TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

U.S. Imposes Steep Tariffs on Chinese Solar Panels

56 pointsby ytNumbersover 10 years ago

12 comments

revelationover 10 years ago
The cynic in me would probably ascribe actions to tax Chinese solar panels as small steps towards banning and slowing the adaption of clean energy generation.<p>Because the alternative is just too stupid to consider. Making solar panels as they exist today is 1) a commodity business and 2) very, very, very simple. Surely no one would be stupid enough to believe that US manufacturing could be cost-competitive with China in manufacturing a product where the sole complexity lies in sourcing high purity silicon? There aren&#x27;t even any manufacturing jobs involved here, it&#x27;s probably 100% automated.<p>Some argue that China is subsidizing chinese solar panel manufacturers and thereby distorting the market. But then that&#x27;s not even necessary, as explained nobody would be insanse enough to try and rival them by manufacturing a commodity in the US when you would have to ship the silicon over from China first.<p>So the effect chinese solar subsidies are having is making solar panels extremely cheap for Americans, transforming the way the US generates energy. They&#x27;re financing our switch to clean energy.
评论 #8777374 未加载
评论 #8777676 未加载
评论 #8777240 未加载
justinsbover 10 years ago
Seems like a biased source (author is &quot;talking his book&quot;). Better sources:<p><a href="http://blogs.barrons.com/asiastocks/2014/12/18/china-solar-limited-impact-from-us-ruling-analysts-say/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blogs.barrons.com&#x2F;asiastocks&#x2F;2014&#x2F;12&#x2F;18&#x2F;china-solar-l...</a> &quot;...the new ruling will have limited impact as Chinese solar companies have adjusted strategy since the preliminary decision.&quot;<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environment/-us-imposes-steep-tariffs-on-chinese-solar-panels.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;12&#x2F;17&#x2F;business&#x2F;energy-environmen...</a>
评论 #8777229 未加载
joshhartover 10 years ago
What?? Aren&#x27;t we supposed to be committed to reducing carbon emissions? Why is the government forcing me to pay more to do the right thing for the environment? If someone is willing to give us solar panels for super cheap why are we upset?<p>Many of the Chinese solar manufacturers are again making a profit. I find evidence that people are intentionally making panels below cost to be dubious. There was a war for market share and a lot of companies like Suntech Power went bankrupt. Seems like the market is working.
评论 #8777729 未加载
评论 #8777731 未加载
AnthonyMouseover 10 years ago
As much as this sounds like protectionism, it&#x27;s potentially legitimate.<p>Doing something that covertly benefits oil and coal companies is an easy political maneuver, but that doesn&#x27;t mean it isn&#x27;t right.<p>China has had the same modus operandi for decades. Make sure manufacturing in China is cheaper than manufacturing anywhere else so that everything is manufactured in China. China likes this because it provides jobs for their people and gives them economic strength, everyone else likes it because they get cheap stuff.<p>But automation is changing the math. Having cheap labor doesn&#x27;t matter as much when you only need 5% as many workers as you once did. So for China to keep its advantage it has to subsidize. They&#x27;ve always done that indirectly (e.g. devaluing their currency), and US manufacturers have complained about it, but not enough to overcome our desire for cheap stuff. Now they&#x27;re having to subsidize more directly, and even then the cost difference between the Chinese stuff and the American stuff isn&#x27;t that large -- imposing tariffs on China wont make the panels that much more expensive, they&#x27;ll only cause them to be made in the US.
crazy1vanover 10 years ago
I can&#x27;t help but think this is a classic bootleggers and baptists situation [0]. Traditional energy producers (gas, coal, etc) want to keep the price of solar energy high. Domestic and other nation&#x27;s solar energy manufacturers want their competition&#x27;s price to be high as well. Both groups win with high tariffs on Chinese solar panels. However, the average citizen loses.<p>[0]: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootleggers_and_Baptists" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Bootleggers_and_Baptists</a>
FrankenPCover 10 years ago
None of this would matter if the US Solar installers would stop price gouging the customer. I just got 4KW installed of Canadian Solar panels. They come with an actual 25 year insurance bond to cover the warranty. I&#x27;d like to see China try that. The installation was literally half what SolarCity quoted me. The little guys make a nice profit but don&#x27;t gouge and you get superb quality panels.<p>Capitalism. it&#x27;s really hard to tell what&#x27;s really an issue and what&#x27;s abject greed.
评论 #8777483 未加载
评论 #8777759 未加载
评论 #8777699 未加载
aikahover 10 years ago
Interesting case where U.S. protectionism promotes manufacturing over developers and installers.<p>A political choice has been made.<p>Let&#x27;s see how it goes in the long run.
transfireover 10 years ago
Meanwhile everything else at the Great Walmart is tariff free from China.
评论 #8777677 未加载
Animatsover 10 years ago
This tariff would have been more useful to US manufacturers if it had been in place before Applied Materials exited the solar cell business and Solyndra went broke.
评论 #8777769 未加载
评论 #8777710 未加载
ferongrover 10 years ago
For some reason this story dropped way too fast off the front page.
droopeover 10 years ago
Woah, what happened to the free market? :S
hindsightbiasover 10 years ago
This plus falling oil prices is going to set back PV for a long time.
评论 #8777383 未加载
评论 #8777236 未加载