Fred W

The Solar Energy Market Has Bottomed

What will residential customers be paying per kWh in 10 years?
Answer: You don't know...and neither does the consumer. (Currently: MA $0.19/kWh and HI rates are over $0.30/kWh)
When you install solar on a house (on a net metered basis) you know how much your next 25 years of solar provided kWhs will cost and you can reasonably predict the percentage of your home's total demand that will have to be bought from the utility (appreciated by those who "budget")
As you seem very needy and ill equipped to deal with opinions that differ from your own----Is my explanation simply enough for you to grasp?


On Dec 04 07:10 AM Davewmart wrote:

> Solar is strictly a play on subsidies.
> Here are the costs now, falls in price notwithstanding - this is
> from a source which advocates solar:
> www.solarbuzz.com/Sola...
>
> At 35 cents/kwh for residential in the bet areas of the US and even
> without taking into account issues like solar intermittency etc this
> is not a business but a Government program.
> Good job the Government has plenty of money!

Solar Sector Headed for Price War

The price war is already underway...FSLR will not be the "last man standing". Raw Si prices are just too low and going lower while CdTe are not "easily" mined/found.
ECD actually has a product that is well suited for A&E firms to integrate into their designs...small market currently but with LEED 3.0 valuing solar's contribution so highly within the point structure that ECD will have a relevant business line in the near future.

Top Solar Investing Hedge Fund List

Most investors in solar manufacturers are going to get smoked. The channel to market/installation is where the $/margins have gone--some channels are significantly better than others...the good ones will be bought as manufacturers continue to "verticalize"...premium prices will be paid.
Most M&A for manufacturers will be at very small premiums--common shareholders will be left with very little as the "premium" will be built into management's compensation only...ESLR being bought by FSLR in the next 6 months--quote me on that (many reasons for this to occur) as it should be part of FSLR's long term plan. A lot of debt at ESLR so buyout should be around $2.55/share-- if my tea leaves are accurate.

fyi-I own about 2000 shares of ESLR (under $1.70)
(0 FSLR shares).

Energy Conversion Devices Buys a Solar Integrator

I can't defend ECD as a company, but I can say that the views expressed by the author and the comments about the Uni-Solar product are very one sided...shows the limited knowledge of roofing, solar and tax law.
There is a "sweet spot" for the product--too bad it is in the blind spot of soooo many.

The Sun Is Shining on Solar Stocks

Yeah, Eric really is ahead of the curve! LOL
Savitz you are playing the game of business as usual for the "analyst"--Same song coming out of the IB analysts too...soooo helpful.


On Jun 02 09:30 AM Alphameister wrote:

> Nice to get a bullish article from Eric after these stocks have tripled
> and quadrupled. I seem to recall a stream of bearish articles when
> the stocks were making their lows.

Top Public Pension Funds Shun Solar Stocks

"Pension" funds should stay clear of speculative investments (this includes almost all solar manufacturers).

Solar Stocks Look Ripe

Chris,
SPWR does have the most efficient commercialized product on the market--production costs are simply too high--overhead issues: too many people at SPWR don't add any value, just names w/good looking CVs.
I am surprised that you failed to mention the demise of MMA's solar business--one of the more important solar financing "events" in the last few months...a year ago it was being shopped for well over $100M...sold a couple of weeks ago for less than $20M--JUST the worst case residual value of the equipment at Nellis AFB is worth over $40M.
Lastly, Evergreen was a company with a valuable differentiation point due to its more efficient use of silicon during manufacturing--the value of that advantage has been greatly reduced in proportion to the Si spot price...roughly 1/4 what is was this time last year. EVER management are bumblers that will continue to lose money on each sale with the hopes of "making it up in volume". MA's state level supports for local production are the only things that will keep EVER alive.

Five Top Solar Power Stocks

Here are those ROCKS feeling? They were all good throws as your article is riddled with misinformation and unreasoned conclusions.
Author: you are out of your depth and in need of a few years in the industry to figure out your basic missteps.


On Apr 05 08:54 AM Mr Gadget wrote:

> aquaculture: Yes solar is a growth industry. But this article is
> full of misrepresentation, halftruths, contradictions and mistakes.
>
>
> OK, so how about a reasoned responce that points these "problems'
> out for my edification. Not just throwing rocks.

Economic and Technical Factors Create Winners and Losers in the Solar Cell Market

The $3/watt subsidy is worth about 70% of the fully installed cost of a system in China...NOT the "cost of a solar panel".
Lastly, true BIPV is an O&M nightmare in the making--Uni-Solar's product is the exception.

" * China’s stimulus package announced recently is to pay $3 per watt for solar installations, which equated to about 60% of the cost of a solar panel, with priority given for building integrated photovoltaic panels (BIPV)."

Economic and Technical Factors Create Winners and Losers in the Solar Cell Market

billp37,
NO, kWh is not more appropriate...that is production--the author is referring to capacity...DC nameplate ratings are in watts.


On Mar 31 08:47 AM billp37 wrote:

> " [w]e may see prices drop from $1.85 per watt ..."
>
> kWh, not peak, may be a more appropriate measure?
>
> We're a bit suspicious that PNM claim that laws of thermodynamics
> do not apply to solar electricity generation.
>
> See "N/A" in Heat Rate column in FOILs 6 and 7.
> home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/pnmelectric...
>
> So we're going to try to do some invesigation.
>
> home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/whitman59/w...
>

Stimulus Package Stimulates Chinese Solar Sector

Posted Jan 22, 2009:
Not All Solar Stocks Are Created Equal [View article]
The article fails to mention the support that Suntech is/will receive from the Chinese government. Additionally, the pricing of solar modules will continue to decline and BOS and installation labor wil remain 1/5th of the cost of a U.S. based project...this will open up the largest market in the world to PV (China)--the solar thermal installation numbers in China are astounding so the market is there when the price is "right".
The solar industry in China is perceived as a job engine--the ruling party will not abandon its efforts to ensure economic stability for without it, the party's days in power would be numbered--Suntech will benefit and ultimately First Solar will see much greater competition on price.
Jan 22 10:23 am

On Mar 27 09:35 AM Fred W wrote:

> The support for domestic projects was inevitable...I have written
> about this as the ultimate backstop for Chinese manufacturers--US
> producers beware. China is setting it up so its producers will be
> able to sell modules at below production costs but still make "profits"
> on export incentives that ultimately support economic and political
> stability in China.

Stimulus Package Stimulates Chinese Solar Sector

The support for domestic projects was inevitable...I have written about this as the ultimate backstop for Chinese manufacturers--US producers beware. China is setting it up so its producers will be able to sell modules at below production costs but still make "profits" on export incentives that ultimately support economic and political stability in China.

Alternative Energy's Sunny Outlook

The fact that Geothermal now can claim a 30% ITC rather than a 10 year PTC is a game changing event for Ormat and other gt firms. The drilling boom is coming as soon.


On Mar 09 12:36 PM John Petersen wrote:

> In a recent essay on McKinsey & Company's What Matters website,
> Secretary Chu wrote:
>
> “It’s important to understand where we are now. Existing energy technologies
> won’t provide the scale or cost efficiency required to meet the world’s
> energy and climate challenges. Corn ethanol is not a sustainable
> or scalable solution. Solar energy generated from existing technologies
> remains much more expensive than energy from fossil fuels. While
> wind energy is becoming economically competitive and could account
> for 10 to 15 percent of the electricity generated in the United States
> by the year 2030 (up from less than 1 percent now, according to the
> US Energy Information Administration), it is an intermittent energy
> source. Better long-distance electricity transmission systems and
> cost-effective energy storage methods are needed before we can rely
> on such a source to supply roughly 25 percent or more of base-load
> electricity generation (the minimum amount of electrical power that
> must be made available). Geothermal energy, however, can be produced
> on demand. A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
> report suggests that with the right R&D investments, it could
> supply 10 percent of US power needs by 2050 (up from about 0.5 percent
> now).”
>
> So at least the view from the Potomac is pretty clear.
>
> On balance, I would read Secretary Chu's remarks a bullish for geothermal
> energy, thermal solar and storage.

After a Beating, Solar Energy Is Ready to Shine

Solar is back to the "sleeping giant" position. As the installed price falls, the market grows--at certain price points, in certain states, the grow will be exponential.
However, expect more black-eyes in the near term for solar as some of the leading PPA providers will be exposed for what they are: economic disasters, that were looking to go public before the "music stopped"--it stopped in September 2008 and the exits are now blocked...there is no escape for them.
Dig around a little...quite of few RFP bids (PPA offers) are being subpoenaed and what comes out of the investigations will not be pretty.

Alternative Energy Industry Outlook

Toxicity has nothing to do with First Solar's lack of use for residential applications. Its low efficiency does not lend itself well to the limited space of residential applications (you need much more unshaded space to produce the same amount of electricity that a Sunpower module (16-20%efficiency) or other high efficiency modules require. Also FSLR's cost advantage is much greater for large scale projects due to the fact that the solar modules are a larger portion of the cost of the system--for residential systems labor and interconnection work are much greater cost components.
There are more reasons but I don't have time to go into them here.


On Jan 15 07:57 PM dan-d wrote:

> Tc-1, I looked at First Solar and was going to buy it but the cadmium
> telleride utilized in their pvp manufacturing put me off. The panels
> did not gain a foothold in europe because of the strict environmental
> and human toxicity rules. By your statements it sounds as though
> the toxicity problem has been resolved. Is this so?? I thought
> that this toxicity was one of the reason First Solar has not been
> used in residential area up until ? now.
> I know haz-mat did not like them and there were concerns over disposal
> at end of usage have these added costs and enviro concerns been resolved
> as well for the first several years of the products production.

>
> Thanks for providing answere if possible to my concerns.