GreentechGrid
Text of Commerce Dept. Ruling on China Solar Trade Tariffs
-
Here's a reprint of the fact sheet just issued by the Department of Commerce on the preliminary decision on the anti-dumping complaint from SolarWorld. (Click on the images to enlarge.)
Solar Industry Reaction to the Anti-Dumping Decision
-
Shyam Mehta, Greentech Media's Senior Solar Analyst:
- While the margins are not as high as those seen in many previous U.S.-China antidumping cases (electrical blankets, steel grating), they are certainly much higher than Chinese manufacturers would have hoped for. Stacked onto the margins for countervailing duties, they amount to levels of 35 to 36 percent, which is significant.
- Keep in mind that this is a preliminary decision. We expect Chinese manufacturers and CASE representatives to contest the findings in days ahead.
- The margins were obviously driven in part by the DOC's choice of the "proxy economy" to estimate costs, as China is considered a "non-market economy".
- At these margins, China-based manufacturers would certainly have to raise U.S. prices to turn a profit. It is not feasible for them to maintain prices at tariff-free levels and still be profitable. In the short-term, this is likely to lead to module price increases in the U.S. which would serve to dampen demand and installation growth. If the Chinese were to absorb the tariff, it would place their costs close to parity with many U.S.-based suppliers.
- However, Chinese firms are hardly likely to stand still. Broadly speaking, they have two strategies: set up cell manufacturing outside China, or use the tolling services of Taiwan-based suppliers to turn wafers into cells there, and then assemble the modules in China. Both strategies would allow the Chinese to bypass import tariffs. We estimate that tolling cells to Taiwanese firms would increase Chinese costs by 6 to 12 percent, which is meaningful but manageable.
- Given this, we do expect that the decision will result in at least incremental investment in domestic manufacturing by Chinese firms. However, there are other, lower-cost manufacturing locations that these firms could set up manufacturing in, such as Mexico and Taiwan, for example that would still allow them to price their modules below that of U.S.-based suppliers. Therefore, we see the impact of this decision on U.S. manufacturing as positive, but spurring limited investment in the future and likely only temporary relief for existing U.S.-based suppliers.
Suntech (NYSE: STP): "These duties do not reflect the reality of a highly-competitive global solar industry. Suntech has consistently maintained a positive gross margin as revenues are higher than our cost of production. We will work closely with the Department of Commerce prior to their final decision to demonstrate why these duties are not justified by fact," said Andrew Beebe, Suntech's Chief Commercial Officer. "As a global company with global supply chains and manufacturing facilities in three countries, including the United States, we are providing our U.S. customers with hundreds of megawatts of quality solar products that are not subject to these tariffs," continued Mr. Beebe. "Despite these harmful trade barriers, we hope that the U.S., China and all countries will engage in constructive dialogue to avert a deepening solar trade war. Suntech opposes trade barriers at any point in the global solar supply chain. All leading companies in the global solar industry want to see a trade war averted. We need more competition and innovation, not litigation," continued Mr. Beebe.
Yingli (NYSE: YGE) “We felt validated after the Department of Commerce’s preliminary CVD decision in March, which determined that we are not being substantially subsidized as the petitioners claim. Today’s preliminary anti-dumping tariff recommendation was not unexpected given the historical tariff levels in these types of cases. We will continue to aggressively defend ourselves and remain optimistic that we will persevere in the final determination,” said Robert Petrina, Managing Director of Yingli Green Energy Americas, Inc., the Company’s operating subsidiary in the U.S. “The overwhelming majority of the U.S. solar industry supports access to affordable solar energy and fair market trade. We are grateful to the tens of thousands of U.S. solar installers, developers, manufacturers, and suppliers who stand behind us today.” “As we’ve stated before, tariffs are disruptive and destructive for the entire solar industry,” said Mr. Liangsheng Miao, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Yingli Green Energy. “We remain fully committed to serving the U.S. market irrespective of the outcome“The verdict is in,” said Gordon Brinser, president of SolarWorld. “In addition to its preliminary finding that Chinese solar companies were on the receiving end of at least 10 WTO-illegal subsidies, Commerce has now confirmed that Chinese manufacturers are guilty of illegally dumping solar cells and panels in the U.S. market. We appreciate the Commerce staff’s hard work on this matter.”
Brinser further stated, ““Commerce today put importers and purchasers on notice about the consequences of importing illegally subsidized and dumped products from China. We understand U.S. Customs and other federal agencies are already aggressively enforcing the countervailing tariffs in order to prevent circumvention, and we expect they will be equally vigilant with the anti-dumping tariffs.”Tom Hecht, president of SCHOTT Solar, which produces solar PV panels in Albuquerque, NM: “The solar industry has been awaiting today’s decision from the U.S. Department of Commerce – and for good reason. U.S. project developers and investors need clarity and confidence to make critical supply decisions. Today’s decision brings clarity – but creates another issue for U.S. developers. As they look to keep projects on track over the next three to four months, many will be trying to close on sources for PV panels not subject to the new tariff structure,” said Tom Hecht, President of SCHOTT Solar, which manufactures Buy-American compliant, high quality PV modules in Albuquerque, N.M. “SCHOTT has over 50 years’ experience in solar. With factory sites in the U.S., Europe and Asia, SCHOTT Solar has been preparing to supply modules to our customers without interruption, regardless of the government decision." Hecht also noted, “Longer term, the U.S. solar industry and government must focus on energy policies that will provide long-term certainty to the market and continue to encourage investment. Now is the time to support the industry in its efforts to create energy security for our nation and create additional jobs in manufacturing and services.”
Rhone Resch, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA): "The solar industry calls upon the U.S. and Chinese governments to immediately work together towards a mutually-satisfactory resolution of the growing trade conflict within the solar industry. While trade remedy proceedings are basic principles of the rules-based global trading system, so too are collaboration and negotiations. Importantly, disputes within one segment of the industry affect the entire solar supply chain--and these broad implications must be recognized. In addition, the U.S. solar manufacturing base goes well beyond solar cell and module production and includes billions of dollars of recent investments into the production of polysilicon, polymers, and solar manufacturing equipment, products which are largely destined for export. If the U.S.-China solar trade disputes continue to escalate, it will jeopardize these U.S. investments. Given these broader implications, it is imperative that the U.S., China, and other players in the dynamic global marketplace work constructively to avert or resolve trade disputes that will ultimately hurt consumers and businesses throughout the solar value chain."
Canadian Solar CEO Shawn Qu: “Canadian Solar is disappointed by today’s decision from the DOC. Imposing an obligation to post large bonds on solar imports at this preliminary phase of the antidumping investigation is unwarranted and will inflict losses on the entire solar industry. Limiting trade in solar products will cause panel prices to increase, defeating America’s goal of driving down costs and hindering its move toward a clean energy future. Our first priority should be to support the health of the industry as a whole through the financing and installation of solar, which is the key driver to expanding jobs in the US solar market.”
Jigar Shah, the President of CASE, stated, “Today SolarWorld received one of its biggest subsidies yet – an average 31 percent tax on its competitors. What’s worse, it will ultimately come right out of the paychecks of American solar workers. Fortunately, these duties are much lower than the 250 percent tax that SolarWorld originally requested. This decision will increase solar electricity prices in the U.S. precisely at the moment solar power is becoming competitive with fossil fuel generated electricity.”
“At the same time, CASE recognizes that today’s decision is ‘preliminary.’ Between now and a final decision before the end of the year, there are many issues that will be addressed and whose resolution would lead to a significantly lower tariff. CASE will continue to fight SolarWorld’s anti-consumer and anti-jobs efforts to ensure a better result for America’s solar industry,” continued Shah.
According to Kevin Lapidus, Senior Vice President Legal and Government Affairs for SunEdison, “The U.S. solar industry has been growing, adding new solar electric systems, creating jobs and investing billions of dollars in the U.S. energy infrastructure. By increasing the price of modules and therefore the price of solar energy, these tariffs will undermine the success of the U.S. solar industry and reduce the ability of solar energy to compete with electricity generated from fossil fuel.”
Ken Button, co-founder and President of Verengo Solar, stated, “As the second largest residential solar company in the country, Verengo has helped thousands of middle class families save money during tough economic times by installing solar. Because our customers are very price sensitive, today’s decision to increase costs for solar cells and panels will make it harder for American families to access solar.”
Tore Torvund, CEO of REC Silicon, with 500 solar jobs in the United States, commented, “This decision is short-sighted in the extreme and a severe setback for President Obama’s clean energy program with its goal of expanding the use of solar and other renewables. Further, we are very concerned about the increased likelihood that China will retaliate with their own tariffs on polysilicon exports from U.S. producers such as REC Silicon. Triggering a solar trade war is not in the best interests of the U.S. solar industry or its customers.”Tom Gutierrez, CEO of GT Advanced Technologies, with another 500 solar jobs in the United States, stated, “Today’s Department of Commerce decision subsidizes a German-owned company to the tune of an average 31% tax on its competitors and potentially harms U.S.-headquartered companies like GT Advanced Technologies, Dow Chemical, REC Silicon and MEMC. Ultimately, protectionism fosters dependence and high-cost business models, rather than the innovation and agile approaches required for companies to succeed in the global marketplace. Now is the time for the U.S. solar industry to move forward with the development of advanced technologies that create jobs and enhance our energy security—in spite of this new barrier. American solar manufacturing can compete without special protections.”
Jesse Pichel with Jeffries Group Inc., “Environmentalists and the unemployed should be equally disappointed with this decision because lower cost solar panels make solar more competitive with dirty fossil fuels. It should be clear by now that there are more U.S. jobs on the installation side of the solar business than on manufacturing. These cases have a chilling effect on business and it will linger for a long time. It’s unfortunate that SolarWorld has taken this scorched Earth approach and that they are distracting from the growth of U.S. jobs and affordable solar energy.”
Breaking News: Commerce Dept. Chinese Solar Panel Dumping Verdict Is Now In
-
Although the official pronouncement has not been made, we've learned from sources close to the case that the Commerce Departments's preliminary decision on SolarWorld's solar dumping petition against China has been handed down in a case that had the potential to rock the U.S. solar market's status as an emerging growth market.
Here are the preliminary tariff numbers in the anti-dumping piece of the case:
- Suntech: 31.22 percent
- Trina: 31.14 percent
- Everyone else: 31.18 percent
In short, China solar manufacturers have been accused of unfair trade practices in subsidizing solar panel manufacture and selling panels in the U.S. below their cost. Cheaper Chinese solar panel pricing has been a boon for consumers and solar installers, but a competitive challenge for the few crystalline solar manufacturers in the U.S.
SolarWorld accuses Chinese firms of dumping. Others suggest that China has a legitimate cost advantage. For the purpose of AD investigations, dumping occurs when a foreign company sells a product in the United States at less than fair value.
On March 20 of this year, The Department of Commerce's preliminary verdict on unfair subsidies for Chinese solar panels was handed down, along with what amounted to low tariffs for the Countervailing Duties (CVD). The preliminary determination indicated the DOC’s intention to impose a duty of 4.73 percent on U.S. imports from Trina Solar, 2.9 percent from Suntech, and 3.59 percent from all other remaining Chinese manufacturers.
The AD (Anti-Dumping) tariffs will be added to the CVD (Countervailing Duties) tariff.
The CVD tariffs are retroactive. We're waiting for word on the AD duties and whether they are retroactive.
Gordon Brinser, president of Oregon-based SolarWorld Industries America, had this to say: “This is a bellwether case. It underscores the importance of domestic manufacturing to the U.S. economy and provides a clear indication of whether our country will be a global competitor in clean technologies or outsource them to China. The Commerce Department has already determined that the U.S. solar industry has been harmed by China flooding the market with illegally subsidized goods, and we are in need of relief that counts.”
Clyde Prestowitz, president of the Economic Strategy Institute, added this: “The president has said he will insist on a level playing field for U.S. industry and has said that America always wins when the playing field is level. Well, this week is the week when the administration must decide how to respond to China's industrial policy for solar panels. This decision will tell us whether Obama means business or whether all the activity around the creation of a trade enforcement unit is just a mirage.”
An anti-dumping tariff of 30 percent together with the CVD tariff could mean a difference of roughly $0.30 per watt on solar panel prices. Chinese module manufacturers could ship cells and modules through Taiwan at a cost of $0.06 to $0.08 a watt, which might help Taiwanese solar cell makers like Neosolar or Motech.A report from The Brattle Group looked at 50-percent and 100-percent tariff scenarios and found that a 50-percent tariff will effectively shut the majority of Chinese imports out of the U.S. and result in a job loss of 15,000 to 50,000 -- even accounting for production gains in the U.S. The report also considers the impact of Chinese retaliation in importing polysilicon, which could result in a loss of 11,000 jobs in 2012, for a total of up to 60,000 jobs lost by 2014. The author of the report did acknowledge that there would be some gains among U.S.-based module producers -- albeit at higher module prices.
The Center for American Progress (CAP), a left-leaning think-tank, put out a release yesterday that considered if the "U.S. solar market would be much better off if SolarWorld would drop the petition and allow the U.S. government to negotiate a private solution with China." Their analysts' take was that "if U.S. companies drop trade petitions in response to China’s real or implied threats, then capitulation wins out over negotiation -- and capitulation is a losing game. As a result of this proposed balancing exercise, CASE expects that a bilateral negotiation would result in much lower tariffs (compared to what the U.S. Department Commerce might impose) or a price floor, possibly in exchange for Chinese promises to reduce or eliminate the contested subsidies. But such a balanced outcome is highly unlikely, either in the case of the solar industry or in the many other cases in which U.S. companies face unfair Chinese trade competition."CAP concludes that the U.S. cannot capitulate to China’s solar market ambitions.
Hari Chandra Polavarapu of Auriga Research released a research note on the trade case, saying, "We have written extensively on this issue as part of industry debate and our viewpoints largely converge with Gordon Brinser/CASM that the insidious and predatory nature of Chinese state support (via subsidies, mispricing/misallocation of capital) has emasculated global solar PV manufacturing while propping up its large domestic base, which is littered with uncompetitive/unviable companies. Free of rules, China's state-sponsored capitalism in solar PV manifests as a massive employment welfare scheme engaged in asymmetric/unrestricted warfare against overseas competition."Note that these tariffs and decisions are preliminary and can be decreased, refunded or increased in a final review by the Commerce Department.
Green Button Apps: How Innovative Are They?
-
A tsunami of Green Button applications is coming to an iPad, Android phone or computer near you, if you happen to be one of the 30 million or so Americans who has a utility that supports the Green Button initiative.
The Green Button, which was announced last fall, is a feature that allows residential and commercial customers to download detailed energy-use information in a standardized format to better manage electricity consumption and cost.
The U.S. Department of Energy has a total of $100,000 up for grabs for the developers of some of the best apps, which will be judged in the coming weeks by a team of experts.
One of the prizes is a popularity contest based on which app can get the most votes online. There are 55 apps in total, covering everything from assessing rooftop solar PV for your home to small business energy management applications.
There is a range of applications, but there is also an overwhelming amount of overlap. The bulk of the apps allow people to upload their Green Button data to the application and view it in some shiny graph format. A lot of the functionalities, such as getting an alert if your bill or energy use goes over a certain threshold, are increasingly being offered directly through utilities. Also, it is important to note that the apps that are entered into the contest are not the entire suite of apps that leverage Green Button data.
Most apps in the contest allow people to track overall usage, but a handful are focused squarely on vampire power, a term for energy use caused by appliances that are sucking standby power when they’re not in use. RemindMeGreen is an app that sends you a reminder to shut things down totally when they’re not in use. There’s also the literally named Exploring Background Energy Use that does just that.
Looking into appliance energy use is a steady focus of many of the apps, and while it might be interesting to some people, it is vastly overrated. Few of these apps, in their current iteration, seem to link to current rebates through governments and utilities allowing people to replace their energy-sucking appliances. Also, newer appliances just aren't the energy hogs they used to be.
Plus, you’re just not going to turn your refrigerator off at night. Knowing your refrigerator is using twice as much energy as it’s meant to is helpful, but just knowing how much energy your refrigerator is using is less helpful.
Many of the savviest energy management companies have learned the hard way what many of these app developers have missed: few people care about crunching their energy data. People will engage a few times to get a little insight, then they’re not coming back.
A question that could have maybe been asked more often when developing some of the apps is, “Who cares?” Does your mother care about this stuff? The average college kid? Your grandmother? Who pays the electricity bill? Who is this app for? Who has time for this?
Give ‘Em Something They Can Use
Generally speaking, people don’t like their utility or thinking about their utility usage. What people do like, though, is control. And there are some apps in the contest that offer that.
Schneider Electric’s Wiser app allows homeowners to control their Wiser thermostat and smart plugs, along with the ability to see their energy usage. WattCafe brings in weather data and provides detailed information on how to best set your AC to save money.
Other apps also leveraged weather data. One such example is Energy Forecaster, which lets people see how much energy or money they can save for lowering or raising their AC settings. However, the app relies too heavily on kilowatt-hours, a metric which means nothing to the average person.
Then there is a suite of evaluation apps for electric vehicles or rooftop solar. Some other apps integrate tracking and monitoring with helping a person evaluate if an EV or solar is right for his or her lifestyle. While the apps could be helpful, the question remains whether people are searching for an app to evaluate rooftop solar or buying an EV.
Building on the success of Efficiency 2.0, which was recently acquired, there are also a handful of apps that leverage rewards or points for energy saved. And of course, there are various competition apps, or competition is built into some of the more general apps.
In one of the boldest proclamations of the contest, Urbien Energy Referee assures users that “No one says you can’t save the world while destroying your friends’ self-esteem at the same time.” Good to know.
Novel Apps Peek Through
A few apps took a totally different approach. Watt@Home leverages Foursquare to build a profile of when you’re home and away to help you understand vampire power. Obviously it’s focused on the set of people that check in every time they get home, which leaves out a vast swath of the population (read: people over 30.)
VELObill looks to replace the utility bill experience, a worthy goal indeed. It is one of the few apps that clearly states that it will help people find the cost and payback of energy efficiency upgrades and then link you to a local contractor. How the contractors are vetted, however, is not clear from first glance at the app.
Peaktweak allows users to understand their peak usage and see where they can shift use. The app is useful in places where people might be considering peak pricing plans, but those places are still few and far between, so this app is likely ahead of its time.
Melon Power belongs to a group of apps that is zeroing in on small and medium commercial – an untapped market that could benefit the most from Green Button. Melon Power offers Energy Star benchmarking, the only app of its kind in the contest.
But there are other small business apps, including BEST application, eEnergy Manager, Power Drop, Watt Ease and GEMS, the latter of which can help businesses evaluate energy efficiency upgrades and track energy use. The small business apps are some of the most focused on actionable information, rather than just presenting data.
The apps are just the beginning of what will be available for Green Button. What is missing from the competition are the most active players in the space that are already supporting Green Button, including Opower, Tendril, eMeter and Aclara.
Although the applications aren’t incredibly novel, considering what’s already in the marketplace, they show the various ways to skin a cat. There will be more than one way to provide a basic level of insight for the average consumer, but information is truly just one piece of the puzzle. The best apps will make people's lives easier, and maybe save some money at the same time.
Apparently, the energy apps that completely knock our socks off are still off in the future.
Net Energy Metering and the Fight for Solar’s “Backbone” Policy
-
A decision at the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on May 24 could determine the future of distributed generation (DG) and, especially, of rooftop solar in the state.
The decision involves two questions, a legality explicitly before the commission and an implied dispute between the state’s three investor-owned utilities (IOUs) and renewables advocates.
California has a net energy metering (NEM) program that allows owners of distributed generation systems of up to one megawatt in capacity, like small wind turbines, combined heat and power systems and rooftop solar systems, to reduce their electricity bills.
For the kilowatt-hours they send to the grid, system owners’ meters turn backwards as they are credited at the same retail rate they pay for the kilowatt-hours they consume.
When California established its NEM program in 1995, it imposed a 0.1 percent cap but used the ambiguous language of “aggregate customer peak demand” to define what the total megawatts of net metered systems should be divided by to calculate the cap percentage. And that calculation remained undefined, even as the CPUC expanded the cap to today’s 5 percent.
The differing methods used by the IOUs to calculate the bottom term of the cap equation, and the differing percentages thereby obtained, were recently observed by the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) which, among its other activities, acts as a watchdog group on U.S. net metering programs. IREC filed a motion asking the CPUC for clarity. Commission President Michael Peevey issued a proposed decision April 5.
In it, he noted the legislature had “several goals” in creating the NEM Program, “including encouraging substantial private investment in renewable energy resources and stimulating in-state economic growth.”
He pointed out several differences in how the IOUs calculate the percentage of their NEM, but noted one key commonality: PG&E, SCE and SDG&E all use “coincident” peak demand. Renewables industry advocates argue vehemently in favor of “non-coincident” peak demand.
Coincident peak demand is the designated period when all sectors (residential, commercial and industrial) reach their maximum electricity consumption together. It is the time period when the state’s consumption peaks.
Non-coincident peak demand is the sum of the peaking demand in the sectors. Residential peak is typically late afternoon, commercial peak is early mid-afternoon, and industrial peak can be at night. It is a larger number because that sum of peaks at different time periods is greater than the total peak demand at any one time of the day.
The installed DG capacity eligible for NEM is the same. Dividing it by the peak demand number gives the cap percentage. When that number gets to 5 percent, the utilities are theoretically off the hook. So they want that bottom number to be smaller. Renewables advocates want just the opposite. As long as the number doesn’t get to 5 percent, renewables developers have what one called their “backbone” incentive in place.
The question before the CPUC is the intent of the law. Here’s what Peevey wrote: “The phrase 'peak demand' is used to refer to coincident peak demand in multiple occurrences in the Pub. Util. Code. [...] The words 'aggregate customer' would be superfluous if the Legislature had intended 'aggregate customer peak demand' to mean coincident peak demand. [...] Use of the phrase 'aggregate customer peak demand' in § 2827 of the Pub. Util. Code to mean coincident peak demand when the phrase 'peak demand' is used elsewhere in the Pub. Util. Code for that purpose would constitute the use of inconsistent and confusing terminology by the Legislature.”
These observations led Peevey to conclude that “The Legislature did not intend 'aggregate customer peak demand' to mean coincident peak demand. […] It is reasonable to interpret 'aggregate customer peak demand' as meaning the aggregation of individual customer peak demands, i.e., customers’ non-coincident peak demands, [... and] SCE, SDG&E, and PG&E should use the aggregation of customers’ non-coincident peak demands to calculate their caps on NEM participation.”
In comments filed by their attorneys, the IOUs dispute these conclusions. PG&E wrote that “the best choice for the denominator for calculation of the 5 percent cap is the highest peak ever achieved in the utility service territory. […] For PG&E, at least to date, this was 20,883 megawatts reached on July 25, 2006.”
PG&E’s filing also complicates the basic dispute by suggesting a change in the way the top number is calculated, concluding, “PG&E estimates that reversing these two decisions would reduce the amount of generation that can fit under the cap by about 10 percent, although the exact amounts will vary depending on participation in each group. PG&E recognizes that this means more net metering. However, [... it] is the better measure of the impact on the grid.”
By raising the issue of the impact of renewables on the grid, PG&E opened the door to the implicit debate between the IOUs and renewables advocates.
The utilities point out that of the three parts of the standard electricity bill, only one covers the price of electricity generated. The other charges cover the costs of delivering electricity through the transmission and distribution infrastructure. When NEM customers’ bills are reduced by the retail rate, they escape paying their fair share of costs for infrastructure they use as much as non-NEM customers.
And, the utilities say, it shifts costs to other ratepayers.
More on the costs and benefits of NEM in the next installment in this series.
Solexel, Still in Solar Stealth, Scores $25 Million From KP, Westly, et al.
-
Getting later-stage VC funding for a photovoltaic module company with an unproven technology can't be easy. It might barely make any sense to launch a startup in the current solar market, either.
But Solexel, a Milpitas, California-based solar firm still in stealth, just closed on a $25 million C round, according to an SEC filing.
The firm has raised funding from Kleiner Perkins, Technology Partners, DAG Ventures, The Westly Group, EcoFin, Spirox, Oakhill, Univest, and Northgate Capital, closing a $15 million A round in 2007, an undisclosed B round in 2008, and some additional funding from The Westly Group in 2010. The company looks to have more than 100 employees. The CFO, Jonathan Michael, is the former CFO of Solyndra.
The firm also received a $13 million Sunshot grant in its Extreme Balance of System Hardware Cost Reductions section, along with partner Owens Corning, to "develop a building-integrated PV roofing shingle and installation accessories for residential sloped-roof applications."
Solexel received about $3 million in DOE incubator money in late 2008 with this description:
Solexel plans on commercializing a disruptive, 3D, high-efficiency mono-crystalline silicon cell technology, while dramatically reducing manufacturing cost per watt. At the end of this project, Solexel plans to deliver a 17-percent to 19-percent efficient, 156x156 mm2, single-crystal cell that consumes substantially less silicon per watt than conventionally sliced wafers.
In any case, it seems that Solexel falls in the very-thin-silicon, kerfless-wafer school along with Twin Creeks, AstroWatt, SiGen, Crystal Solar and 1366.
Last August, we reported that Solexel, the former Soltaix, was scouting out manufacturing sites in Malaysia's Senai Hi-Tech Park to build a multi-gigawatt-capacity photovoltaic cell manufacturing plant. The company will be in the business of building solar modules, according to a conversation with Ryan Brown, Director of Corporate Development at Solexel, in an otherwise uninformative phone interview.
The firm's LinkedIn blurb says its "approach is based on a disruptive, IP-protected, high-efficiency technology which reduces silicon consumption by a significant margin compared to the current paradigm and substantially eliminates dependency on the silicon feedstock, ingot, and wafer supply chain. Active cell area is made through the use of plentiful, inexpensive silicon gas, as opposed to costly bulk silicon wafers."
Judging by the NREL disclosures and patent information, Solexel is or was also working on an epitaxial lift-off scheme using Porous-Silicon-Process (PSI process) technology licensed from the Max Planck Society, as well as some 3D wafer features, including prisms and a "honeycomb" array.
Here's the patent for three-dimensional solar cells with honeycomb prisms. Here's a patent for manufacturing three-dimensional thin film silicon solar cells. And here's a patent for releasing a thin film substrate from a reusable semiconductor template. Here are links to some other Solexel patents. Most of the patents are invented by Mehrdad Moslehi, the founder and CTO of the firm.
One of Greentech Media's solar analysts was able to determine this about the firm: "They are similar to Crystal Solar in that they are depositing crystalline silicon via the gas phase onto a reusable substrate with a release layer (probably porous silicon)" but Solexel is "trying to save the cost of texturing by growing the light trapping texture into the "wafer" itself by having a substrate with a pyramid-like surface topography."
When Solexel was formed, solar modules were selling in the neighborhood of $4.50 per watt. Today you can buy a reputable brand's module for less than $1.00 per watt.
This is the new solar landscape that Solexel is going to have to play in -- a landscape the firm and its investors might not have imagined when it was first formed.
Smart Grid Market in China, Japan and South Korea to Hit $19 Billion by 2016
-
Asia is quickly becoming a center of global smart grid activity. The cumulative smart grid market in China, Japan and South Korea is currently valued at $8.5 billion, with that number forecasted to increase to $19 billion by 2016, according to GTM Research's latest market report, The Smart Grid in Asia, 2012-2016: Markets, Technologies and Strategies.
At over 180 pages, The Smart Grid in Asia, 2012-2016 is the definitive source for organizations looking to capitalize on Asia's predominant smart grid markets. A clear understanding of the energy scenarios in China, Japan, and South Korea, as well as their respective smart grid technology and deployment trends, will be crucial to achieving meaningful entry in Asia. This report provides a detailed five-year smart grid forecast, domestic vendor taxonomies, and strategic perspectives on how smart grid players should position themselves for success in each market.
"We expect to see the smart grid in Asia move forward at a breakneck pace," said Kamil Bojanczyk, the report's lead author and an analyst-at-large with GTM Research. "Over $45 billion in funding has been earmarked by governments and utilities across China, Japan and South Korea, with the clear majority of those funds and opportunities originating in the Chinese market."
FIGURE: Smart Grid Market Assessment for 2016
Source: The Smart Grid in Asia, 2012-2016 (GTM Research)
Bojanczyk indicated that each country's growth will be characterized by the specific needs of its utilities and existing grids. The vast majority of smart grid investment in China centers around transmission, distribution automation and automatic metering reading (AMR) to support a developing grid and robust renewable energy build-out.
In Japan, the sunsetting of all of the country's nuclear plants has created an acute need for demand response, home energy management and smart meter deployments.
In South Korea, the market is developing quite differently; for the country with the most reliable grid in the world, South Korea and its chaebols are looking to develop next-gen smart grid technologies across all segments, primarily for global export.
In addition, the report identifies the leading strategies for addressing each of Asia's smart grid markets, and analyzes the companies that are currently winning big. This list includes; ABB, Accenture, BPL Global, Echelon, Freescale, GE, Holley Metering, Moxa, RuggedCom, Siemens, State Grid Corporation of China, Wasion, XD Electric, and XJ Group.
For more information on this report and to download a brochure with the complete table of contents, visit http://www.greentechmedia.com/research/report/smart-grid-in-asia-2012-2016.
Gen110, Energy “Concierge” to the Solar Household, Gets Funding From KP
-
Third-party-financed residential solar -- offering homeowners rooftop solar at no cost, then reaping the benefits of tax incentives and economies of scale -- is all the rage these days. California saw third-party solar outpace homeowner-owned solar for the first time last year, with contenders like SolarCity, SunRun, Sungevity, Clean Power Finance, OneRoof Energy, and others vying for the new market.
It appears that cheaper power bills for little or no money down is an attractive offer for many homeowners. But could new approaches open the market up even further?
Gen110, a San Francisco startup with 70 employees, 11 offices in California and about 2,000 customers for its solar-backed energy bill reduction service, says yes -- if you can pick out the right customers. On Thursday, Gen110 announced an investment of undisclosed size from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers to expand its “energy concierge” concept to broader markets, along with unspecified “business development support” from the big green venture capital firm.
It also announced that it will be using SunPower panels, and SunPower's financing program, in projects in California's Central Valley, adding the high-efficiency PV maker to a list of partners that includes solar financing startup SunRun and roofing and solar installer PetersenDean.
The startup works with solar installers, developers and financiers on the customer engagement side of the business, from picking out the right customers to target to getting them to sign up for a long-term relationship to lower their energy bills, CEO Jason Brown said in a Wednesday interview.
“We’re not a solar company; we’re a distributed energy company,” he said. Gen110 has partnered with big third-party solar players, but it’s also looking at future applications of on-site combined heat and power systems, energy storage and other technologies that could provide homeowners their own power, Brown said.
That’s because Gen110’s main relationship with its customers is as an energy services company of sorts, he said. The startup’s core IP resides in analyzing the world of potential customers in a market -- in this case, California -- and picking out those that pay higher bills. Those are typically owners of larger homes, though Brown said there’s a mass market for the service as well, as long as you pay about $120 or more per month for electricity.
From there, Gen110 hits those customers with a marketing and customer service experience that includes home visits to lay out just how a no-cost solar array -- whether via a power purchase agreement, financing plan, lease or another structure -- could reduce the customer’s power bills, not just today but in the future, he said.
These customers represent fresh markets for the solar industry, which has depended so far on targeting so-called “green” adopters, rather than doing market analysis to identify economic needs, Brown said. He wouldn’t provide much more in the way of details on the “big data” analysis that goes into this process, saying that it’s a core part of Gen110’s intellectual property.
Gen110 makes money via revenue-sharing agreements with its partners, Brown said. That could include energy efficiency service providers and others interested in ways to isolate and target customers who stand to see the most economic benefit in being sold a third-party-financed project or system, he noted.
Typical savings add up to about $50,000 over 20 years, he said. But while some customers want to get involved in how much they’re saving, a good deal of them just want to get a cheaper, fixed rate for power and leave the rest in Gen110’s hands, he said. The startup is concentrating on California right now, though Brown said it could expand to other states and regions.
Just how Gen110’s offering will fit into the ecosystem of third-party solar developers remains to be seen. Flagship third-party solar startup SolarCity, which took the top spot for U.S. residential solar market installation in the first nine months of 2011, certainly spends a lot of money targeting and marketing, and so do its competitors. The proof in the concept will no doubt lie in whether or not Gen110 can land more partners like SunPower to use it.
Clean Clothes and Dishes for a Fraction of the Energy
-
Standards -- they’re so boring yet so essential. That is true in every industry, and particularly for energy-intensive products.
Just ten years ago, a clothes washer used double the amount of energy it does today. In the coming years, that figure will again be slashed again, thanks to the new standards released on Wednesday by the U.S. Department of Energy.
The new standards for clothes washers and dishwashers will save consumers an estimated $10 billion in energy and water costs. It has taken years for them to be finalized; it was nearly two years ago that industry groups released final recommendations on the standards. The announcement adds to the nearly 40 different products the Obama administration has updated standards on, along with heavy- and light-duty vehicles.
"Working with consumer, industry and environmental groups to develop common-sense energy-saving appliance standards is an important part of the Obama administration's all-of-the-above approach to American energy and the Energy Department's efforts to reduce energy costs for consumers," DOE Secretary Steven Chu said in a statement.
The standards for clothes washers will go into place in 2015 and dishwasher standards will take effect in 2013. For clothes washers, the new front-loading models will use 15 percent less energy and 35 percent less water, while top-loaders will use one-third less energy and 19 percent less water. The savings will add up to $400 to $600 over the lifetime of the clothes washer, and about $100 for the dishwashers, according to the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.
Some appliances, such as dishwashers, have already become so efficient that updating the standard is important, but there is diminishing savings that can be gained.
“Clothes washers will save households as much as 10,000 gallons of water -- the equivalent of taking 250 baths -- every year under these new standards,” Ed Osann, NRDC senior policy analyst, said in a statement. “That’s good news for consumers, our environment and our economy -- and especially for anybody with a houseful of kids.”
The DOE also made changes to the ratings methods by changing the way the tests are conducted. There is now more of a balance between getting accurate results in the lab and testing the products as they might be used in the real world.
For clothes washers, for instance, they have reduced the average number of loads per year as households have grown smaller over the decades and the machine size has increased, according to Andrew deLaski of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project at the ACEEE.
The new tests will also measure for standby power, which has to be 0.08 watts or lower when the products aren’t in use.
Of course, as appliances grow more efficient, the energy hogs in the house (after heating and cooling, that is) continues to be consumer electronics, like televisions and set-top boxes. “There’s been a lot of progress, but there’s more potential,” said deLaski.
Earlier this year, the ACEEE found that appliance standards across commercial and residential sectors could save $1 trillion by 2035 and more than 200 quads of energy. Standards are coming or are being updated for some of the biggest offenders, like set-top boxes, computers and streetlights.
Even with the advancements, it’s a slow roll. Once the standards are put in place, it takes about 14 years for the products to replace older appliances in the home, although items like computers have a shorter lifespan. In the meantime, utilities are just starting to develop residential demand response programs that use either a carrot or stick to encourage people to shift their load to other times of the day. Advancing standards and increasing control features also mean that there is less need for appliances to talk to the grid, at least in the home. If HVAC systems are smart and connected, and appliances are super-efficient, it becomes less important for the latter to be grid-connected.
The good news for utilities is that updated standards can drive down peak demand in homes and businesses overall, although there is always a new technology on the horizon waiting to be plugged in.
Opower Adds Utility Customers, Tests Smart Thermostats
-
Opower, the energy management startup with the lead in U.S. utility deployments, had just expanded again. On Tuesday, it announced 15 new utility customers, bringing its list to 75 total, and six new expansions with existing customers like NSTAR and Consumers Energy.
Looks as if the Arlington, Va.-based startup with about $64 million in venture capital investment is cementing its lead as the startup to beat in the field of connecting utility customers to their energy use and efficiency options. Last week, it announced it had reached its goal of 1 terawatt-hour of energy saved for its customers.
Competitors include Boulder, Colo.-based Tendril, which has more than 30 utility pilot customers (and a few full-scale rollouts coming this year), and Aclara, whose customer web portal now runs at about 20 utilities across the U.S. Canadian startup Energate partners with Silver Spring Networks and is also reaching millions of homes in Ontario province. Efficiency 2.0, a startup with software to get homeowners to save energy via coupon giveaways and contests, was bought by C3 earlier this month.
All of these contenders are facing a slow-to-develop market for their services, of course. Most homeowners aren’t willing to spend more than $50 or so, if anything at all, to better manage their energy use. Utility pilots are struggling to prove they’re worth their cost in terms of efficiencies and customer payback.
Still, Michael Sachse, vice president of regulatory affairs for Opower, told me that utilities are typically doubling their deployments when they expand, or even better -- National Grid has scaled from 100,000 to 650,000 homes in the New England region, and is adding web services to Opower’s core paper-mail reports, he noted.
Beyond growing its core business, Opower’s been up to a few more things in the past few months. First of all, it’s moving outside the United States. Opower launched a pilot project with U.K. utility First Utility last year, and earlier this month added web services to the list. Sachse told me Opower was working on up to three additional projects outside the United States, though he wouldn’t provide details.
Second, it’s starting to ramp up its intriguing smart thermostat project with Honeywell. The two now have about 1,000 homes testing out Honeywell’s Wi-Fi smart thermostats and cloud platform running Opower’s customer management and data analysis software, Sachse said, though once again, he wouldn’t provide more details.
That’s going to be a closely watched project, since it combines a giant in the thermostat field (and one that’s proven it’s willing to go after the competition with lawsuits) with a startup that’s gained a lot of traction in the business of getting customers to save energy. Opower’s mailed reports have been able to yield 2 percent to 4 percent reductions in energy use across the 35 million or so households it serves.
That figure is respectable, but it’s still a lot lower than what you can get with a smart thermostat that turns off when you leave the house and other such automated energy-saving features. Those can push efficiency gains into the 20 percent range or greater, which is what Opower is aiming at with Honeywell, and other competitors are claiming as well.
As for market share, it’s important to note that while Opower analyzes data from about 35 million households (7.4 million from these new customers), its web portal users number only about 10 million, and “active” users of the mail, email, text and website channels that Opower provides only number about 4.5 million.
There’s a simple reason for this: most people don’t care enough about their energy bills to do anything about them, a fact that’s borne out by competitors as well. Aclara, for example, has about 8 million utility customers with Web portals delivering them Green Button data, but only about 1 million of those customers actively engage with their portals today. Getting more people to sign up for active, online participation with their energy use is the next step for startups and utilities.