Suntech Power Plans to Start U.S. Panel Production in Early 2010 12 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
By Ucilia Wang
Suntech Power (STP) plans to announce in a few weeks the site of its first factory in the United States, and expects to start production in the first quarter of 2010, said Roger Efird, president of North American sales for Suntech Thursday.
The Chinese company has narrowed a list of potential sites to one on the East Coast and three on the West Coast, said Efird in an interview after his talk at the Edison Electric Institute's annual convention in San Francisco.
The final selection will depend largely on the economic incentives from state and local governments that are wooing Suntech.
"We are asking for the best economic packages now," Efird said. "Then we will narrow the list down to two next week."
For Suntech's part, the decision will depend on labor rates and other costs, as well as the education of the local workforce and the proximity of the factory to target markets, Efird said.
The factory would assemble solar cells produced at Suntech's manufacturing complex in China, he added. Solar cells are lighter to ship from China than complete solar panels, which are heavy because of the use of glass and aluminum.
The U.S. factory would have a production capacity of 100 megawatts per year and would employ about 300 people.
Suntech started talking about setting up a factory in the United States three years ago.
It decided to make that happen soon primarily because of a political push to use American-made products, Efird said. Last month, the company announced it would select a production site within six months.
"In this time of downturn in the economy, the politically correct thing to do, if you are a buyer, is to promote buying American," he said during his talk.
Suntech will follow several other European and Japanese solar companies that have set up manufacturing centers in the United States over the past year.
Germany-based Schott Solar recently opened a solar panel factory in New Mexico (see Scott Opens New Factory, Considers Biz Beyond Manufacturing). SolarWorld, also headquartered in Germany, opened a 150-megawatt solar cell factory in Oregon last fall (see Q&A: Will U.S. Become a Solar World?).
Sanyo (SANYY.PK) from Japan announced last October that it would build a silicon ingot and wafer processing plant in Oregon.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
TraderMark
-
2
Don Dion
-
3
Cliff Wachtel
-
4
Mike Havrilla
-
5
James Quinn
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 12 comments:
In the South-West of the US peak power is needed for cooling just when the solar output is highest, and any discrepancy in peak load needs a few hours storage at most.
In Germany on a cold winter's day in contrast you receive a fraction of the power you get in the summer, just when it is needed most as Germany uses power much more for heating than cooling.
I particularly like Nanosolar's idea for fairly small, 2-10MW installations on the edge of small towns:
nextbigfuture.com/2008...
You avoid all the expense and hassle of roof-top residential installation, and don't need to alter the voltage of the power or ship it long distances.
For use in residential and commercial heating and cooling air source heat pumps have now matured into a viable technology, using CO2 instead of previous chemicals, and able to operate to very low temperatures.
On Jun 26 06:36 AM Davewmart wrote:
"I particularly like Nanosolar's idea for fairly small, 2-10MW installations on the edge of small towns"
PV is not a replacement for oil, therefore another pop in oil does not guarantee PV will rise. Shocking how many people make this elementary mistake.
As to your statement PV power is almost cheaper than grid power. If you had ~really~ followed this sector for "40 years" you'd know that milestone was passed over 6 months ago. See the FSLR Boulder City NV 10MW project that came online Dec '08.
On Jun 25 04:55 PM Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:
The gap now is only a few cents per kilowatt, and that can easily be bridged with government subsidies. All it might take is another rise in crude prices, something you can count on.
I am looking mostly at US solar companies, along with strong China players like STP and LDK.
One question why SPWRB over SPWRA?
Nanosolar: You are correct. I referred specifically to their ideas on deployment, not the company itself.
Any solar company could deploy their units in this manner.
Zenfar:
More silicon is now sold for the solar industry than the computer industry.
A lot of new foundries are coming on-stream, and demand is currently low.
There is also a lot of work going on on using less pure silicon, which greatly reduces cost:
pesn.com/2007/05/02/95.../
Then you would have had enough sense to know that FSLR is facing real problems and would not have mentioned them here.
The "line" (grid parity) has already been crossed in many states for the "right" buildings/energy consumers.
On Jun 25 04:55 PM Mad Hedge Fund Trader wrote:
> Good name. I have been covering the solar industry for nearly 40
> years now, and for most of this time it has only been economic in
> space stations. But times are changing. If you look carefully at
> your electric bill and calculate the cost per kilowatt hours each
> month as I do, you will notice that the price has been going up for
> the last ten years. This is partly because of ineptly handled deregulation,
> but also because our utility, Pacific Gas & Electric (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> is mandated by state law to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Last
> year, the collapse of the economy and crude prices drove the cost
> of thin film solar’s primary raw material, polysilicon, down dramatically.
> The cost curve is falling, the demand curve is rising, and it is
> only a matter of time before they cross. The gap now is only a few
> cents per kilowatt, and that can easily be bridged with government
> subsidies. This industry is on the verge of becoming truly profitable.
> All it might take is another rise in crude prices, something you
> can count on. Watch behemoth First solar (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> position itself to cash in, as well as Suntech Power (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> and SunPower (seekingalpha.com/symbo...). But also watch
> the volatility, as this is definitely an “E” ticket ride.
There is NO "there" there.
On Jun 26 10:08 AM Davewmart wrote:
> Steve Pluvia
> Nanosolar: You are correct. I referred specifically to their ideas
> on deployment, not the company itself.
> Any solar company could deploy their units in this manner.
> Zenfar:
> More silicon is now sold for the solar industry than the computer
> industry.
> A lot of new foundries are coming on-stream, and demand is currently
> low.
> There is also a lot of work going on on using less pure silicon,
> which greatly reduces cost:
> pesn.com/2007/05/02/95.../
fyi-cooler temps actually increase efficiency for most solar PV--clouds are the problem NOT temps.
On Jun 26 06:36 AM Davewmart wrote:
> Solar power is now moving from where it is a truly lousy way of generating
> power, such as Germany in the winter, and into areas where it can
> actually provide a benefit.
> In the South-West of the US peak power is needed for cooling just
> when the solar output is highest, and any discrepancy in peak load
> needs a few hours storage at most.
> In Germany on a cold winter's day in contrast you receive a fraction
> of the power you get in the summer, just when it is needed most as
> Germany uses power much more for heating than cooling.
> I particularly like Nanosolar's idea for fairly small, 2-10MW installations
> on the edge of small towns:
> nextbigfuture.com/2008...
>
> You avoid all the expense and hassle of roof-top residential installation,
> and don't need to alter the voltage of the power or ship it long
> distances.
> For use in residential and commercial heating and cooling air source
> heat pumps have now matured into a viable technology, using CO2 instead
> of previous chemicals, and able to operate to very low temperatures.
btw--that money is GONE.
On Jun 26 08:41 AM Steve Pluvia wrote:
> Nanosolar? Better you like their ideas than their vapor ware. They
> reported commencing commercial production Dec '07 and have yet to
> ship commercial volume.
>
> "I particularly like Nanosolar's idea for fairly small, 2-10MW installations
> on the edge of small towns"
On Jun 26 10:08 AM Davewmart wrote:
> Steve Pluvia
> Nanosolar: You are correct. I referred specifically to their ideas
> on deployment, not the company itself.
> Any solar company could deploy their units in this manner.
> Zenfar:
> More silicon is now sold for the solar industry than the computer
> industry.
> A lot of new foundries are coming on-stream, and demand is currently
> low.
> There is also a lot of work going on on using less pure silicon,
> which greatly reduces cost:
> pesn.com/2007/05/02/95.../
'Referencing Nanosolar's "idea" is better then referencing its tech or lack thereof.
fyi-cooler temps actually increase efficiency for most solar PV--clouds are the problem NOT temps.,
Which is why I explicitly stated that I was referencing their installation pattern of ground based small plants.
As for 'clouds are the problem, not temps'
clouds are indeed part of the problem in Germany and the UK, where solar incidence at comparable latitudes is much reduced compared to many sites in the US.
You appear to have completely misconstrued my argument on the relative inefficiency of solar PV in Germany.
It is not that PV becomes less efficient at low temps, but that low temperatures in the winter mean that that is when power is most needed, in Germany and in the UK being much higher than in the summer, as air conditioning is relatively rare and anyway on average has a lot less of a temperature differential to cope with than in Phoenix or Dubai.
Less hours of weaker sunshine in the winter means that you have negligible amounts of power being generated when it is most needed.
This is disguised for the individual because they get guaranteed feed-in tariffs which mean that in the summer they can sell to the grid at a handsome price electricity which is not needed, and draw it in the winter when the generators are flat out.
The only reason that the effects on the grid are not severe is because of the low total amounts of power.
As a capital investment though it is a complete waste of money, and negatively effects the economics of other generating equipment as they can't use some equipment in the summer but must maintain it for use during the winter.
These remarks do not apply with the same force to residential solar thermal, but although it costs far less still turns out most heat when it is least needed.
Diurnal variation can be engineered around, with back-up etc, but annular variation means that you have a huge hole for a period of months which cannot be engineered around at any remotely affordable cost.
In Phoenix though, demand coincides nicely with peak availability of solar power.
Which is another way of saying that solar is approaching cost effectiveness when your main problem is cooling in the summer, not heating in the winter.