After the United States Commerce Department last week announced
preliminary tariffs of more than 31 percent against solar panel
manufacturers in China for dumping their products on American shores,
the debate over the benefits and costs of the move for U.I found them
to have sharp edges where the injectionmoldes
came together while production.S. industries and the fight against
global warming has been heating up more than the noon sun. Clearing up
one debating point could help those on both side of the issue assess
the impact of the decision: the U.S. solar trade balance (or lack
thereof) with China.
As background, Commerce already levied a
preliminary, much smaller tariff against China in March for subsidizing
its solar industry to the competitive disadvantage of U.S. solar
manufacturers. The dumping charge is related in that Chinese companies
were found to be selling panels at well below actual cost, imperiling
U.S. companies' ability to sell panels. Those in favor of the tariffs
say that imposing them will assure that the U.Industrialisierung des werkzeugbaus.S.,
which once was a world leader in solar panel production, will have a
foothold in what is sure to be an important industry in the future.
Also, if China is allowed to dominate the market, they could suddenly
raise prices after driving out competitors.Another Chance to buymosaic
(MOS) 0 comments. Those against the tariffs recognize the need for
more widespread use of solar to mitigate global warming and acknowledge
that cheap panels help this happen. They also herald the $8 billion
solar installation industry.
Some opponents of the tariffs cite
a 2011 study that found the U.S. solar trade balance is positive.
According to research by the Solar Energy Industries Association,Posts
with Hospital rtls
on IT Solutions blog covering Technology in the Classroom, the U.S.
was found to have a $1.88 billion surplus in solar goods in 2010. The
U.S. was a net exporter to China by $240 million. While China may
supply most of the panels, the argument goes, the U.S. supplies most of
the polysilicon needed for the photovoltaic (PV) cells for the panels.
So we shouldn't be worrying about the Chinese subsidizing panel-makers
or those companies selling at unrealistic prices.
In an
interview on Tuesday with the impeccable Tom Ashbrook on NPR's On
Point, Ned Harvey of the Rocky Mountain Institute, a nonprofit
foundation for sustainability, and Clyde Prestowitz, the founder and
president of the Economic Strategy Institute, danced around -- or
perhaps tripped over -- this argument.
Recently the Coalition
for American Solar Manufacturing came out with a report showing that in
2011 the nearly $2 billion solar trade surplus turned into a deficit.
Specifically, the trade balance with China went from a $240 million
surplus to a $1.6 billion deficit.
While one should always be
skeptical of an analysis by a trade group that could be negatively
impacted by continued cheap solar panels from China, the concerns
echoed remarks by Oregon Senator Ron Wyden. Major environmental blog
sites accept the findings.
Without getting into the trenches of
the debate, the existence of the solar trade deficit would seem to
support those who fret about China's dominance of the solar industry,
for the U.S. is playing an increasingly smaller role in producing the
parts for panels. All of this could change, however, if Chinese
companies move plants to the U.S. or other countries to manufacture
panels to avoid tariffs. And all of that could be a moot point if panel
costs rise too much to entice Americans to retrofit their homes, as
those against the tariffs claim.UK chickencoop
Specialist. Let the debate blaze on, but know that the real winners in
solar in the U.S. are the installers, not the supply chain or
manufacturers.
没有评论:
发表评论