7 ms·

Can the US even manufacture panels? I was under the impression our infrastructure had almost completely gone away over the last 10 years with the rise of cheap

Can the US even manufacture panels? I was under the impression our infrastructure had almost completely gone away over the last 10 years with the rise of cheap Chinese panels. And would we even be able to produce them at a competitive price with the tariffs, anyways? Would we even want to? The margins are tiny, it's a commodity product. Highly doubtful. I'm seriously baffled here as to who is supposed to benefit from this. The only possibility is some kind of misguided attempt at forestalling the draw down of fossil fuels, which is inevitable.

post_break 8y ago
First solar in Toledo manufactures solar panels. Almost 100% of their output was sold to Germany because they were subsidizing them.
epistasis 8y ago
Counter to narrative, there is/was some US based panel production capacity, we do still make things here! We don't make as many things as in, say, Germany, but there is manufacturing. The whole reason that these tariffs came in to effect was that some failed manufacturers brought the issue. My understanding is that the manufacturers failed not because it's impossible to do in the US, but simply because of poor management decisions or betting on the wrong technology. The real question is whether the tariffs will be around long enough to incentivize any new manufacturing capacity in the US. They will almost certainly be slapped down by the WTO in a short amount of time, as previous tariffs like this have been. So by the time anybody could make more manufacturing capacity, it seems likely that the tariffs will no longer be around to support the facility. So new facilities must be planned on the basis of profitability without the tariffs. Even in this environment, there is new production being planned. However, the jobs associated with this are dwarfed by the number of jobs related to installation of panels. So while this will certainly be a net negative to the US economy in the short term, without much opportunity to provide positive impact. Basically, just a meaningless PR move by a politician. I don't think it will cause hugely detrimental effects either, it's just stupid.
- gascan 8y ago
  Counter to narrative, there is/was some US based panel production capacity, we do still make things here! True, except those operations are owned by foreign companies, right? Particularly... Germany and China.
  - epistasis 8y ago
    I believe so. That may be due to several rounds of consolidation; it's a tough business and there's a lot of periods of oversupply, which brings down prices.
- drak0n1c 8y ago
  For perspective, the Obama Administration already imposed solar panel tariffs twice and directly propped up Solyndra and US solar investors in general - the ones who now want another tariff bailout. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environment/-us-imposes-steep-tariffs-on-chinese-solar-panels.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environme... http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/261363-us-hits-china-with-solar-tariffs http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/261363-us-hits-...
  - epistasis 8y ago
    I'm not sure how that adds any perspective to my comment, or relates to it. But because it's a common politically driven meme, I'd like to address it. Obama doing something bad does not justify current bad actions. It does not make complaining about the current tariffs hypocritical. I would agree 100% with Jigar Shah's opinion about the prior tariffs: >“Taxing solar trade undermines both the spirit and efficacy of pledges made by the U.S. and China to work together in the battle against global warming,” Jigar Shah, president of the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy, said in a statement. But those prior tariffs were not identical in their form. The Obama tariffs were on a single country, China, for specific actions. The current tariffs are almost worldwide, for no clear reason at all. They benefit few jobs, and the investors that benefit are not from the US. Obama's actions were less than ideal, but at least they made a tiny bit of sense.
- 8y ago
ThomPete 8y ago
Fossil fuels aren't even close to going anywhere. Keep in mind it's not just being used for transportation and heating it's being used for more or less everything. Your computer, your raincoat, your tires, your trashcan, all the products you buy at amazon, in hospital equipment, your furniture etc. It's hard to find anything that is as flexible as fossil fuel, unfortunately. https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/lets-honest-gas-oil-not-going-anywhere-anytime-soon/40104/ https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/lets-honest-gas-oil-not...
- aphextron 8y ago
  >Fossil fuels aren't even close to going anywhere. Completely agreed. We will be flying around in kerosene powered airliners, and burning natural gas for electricity for a long, long time to come. But that doesn't mean it won't draw down to a fraction of what it is today. Personal vehicle gasoline consumption, for example, will be almost nonexistent in 20 years.
  - leereeves 8y ago
    Even if personal vehicle gasoline consumption fell to zero, it would only reduce overall fossil fuel use by about 25%. (And that's assuming it wasn't simply shifted from gasoline ICEs to natural gas power plants.)
  - megaman22 8y ago
    I can't conceive of anything that would reasonably replace diesel for outdoor heavy equipment, either.
    - aphextron 8y ago
      >I can't conceive of anything that would reasonably replace diesel for outdoor heavy equipment, either. Believe it. Heavy equipment is a prime candidate for electrification. Mining companies are already using electric dump trucks in production, and they are incredibly more efficient because of regen braking with the mass differential of unloading at the bottom of a hill [0]. Literally anything that isn't dependent on the energy density of hydrocarbons will be electrified in the next few decades. That leaves basically aircraft and spacecraft as consumers outside the petrochemical and energy industry. [0] http://revolution-green.com/worlds-first-electric-dump-truck-uses-gravity-power-recharge/ http://revolution-green.com/worlds-first-electric-dump-truck...
galieos_ghost 8y ago
Do you really want your power grid dependent on manufacturing by an increasingly hostile and authoritarian country? The tariffs were made based on national security reasons.

post_break 8y ago

First solar in Toledo manufactures solar panels. Almost 100% of their output was sold to Germany because they were subsidizing them.

epistasis 8y ago

Counter to narrative, there is/was some US based panel production capacity, we do still make things here! We don't make as many things as in, say, Germany, but there is manufacturing. The whole reason that these tariffs came in to effect was that some failed manufacturers brought the issue. My understanding is that the manufacturers failed not because it's impossible to do in the US, but simply because of poor management decisions or betting on the wrong technology. The real question is whether the tariffs will be around long enough to incentivize any new manufacturing capacity in the US. They will almost certainly be slapped down by the WTO in a short amount of time, as previous tariffs like this have been. So by the time anybody could make more manufacturing capacity, it seems likely that the tariffs will no longer be around to support the facility. So new facilities must be planned on the basis of profitability without the tariffs. Even in this environment, there is new production being planned. However, the jobs associated with this are dwarfed by the number of jobs related to installation of panels. So while this will certainly be a net negative to the US economy in the short term, without much opportunity to provide positive impact. Basically, just a meaningless PR move by a politician. I don't think it will cause hugely detrimental effects either, it's just stupid.

gascan 8y ago
Counter to narrative, there is/was some US based panel production capacity, we do still make things here! True, except those operations are owned by foreign companies, right? Particularly... Germany and China.
- epistasis 8y ago
  I believe so. That may be due to several rounds of consolidation; it's a tough business and there's a lot of periods of oversupply, which brings down prices.
drak0n1c 8y ago
For perspective, the Obama Administration already imposed solar panel tariffs twice and directly propped up Solyndra and US solar investors in general - the ones who now want another tariff bailout. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environment/-us-imposes-steep-tariffs-on-chinese-solar-panels.html https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environme... http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/261363-us-hits-china-with-solar-tariffs http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/261363-us-hits-...
- epistasis 8y ago
  I'm not sure how that adds any perspective to my comment, or relates to it. But because it's a common politically driven meme, I'd like to address it. Obama doing something bad does not justify current bad actions. It does not make complaining about the current tariffs hypocritical. I would agree 100% with Jigar Shah's opinion about the prior tariffs: >“Taxing solar trade undermines both the spirit and efficacy of pledges made by the U.S. and China to work together in the battle against global warming,” Jigar Shah, president of the Coalition for Affordable Solar Energy, said in a statement. But those prior tariffs were not identical in their form. The Obama tariffs were on a single country, China, for specific actions. The current tariffs are almost worldwide, for no clear reason at all. They benefit few jobs, and the investors that benefit are not from the US. Obama's actions were less than ideal, but at least they made a tiny bit of sense.
8y ago

ThomPete 8y ago

Fossil fuels aren't even close to going anywhere. Keep in mind it's not just being used for transportation and heating it's being used for more or less everything. Your computer, your raincoat, your tires, your trashcan, all the products you buy at amazon, in hospital equipment, your furniture etc. It's hard to find anything that is as flexible as fossil fuel, unfortunately. https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/lets-honest-gas-oil-not-going-anywhere-anytime-soon/40104/ https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/lets-honest-gas-oil-not...

aphextron 8y ago
>Fossil fuels aren't even close to going anywhere. Completely agreed. We will be flying around in kerosene powered airliners, and burning natural gas for electricity for a long, long time to come. But that doesn't mean it won't draw down to a fraction of what it is today. Personal vehicle gasoline consumption, for example, will be almost nonexistent in 20 years.
- leereeves 8y ago
  Even if personal vehicle gasoline consumption fell to zero, it would only reduce overall fossil fuel use by about 25%. (And that's assuming it wasn't simply shifted from gasoline ICEs to natural gas power plants.)
- megaman22 8y ago
  I can't conceive of anything that would reasonably replace diesel for outdoor heavy equipment, either.
  - aphextron 8y ago
    >I can't conceive of anything that would reasonably replace diesel for outdoor heavy equipment, either. Believe it. Heavy equipment is a prime candidate for electrification. Mining companies are already using electric dump trucks in production, and they are incredibly more efficient because of regen braking with the mass differential of unloading at the bottom of a hill [0]. Literally anything that isn't dependent on the energy density of hydrocarbons will be electrified in the next few decades. That leaves basically aircraft and spacecraft as consumers outside the petrochemical and energy industry. [0] http://revolution-green.com/worlds-first-electric-dump-truck-uses-gravity-power-recharge/ http://revolution-green.com/worlds-first-electric-dump-truck...

galieos_ghost 8y ago

Do you really want your power grid dependent on manufacturing by an increasingly hostile and authoritarian country? The tariffs were made based on national security reasons.