I would strongly second aquaculture. This article is full of flat-out wrong information.
Evergreen Solar, for example, is not a thin-film solar company. They have a "string ribbon" technology for working w silicon, but it has nothing to do w thin film deposition, nothing at all.
China is definitely not the world's second biggest market - I don't know where that comes from. Spain was probably number two last year - since the Spanish subsidy change, no one knows who's number two this year. It could be the US. But it's not China. They're just getting started with their market.
Also, anyone who knows anything about installations would mention the role an inverter plays, rather than a "control system." (Why not just say "thingamajig"?)
The conversion efficiencies described are way off too. First Solar's thin film panels regularly convert 10% today. Commercially sold silicon panels today are more like 14-15%. Top lab-tested panels are at least in the high 20s, perhaps even more. These numbers make a difference.
Three Things Obama Will Do to Advance Alternative Energy [View article]
I want to see an initiative to put solar on government buildings as much as the next guy, but I think it's premature to say it's "clear" such an initiative will occur. I for one have heard nothing definite on solar from Obama. The only energy "source" he has mentioned as a specific initiative in his transition is efficiency, specifically in schools. If he's made an actual statement that he's going to do something involving solar, I'd appreciate a reference. Otherwise, nothing is "clear" when politics are involved.
"Companies who have domestic production should benefit, including FSLR, STP SPWR, ENER." - Factual error. STP does not have domestic US production (if that's what the vague phrase "domestic production" meant). They have a US sales office, and now a US based installation venture, but no production. They've talked about building a US factory, but haven't yet bc of the credit crisis.
"Wind energy has been proven cheaper than solar and has achieved grid parity to some extent." - This shows a lack of understanding of what "grid parity" means. In California, Hawaii, Italy, and other markets, the annualized cost (over 20-25 years) of installing solar on a large home and the cost of buying grid power at current rates is equivalent. Tiered rates and peak power make a big difference. In places like Alabama, where electricity retails for 7c/kwh, solar's a long way off.
So to compare wind and solar in terms of an abstract "grid parity" is really not meaningful.
3 Reasons To Be Bullish on Solar Stocks - Cowen [View article]
Well, we give the oil companies billions in direct subsidies each year, and I hear they're at least breaking even. And you don't see us spending 500 billion per year, plus 150 billion in supplementals, on a military and navy in order to secure silicon. So at least some of our huge defense spending is an indirect subsidy. You also don't see us placing any value on carbon emissions - how much do you want to bet we're going to keep that policy in place?
Right now solar is a victim of its own success. Once the industry actually has the refined silicon to supply it, not just the semiconductor industry, then grid parity's getting close. The industry talk is generally 12-18 months for the silicon, and three to five years for grid parity pricing. There's your horizon.
Five Top Solar Power Stocks [View article]
Evergreen Solar, for example, is not a thin-film solar company. They have a "string ribbon" technology for working w silicon, but it has nothing to do w thin film deposition, nothing at all.
China is definitely not the world's second biggest market - I don't know where that comes from. Spain was probably number two last year - since the Spanish subsidy change, no one knows who's number two this year. It could be the US. But it's not China. They're just getting started with their market.
Also, anyone who knows anything about installations would mention the role an inverter plays, rather than a "control system." (Why not just say "thingamajig"?)
The conversion efficiencies described are way off too. First Solar's thin film panels regularly convert 10% today. Commercially sold silicon panels today are more like 14-15%. Top lab-tested panels are at least in the high 20s, perhaps even more. These numbers make a difference.
The list goes on...
Three Things Obama Will Do to Advance Alternative Energy [View article]
"Companies who have domestic production should benefit, including FSLR, STP SPWR, ENER." - Factual error. STP does not have domestic US production (if that's what the vague phrase "domestic production" meant). They have a US sales office, and now a US based installation venture, but no production. They've talked about building a US factory, but haven't yet bc of the credit crisis.
"Wind energy has been proven cheaper than solar and has achieved grid parity to some extent." - This shows a lack of understanding of what "grid parity" means. In California, Hawaii, Italy, and other markets, the annualized cost (over 20-25 years) of installing solar on a large home and the cost of buying grid power at current rates is equivalent. Tiered rates and peak power make a big difference. In places like Alabama, where electricity retails for 7c/kwh, solar's a long way off.
So to compare wind and solar in terms of an abstract "grid parity" is really not meaningful.
3 Reasons To Be Bullish on Solar Stocks - Cowen [View article]
Right now solar is a victim of its own success. Once the industry actually has the refined silicon to supply it, not just the semiconductor industry, then grid parity's getting close. The industry talk is generally 12-18 months for the silicon, and three to five years for grid parity pricing. There's your horizon.