Archives

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/AmericanFlag.jpg The price for crystalline silicon panels dropped about 30% over the past 12 months, as financing for solar installations evaporated around the globe. (http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200911060915DOWJONESDJONLINE000459_FORTUNE5.htm)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Solar_Panels_on_home_roof.jpgCNN Money - CNN (http://money.cnn.com) - November 6, 2009

Pretty soon nothing substantial is going to be manufactured in America --Ed.

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- General Electric Co. (GE) plans to shut down its only solar-panel manufacturing facility, as it found that prices for panels fell below production costs, Clean Technology Insight has learned.

"On October 23 we announced the restructuring of our solar business to employees and our intent to close the Newark [Del.] facility," said Milissa Rocker, spokeswoman for the company, in an interview.

GE's production facility is a victim of a rapidly evolving solar market, where older U.S. plants are shutting down, reducing production, or outsourcing abroad, even as some foreign manufacturers, like those from China, plan to open new manufacturing in the U.S.

The decision to shut down production was "mainly due to the challenges in the solar industry, including overcapacity levels that are twice demand and industry pricing that's below the cost of producing the panels," said Rocker.

GE plans to stop manufacturing crystalline silicon panels on Jan. 1, 2010. It will close the plant by the end of June of next year, she said.

The plant currently employs 82 people. All will be laid off, receiving severance and benefits packages, she said.

GE is also "exploring other alternatives" for the plant, she said.

The plant has capacity to produce 34 megawatts of panels annually, according to a document aimed at potential investors that was seen by Clean Technology Insight. Rocker declined to discuss capacity. According to the document, the facility could be expanded to 68 MW.... http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200911060915DOWJONESDJONLINE000459_FORTUNE5.htm

This topic has been bothering me a great deal lately. The developing world (especially China) has us over a barrel when it comes to just about anything manufactured. The Yuan is essentially pegged to the dollar, meaning that China is at a permanent advantage until they float their currency. And why would they do that while a) it works so thoroughly to their advantage and b) the US would be essentially bankrupt if not for the massive borrowing from the Chinese themselves?

What on earth do we do? Confining the problem to the automotive industry for a moment, it's only in the last few years when the domestics have begun to produce vehicles with the kind of quality that can compete with the likes of Japan. As I have said before, if something happened to my Prius today my next stop would be to a Ford dealer. And it's only going to get better when the Fiesta, new Focus, and Chevy Cruise get here. Time will tell if that's just in time or too little to late.

But what about everything else? In general the problem with American goods is not quality. A decade or two ago it didn't make sense to buy Chinese-made goods even at bargain prices because they were essentially disposable. Enter the "offshoring" movement whereby US manufacturers started exporting manufacturing capacity to China. You had better believe that what they learn from us (and other developed nations with the same problem) is applied directly to the design and manufacture of their own goods as well. That's why you can buy cheap, Chinese-made stuff that's actually fairly decent. How long until they don't need us in the loop at all?

The logical conclusion to our present course is not pretty. We get a market full of more cheaper stuff, less and less of the revenue from which stays in the US. Pretty soon we can't even afford the cheap stuff. Eventually there has to be a balance but how long will it take? What kind of shape will we be in when the tide turns back?

What you said is good, and in fact one of the issues inherit in capitalism. If a country wishes to have a 'high' standard of living - then they need cheap goods. To make more people able to live the 'good' life we import tons of cheap goods. The only problem is that eventually (over decades) the 'high' standard of living has moved on to where the cheap come from, because they now have the capital.

You can't buy imported goods forever without seeing your standard of living go down.

Also, I thought this "new economy" that was touted by Obamarama was supposed to be based on green jobs? How can it be if we as a country are losing our green businesses?

Hi Chilimac:

___Moving in a slightly different direction, the std. of living for 95% of the US populace has gone nowhere but down over the last 10 years while we the Government have lowered tax rates on the extremely wealthy to 15% on both capital gains and dividends.

___Additionally, Wall Street has turned into a simple financial legal casino. It has been this for over a century but recently it has taken a serious turn toward the financial engineering area vs. capital raising function it used to be used for with nothing other than people moving money around and taking a cut of the action. All the while the federal deficit has soared beyond belief.

___At one point, I thought the Chinese were holding the Yuan pegged by buying Treasuries to the tune of their trade surplus but recently they have backed off of that buying spree. How does a country hold down its currency with such a ballooning trade surplus and money literally flying into the country from just about everybody?

___When you have these kind of imbalances, is it any wonder a pegged Yuan is killing us on the other side of the coin as well? Unfortunately, it is driving Europe into a mess too. The Brits are sitting on an economy ready to keel over thanks to their strong Pound and Europe’s Euro is going to bury the German’s until they move production to the US, Mexico, Brazil...

___I have been watching to much Charlie Rose the last few months with very smart people discussing how the US is floundering while the US financial players in control continue to fiddle away :(

___Unfortunately, those same players are tied to the halls of Congress and the President and are peddling influence through their lobbyists as if they were playing under the previous Administrations rules.

___We are in for one hell of a ride thanks to the wealthy’s game of the millennia...

___Regarding a strategic interest, a solar company seems pretty darn important but nobody is watching the bigger picture while we play Army in Iraq and Afghanistan.

___And back to our regularly scheduled programming.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I'm beginning to consider a PV system, due to the present low prices. The manufacturing location will be a strong consideration.

So is it time to start a politics forum. :)

Someone sent me this related to auto ... but it has serious domestic manufacturing implications:

"To the US consumers,

IF you are looking for looking for new truly fuel frugal domestically built vehicles that are affordable ... I understand your frustration! I have been waiting more than 25 years for Detroit to “GET IT RIGHT”.

My solution was to used http://www.fueleconomy.gov in “advanced search” to look for older vehicles that met my needs. We ultimately settled for a 1995 Civic DX 5 speed manual rated about 38 mpg combined average (the VX is rated about 50 mpg but hard to find unmodified).

It is really frustrating to know that OEMs with US presence have roughly 20~40 TIMES more vehicles in Europe rated between 50 and 65 mpg(US) combined cycle and about 8X more above 60 mpg(US) combined cycle than WE have in the US rated above 45 mpg(US) combined average, just ONE … the Prius @ 50 mpg. Look for vehicles above 60 mpg(Imperial) here http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/fuelConSearch.asp

So I guess my suggestion is buy “old used” until “THEY” get the “message”! I have 3 Hondas (a 2 door, a 4 door, and a van) with almost 600K miles on them, all over 14 years old.

It occurred to me that … IF … you want to spend (waste?) some time, you can contact your favorite auto manufacturers through their Customer Service channels as well as your elected Congressional officials to express your opinion/need/concern/frustration.

OR … you could contact the Whitehouse ... and request an EXECUTIVE ORDER for a “24 month waiver of import restrictions and tariffs on passenger vehicles rated above 43 mpg(US) combined average [about 51 mpg(Imperial) combined cycle] and pickups/vans rated above 30 mpg(US) combined average [about 36 mpg(Imperial) combined cycle] that meet current EU emissions and safety standards” because OUR collapsing industrial base, OUR sick economy, and oil imports are ALL National Security issues. Further, all sales after the waiver must comply to US standards.

Please understand that these are not necessarily smaller vehicles, some are in the 2 ton range and can tow 2 tons.

This requires NO restrictions of choice including "gas guzzlers", NO CAFE, and NO taxpayer money.

Just maybe Detroit will get the message then! Besides, they already have the product available with left hand drive in Europe. How long would it take Detroit to learn to build these types of vehicles in the US based on consumer purchase rate?

The consumer gets to buy real fuel frugal vehicles that potentially allow an oil consumption savings that could exceed 32 barrels/vehicle year immediately.

The OEMs have the opportunity to temporarily (24 months) test their “best” fuel frugal products, to measure consumer acceptance rate, select their “best configurations” for the US market, start focused accelerated emission/safety abatement development, start-up, and domestic manufacturing based on KNOWN consumer response. This allows low risk skip of multiple sequential development cycles to market, moving $10 (if not $100s) of billions of costs from their ledgers improving profitability. And dealers have NEW innovative product to sell.

If the above 43 mpg(US) auto market segment expands as expected, the first year sales should be between ¼ and 1 million units and the last 12 months of the waiver a doubling could be expected. By the 6th year (2016) it is reasonable to expect roughly 6 million units sold out of about a 15~18 million unit market. The resulting market expansion will provide an opportunity for expansion of domestic production and more US jobs with Detroit’s support.

With a little effort by the domestic OEMs, these US built fuel frugal vehicles should be more readily accepted in foreign markets and therefore may be more easily sold as exports, particularly when exchange rates are favorable.

And if the OEMs do not want to participate, individuals could do the importing.

Maybe IF someone can figure out how to make the “24 month WAIVER” IDEA go “viral” it might JUST WORK!

Just an idea!


If you like this idea ... please pass it on to at least 10 of your friends and we will see what happens."

Hi 44 mpg:

___The individual that wrote that is missing at least 5 key points including FE test cycles and comparison, emissions, safety, who actually builds the cars he or she is describing and the cost of said vehicles thanks to the shrunken greenback.

___I am all for the big FE numbers immediately but American's cannot be trusted to purchase a reasonably performing 30 mpg vehicle when gas is at $3.00 let alone a 40 + mpg diesel so how is bringing over a slew of much smaller and slower but still reasonably performing Superdiesles from Europe going to entice said consumer to purchase said vehicle for 30% more than they are paying for a monstrosity today? The answer is first and foremost the price of gasoline. The second is our joke of a regulation called CAFÉ’ written by the same auto manufacturers who are losing their shirt here in the US but are making wheelbarrows of $'s from their far more fuel efficient overseas operations.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hi 44 mpg:

___The individual that wrote that is missing at least 5 key points including FE test cycles and comparison, emissions, safety, who actually builds the cars he or she is describing and the cost of said vehicles thanks to the shrunken greenback.

It would appear from the references to Detroit, the focus is Chrysler-Fiat, Ford/Volvo, and GM/Opel, particularly with the comments about expanding domestic production. Although, I would guess that such a waiver would allow all OEMs with US presence to participate. In my opinion, Ford/Volvo seem to have the strongest family of fuel frugal EU offerings although Fiat and Opel/GM are not without promise.

I was looking at http://www.autocar.co.uk/SpecsPrices/SpecsAndPrices.aspx and after removing the 15% VAT and 10% Engine Size Excise Tax (less than 2L) and adjusting for current exchange rates, costs don't seem high enough to be objectionable for the import restriction waiver period.

IF I understood the proposal correctly, European emissions and safety standards would apply during the waiver (at least that's the way I interpreted it). BUYER BEWARE?


___I am all for the big FE numbers immediately but American's cannot be trusted to purchase a reasonably performing 30 mpg vehicle when gas is at $3.00 let alone a 40 + mpg diesel so how is bringing over a slew of much smaller and slower but still reasonably performing Superdiesles from Europe going to entice said consumer to purchase said vehicle for 30% more than they are paying for a monstrosity today? The answer is first and foremost the price of gasoline. The second is our joke of a regulation called CAFÉ’ written by the same auto manufacturers who are losing their shirt here in the US but are making wheelbarrows of $'s from their far more fuel efficient overseas operations.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I agree that the AVERAGE US consumer is NOT very automotive savvy. But there are a reasonable number that are adequately informed. I think the idea is to “seed” the market and kick Detroit management in a rational direction with an observable demand demonstrated with real US dollars (not an opinion survey).

Since the waiver would only apply to passenger vehicles above 43 mpg(US), 51 mpg(Imperial), combined and van/pickups above 30 mpg(US), 36 mpg(Imperial), combined, the choices would be relatively high mpg, generally well above ALL US offerings except the current Prius according to EPA.

Would they sell if available, I certainly could not guarantee, but I am guessing there are enough informed consumers that there could be a couple of million sold within a 2 year waiver, enough to measure market reaction, establish demand, and generate some cash flow.

What would the maximum number of high mpg LHD vehicles that the EU could provide in 2 years on short notice of an Executive Order? A reasonable guess might be 1 to 4 million vehicles of types proposed for the waiver?

I fully get the idea of an “untapped US market segment”!

I think the idea is to demonstrate the existence of this market segment and then either Detroit will aggressively respond OR they will give this segment to the “foreign” OEMs as well, as in the past. CAFÉ is ignored but fuel economy and emission get improved.

Paragraph 11? makes a comment about expanding this fuel conserving segment to possibly 6 million units/year of domestically built machines by 2016.

Well, at least that is the way I read it.

Regards and Good Fortune, HS