For a government that says it’s eager to hugely expand solar capacity and really tackle climate change, the Biden Administration is doing some pretty weird stuff.
After a request from a US solar panel manufacturer, the country’s Department of Commerce is launching an inquiry into whether solar cells and panels produced or assembled in Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam using components from China are circumventing the country’s punitive solar tariffs.
Furthermore, the Department may consider whacking on additional costs after the Biden Administration extended Section 201 tariffs on many solar cells and panels produced in China for another four years. The Section 201 tariffs were originally introduced by former President Trump with devastating effects.
It was only 4 months ago when the Department rejected a similar petition – but even a whiff of more or increased punitive measures were enough to send shockwaves through the industry and increase solar prices.
“Contrary to the Biden Administration’s goal of growing clean energy in the U.S., the Department of Commerce has decided to consider up to 50%-250% tariffs on the solar industry in the United States,” said president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) Abigail Ross Hopper. “This misstep will have a devastating impact on the U.S. solar market at a time when solar prices are climbing, and project delays and cancellations are adding up.”
According to Ms. Ross Hopper, additional tariffs will result in the loss of 70,000 American jobs and solar deployment will plummet by 16 gigawatts annually – around two-thirds of all the solar capacity installed in the USA last year.
The American Clean Power Association was similarly appalled by the decision.
“The Department of Commerce’s decision today signals that the Biden Administration’s talk of supporting solar energy is empty rhetoric,” said ACP CEO Heather Zichal. “If its commitment to a clean energy future is real, the Administration will reverse this decision immediately.”
Solar Prices – Australia Vs. USA
Australia is certainly the lucky country when it comes to home solar power, with costs here far less than in the USA – even taking into account recent price hikes resulting from supply chain issues.
For example, the general price range for a good quality 6.6kW solar system in Australia is currently $5,500 – $9,000 after subsidies; with the upper end of the range a system using the best quality components installed by a particularly fastidious professional.
In the USA, the average price of a slightly smaller 6kW system after tax credits is USD $12,579 – a tad higher than it was when we checked in September last year. In Australian dollars, that works out to around $16,750 at current exchange rates.
There was an attempt in Australia some years ago to whack extra tariffs on Chinese solar panels that thankfully that didn’t come to pass. If it had, Australia would not be the solar energy powerhouse it is today and far fewer Australian households would be slashing their electricity costs with the bill-busting technology and achieving the rapid payback on PV currently enjoyed.
About Michael Bloch
RSS - Posts
That America is doing yet more weird stuff should surprise nobody at all. I am however surprised to hear that Chinese solar materials are still being tariffed. My understanding (apparently mistaken) is that Biden had dropped all taxes on Chinese imports and (unofficially) supported the exporting of US jobs – basically functioning as an anti-Trump.
George Kaplan
This might help…
President Trump seemed to have no clue at all that he was starting a trade war when he decided to slap $50 billion worth of additional tariffs upon Chinese goods imported into the USA in 2018.
You can find a more detailed explanation of the above along with an explanation of why Biden is keeping the duties on Chinese imports in place at the present time at on this CNN webpage here:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/26/politics/china-tariffs-biden-policy/index.html
It’s worth noting from the article that: “US importers have paid nearly $123 billion to cover the cost of the China tariffs since 2018, according to US Customs and Border Protection.”
That extra cost to USA importers EITHER gets reflected in retail prices ultimately charged to USA consumers OR it doesn’t.
If the price to end consumers rises then, at its worst, smaller importers start going out of business, freight truck drivers have less goods to transport which will make some of their activities uneconomic, storage warehouses have empty storage space and so forth.
It can take some months before those effects filter through, but ultimately it leads to job losses scattered across the whole supply chain.
A common argument against that occurring is “Oh well, we will just start making the same stuff ourselves, that will create even more jobs to offset that”.
That line of thinking. if carried to an extreme by its political leaders ultimately leads a country’s economy to the situation where it doesn’t export or import anything at all,
Rather, it sets out to become completely self-sufficient in everything.
Being self-sufficient in everything may well be an admirable aim for an individual, but it does not mean total self-sufficiency is suitable for an entire nation with even a modest population. That’s due in part to the fact that any population will have a diverse range of age-groups and needs.
We have some outstanding examples of the ultimate end-result of adopting such policies in North Korea and the collapse of communism in eastern and central European countries which began in December 1989.
see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Berlin_Wall#International_opposition
I note too, your use of the word “anti-Trump”
As we all know, President Trump has a public history of claiming that the US electoral system is rigged, that true patriots should defend America’s democratic values, and he is the only leader capable of ‘Making America Great Again”.
That public persona does seem to wildly conflict with other more private personae he adopts at various times.
According to another CNN article, President Trump has yet again sought the assistance of President Putin. To quote from the news item
“In a new interview published Tuesday, former President Donald Trump called on Russian President Vladimir Putin to release any damaging information he has about the Biden family, in a brazen request for domestic political assistance from America’s top adversary.”
You can watch the video here:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/31/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-hunter-biden/index.html
To find an ex-President of the USA requesting help from some-one who is currently actively butchering unarmed civilians and children and who represents the total opposite of Western democratic values is mind-boggling.
There is currently an ongoing Department of Justice investigation going on concerning Hunter Biden, a son of the current POTUS, who back in 2018 was doing some consulting work in the Ukraine and being paid $50,000 a month.
CNN reported recently
“Hunter Biden’s business dealings have long been a line of political attack for Republicans, often spearheaded by Rudy Giuliani on behalf of Trump. They sought to sully President Biden with the taint of his son’s foreign business dealings and personal problems.
President Biden, who is not implicated in the federal investigation into his son’s activities, has denied having anything to do with his son’s business and praised his son’s attempts to deal with his addiction.”
You’ll find a detailed article about Hunter Biden and the problems caused by his drug addiction and other personal problems here:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/hunter-biden-federal-investigation-heats-up/index.html
It’s worth noting that Hunter Biden is 52 years old, and his mother and younger sister were killed in a motor vehicle accident in December 1972 when he was 2 years old. Both he and his older brother (aged 3) were injured but survived, Hunter suffered a skull fracture and other head injuries.
His father, President Joe Biden remarried in 1977
There’s no evidence at all of any wrong-doing by President Biden.
:
Did Trump start a trade war, or did he simply change the nature of a pre-existing war?
Self-sufficiency in absolutely everything is improbable, but reliance for almost everything is worse. Over 100 years ago it was widely accepted that Australia should not open the door to being flooded by cheap Chinese crap which would see local craftsmen and workers out of work, industry destroyed, and quality crash. Today cheap Chinese crap is championed by companies making massive profits, there are (practically) no local craftsmen and workers, there is no industry, and quality is based on Chinese crap. What’s changed? (Apologies it’s too long ago so I can’t give you the specific page\issue number for the anti-China import article, nor am I certain if a digital copy is available).
As regards anti-Trump, I think you’ve read the wrong meaning of anti-Trump into things. While it can mean opposed to or against e.g. Biden is opposed to Trump, I actually meant it in the sense of being opposite e.g. negative v positive numbers, a mirror image of sorts.
If you’re really interested in Hunter and his father though you might want to read up on the laptop scandal e.g. https://nypost.com/2022/03/17/hunter-bidens-infamous-laptop-confirmed-in-new-york-times-report/ Note it’s only taken the MSM 2 years to go from claiming it’s Russian disinformation to admitting maybe it kinda sorta actually is real – and this admission is not MSM wide. Of course the laptop with its trove of emails, text messages, financial documents etc has long since disappeared after seizure by the FBI. Somewhat similar to the diary of Biden’s daughter which came into Project Veritas’ possession, though at least the FBI\DoJ doesn’t seem to have engaged in an unlawful investigation of the repair shop owner who possessed said laptop.
No evidence of wrongdoing, or no conviction for criminal misconduct? There’s a gaping chasm between the two things!
You need to brush up on your history. One hundred years ago China only had superficial industrialization and its main exports were animals and animal products. Textiles only reached 10% of exports in 1940. Here’s a source:
https://spot.colorado.edu/~shiue/Keller_Li_Shiue.pdf
Ronald, I’m paraphrasing a peer-reviewed state government scientific journal from around 1900 – not sure if it was peer reviewed at that time. I was partially involved with the department’s digitisation effort, hence why I know about it, but I’ve no clue where that ended up so can’t directly quote or provide a link to the relevant copy\passage in question.
Note I never claimed China had had an Industrial Revolution – mass labour can do similar things to low labour mechanised systems. Remember China was highly self sufficient and inward focused – similar to North Korea in many ways, but happy to export silk, porcelain, tea etc whilst draining the West of its gold and silver. Come to think of it, in some ways things really haven’t changed!