Deal?

One would think that these two would effortlessly win the support of their local sector players, competitors and all. But this is not what happened. What did happen was exactly the opposite: the Solar Energy Industries Association came down on Suniva and SolarWorld like a ton of bricks, claiming that tariffs and floor prices would be a stab in the chest for the U.S. solar industry, leading to project cancellations worth billions of dollars and massive layoffs, to the tune of a third of the total number currently employed in the industry.

Yet it’s easy to see why the ruling resonated with traders. Tariffs and floor prices are, after all, protective measures aimed—on the face of it—at protecting U.S. solar businesses from cheap imports. The problem is that sometimes, as in the Suniva/SolarWorld case, this is a dangerous oversimplification.

Contrary to what the plaintiffs in the case were claiming, there was no “flooding” of any sort, according to the solar industry association in response to the court ruling. What Chinese exporters did was merely provide U.S. solar installations builders with the necessary materials­—namely, cells and modules. In fact, the SEIA said, the plaintiffs were trying to blame Chinese cell and module makers for their own failure to turn in a profit because their products were subpar, while the Chinese suppliers were simply filling a critical gap amid booming demand for utility-scale solar installations.

The shares of utility-scale solar companies saw obvious effects of the investigation and the consequent ruling—chief among these: First Solar’s stock.

First Solar (NYSE:FSLR)

The country’s largest solar panel manufacturer’s shares added a stunning 78 percent between the end of March and last week, hitting US$51.99 on September 22, the day of the ruling.

That was the highest price for the stock for the past 12 months.

On Monday, First Solar’s stock reversed to US$46.88 as investors started to wrap their heads around the actual implications of the ITC ruling. As of late-morning trading on Tuesday, FSLR was at $46.44, down 0.94 percent on the day and down over 5 percent on the week.

(Click to enlarge)

Last year, First Solar announced it could take an impairment charge of between US$500 and US$700 million in the phasing out of the thin-film solar panel model it was producing at the time, its flagship Series 4, and speed up the development of the new model, Series 6. The Series 6 was expected go into production in 2018, and according to comments at the time of the announcement, would help First Solar to gain a competitive edge in a world of falling solar panel costs.

But what about the proposed tariff?

This is where it gets complicated for First Solar, because it’s not black and white—and when it comes to stock prices, well, it depends who is paying attention and what they’re paying attention to, exactly.

It would seem to make sense that a tariff on imported solar modules and cells would benefit First Solar, but not necessarily because it would boost sales by eliminating lower-cost imports.

On the contrary, a tariff on Chinese solar module and cell imports would benefit First Solar by allowing it to continue to produce its own modules and cells in Malaysia while competitors grapple with higher import prices. Why? Because First Solar does not use crystalline silicon for its modules. It uses cadmium telluride for its thin-film PV panels, so the tariffs, which specifically concern the more popular crystalline silicone solar products, won’t affect it. Related: $60 Oil Enters The Realm Of Possibility

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. First Solar’s Series 4 is what is being produced in Malaysia, and that production capacity is being idled. So this immediate benefit of the tariff isn’t as great at it looks on the surface. It’s preparing for the launch of the Series 6 now, and it may have to reopen one idled factory in Vietnam to respond effectively to a hoarding urge in response to the ruling. This would add to the company’s cost burden in the short-term, but over the medium and long term, it could be a benefit—if tariffs go through.

Right now, the drop in FSLR’s stock price reflects the general confusion as to what this means for all solar stocks, and the reality hasn’t yet set in regarding this company’s future in a new regulatory environment. It also reflects the fact that no one can be sure if these tariffs are going to see the light of day, given the level of opposition from the industry they are meant to protect.

In the medium and long-term, First Solar could turn out to be one of the very few winners from the Suniva/SolarWorld case, so even though it’s lost over 5 percent this week, there’s room for a reversal.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Matt on September 27 2017 said:
    You have some basic errors in your article.

    First, it's not a tariff against Chinese manufacturers. It's a tariff against all foreign manufacturers of silicon solar panels.

    FSLR would not be included because they make Cadmium telluride panels.

Leave a comment




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