Will China’s 50 GW goal create a solar bubble? No.

[kristopher]

Will China’s 50 GW goal create a solar bubble? No.
In fact, the dramatic scaling of solar manufacturing capacity is just what’s needed to keeps costs dropping
By Stephen Lacey on May 12, 2011 at 1:50 pm


...Seemingly every week there’s another story about how China is upping the U.S. in the race to develop clean energy. This week’s news is in the solar sector, where Chinese officials say they plan to deploy 50 GW of cumulative capacity in the country by 2020. China only has about 1 GW of solar PV installed today (and no concentrated solar thermal power). But assuming it can meet those targets and continue scaling manufacturing (the country currently holds 57% of global solar cell manufacturing in the world), China is poised to become a vertically-integrated solar leader – not just an exporter of technology.

This story on the Forbes blog seems to have misunderstood the implications of China’s strategy:
“The epic expansion planned for the latter part of this decade may create the world’s first solar-energy bubble. The existing solar supply chain is likely too shallow to sustain growth on this scale. Unless the industry develops scalable infrastructure over the next four years, China’s planned installation of 8 GWs of solar capacity annually between 2015 and 2020 is likely to create severe bottlenecks in the solar supply chain. These bottlenecks could radically inflate the price of basic materials like silicon and create labor shortages that would affect the costs of manufacturing solar modules, designing and installing new solar systems and operating and maintaining already installed systems.”

So are we really going to see a solar energy bubble? That’s extremely unlikely, says Shayle Kann, a leading solar analyst with GTM Research.

“It’s actually nothing crazy,” he says. “I have a hard time seeing this creating a global undersupply – we’ll have 50 GW of module manufacturing capacity by the end of this year. The goal is doable.”...

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/05/12/208083/will-china-create-a-solar-bubble-not-going-to-happen/


50 GW of moducle manufacturing capacity...

Assuming a 20% capacity factor for solar, and an 80% capacity factor on 1GW nuclear plants that means these factories are going to be turning out enough panels to generate the same amount of electricity as 12.5 nuclear plants ...

- that is a new 12.5 completed nuclear power plants equivalent each and every year...

- online and producing electricity....

[FBaggins]

1. With the exception that it isn't even close to true.

2011 GLOBAL production isn't expected to hit half that much (most, but by no means all in China). Current estimates range from 19-22 GWs with some downside risk (already priced in IMHO).

You will, of course, be unrecing this thread based on your consistent standard that months-old news (particularly that which has been previously posted) should be censored.

[kristopher]

2. Just the top 10 companies in China have 22GW of production capacity.

As to the "old news" issue: as usual you missed the point. This article is clearly dated; the one you put out was about a 6 week old event dated to make it appear it had just happened the day you posted it.

http://www.made-in-china.com/products-search/hot-china-products/Solar_Module.html

[FBaggins]

3. Nope.

And, of course, your link is pretty worthless.

The top ten in the world come close to that level (estimated at year end), but that inlcudes Sharp and First Solar..l. as well as capacity at other firms that isn't in China.

http://www.solarplaza.com/top10-estimated-module-production-capacity-2011/

It's also pretty well accepted that there's some "wiggle room" in some capacity numbers as some companies do little more than rebrand parts from other manufacturers. The much more reliable figure is how much is actually being installed globally.

[kristopher]

4. The link gives a clue about what the other 400 module manufacturers are doing

And for once you are right about something, only 8 of the top 10 are Chinese. But the primary point remains, your estimate of 19-22GW of production capacity is not even close to accurate.

Since you seem to accept SolarPlaza:

Chinese companies dominate global production of solar PV modules
Based on their estimated production capacity for 2011, the world’s 10 largest solar module manufacturers would have been able to cover 100% of the global demand in 2010. The solar industry includes at least another 400 module manufacturers, however, and they are all looking for a slice of the ever-growing pie. The global solar PV market might be growing fast, but the industry is growing even faster, As a result, an ‘industry oversupply’ situation is expected to take shape this year. This oversupply situation, combined with decreasing subsidies in various leading markets, is leading to a serious decline in solar module prices. During the first half of this year alone modules have already experienced a price reduction of over 25%. This is good for the customer, of course, and accelerates the process of reaching ‘grid-parity’, the moment when the cost of energy from an unsubsidized solar system equals the price of electricity from the grid.

The faster the solar industry grows the faster costs and prices decrease, and the sooner energy from solar systems will become cheaper than electricity from fossil fuel sources. At that point, it is expected that the solar energy market and industry will face infinite growth potential.

The growing pie still attracts new manufacturers
Will the manufacturers of the Top-10 crush the smaller players, or will we soon reach an infinite market which no longer depends on government subsidies? And could that situation provide room for many, if not all, existing manufacturers? Today, large, new companies enter the arena with huge ambitions. Some of these new manufacturers have developed production in the last two years, and have announced plans of reaching a Gigawatt production scale within 3 years. Their confidence is clearly based on the enormous market potential for solar energy. If international institutions like the International Energy Agency (IEA) and their market forecasts are correct, the solar energy market is only just getting started. According to their projections, solar energy will cover more than 10% of the world electricity consumption within 10 to 20 years. With current solar technologies producing less than 0.5% of all electricity consumed, , these new manufacturers believe it is not too late to enter the business of large scale module manufacturing. The pie is growing, and for now seems big enough to allow everyone to claim their piece.

Eight of the world’s top ten manufacturers are Chinese
Current market leaders show impressive growth ambitions. LDK Solar plans to increase its module production capacity by almost 100% this year, from 1.6 GW to 3 GW. Other top-10 manufacturers are growing quickly as well. Of note is the fact that eight of the top ten manufacturers are Asian companies. Even the two exceptions, Canadian solar and First Solar, can be considered partly Asian, as they have important production facilities in China and Malaysia. If we look at the situation today compared with five years ago, we can conclude that within half a decade the production of solar modules has almost entirely shifted from Europe and the US to Asia. China has become the world’s leading producer of solar modules, a dominant energy technology over the next several decades.

http://www.solarplaza.com/article/chinese-companies-dominate-global-production-of-so

Clearly your 19-22GW pronouncement isn't even close. The 50GW level estimated by the Greentech solar industry analysts in the OP is, on the other hand, consistent with what I see happening in the world.

[FBaggins]

5. Chyeah... like ebay gives a clue to how many barbie dolls are produced in the US.

If you have an actual source that says that ten companies in China are producing as much as the entire globe currently demands, now would be a great time to show it.

And for once you are right about something, only 8 of the top 10 are Chinese. But the primary point remains, your estimate of 19-22GW of production capacity is not even close to accurate.

Nowhere did I say that that's what the production capacity was. I said that that was the current estimate for total world production this year.

If you were right some months ago that China alone was producing 35GW (or would by the end of the year - your story was on shifting sand)... then the massive inventory glut currently damaging price stability (and driving solar stock prices down with it and some companies out of business) will be several times as serious by the end of the year.

[kristopher]

6. You have the same understanding of market forces as Rod Adams

He again made a total fool of himself trying to discuss electric markets the other day.

The effects of the "massive inventory glut" that is "currently damaging price stability" (rofl) will certainly be a lot of bankruptcies. However, in case you haven't noticed the most common outcome of a bankruptcy is loss of investor equity, not loss of manufacturing capacity. The equipment and intellectual property of most those companies will still produce panels, only the companies will be able to sell them for less since they won't need to service their debt. Some of them will fold completely, but a shake-out in a growing industry is a normal part of the process as improvements in technology and methods make their way into the field.

You consistently misconstrue what I've written (to the extent that it's hard to believe it isn't a deliberate strategy to create strawmen). As far as I can recall, I usually write on this topic in terms of "production capacity". When I perform an exercise like that in the OP, which assumes the full output, it is not the same as predicting any particular market for a product. It is, instead, a comparison of the relative capability of the two technologies. And it is a comparison that you, a person who wants nuclear power promoted no matter whether it is good for the world or not, can't stand to see put before the public.


Poor little feller, you really just ain't got a clue, do you?

[FBaggins]

7. I think he did slip... but not as badly as Arnie did this week.

And the difference is that he did it on a subject for which he pretends expertise.

But that's just you trying to avoid the subject. Sorry... you're memory is faulty. Your original claim was for actual production, and not just by year-end. ("China's factories manufacture 35GWp of solar panels each year right now.")

I do find it hilarious that you see nothing wrong with solar companies going under. Do you not remember any of your comments about nuclear power not making business sense? Heck... I guess it IS "too cheap to meter" if the original owner goes under and the new operator gets the plant without all those billions in capital costs.

[kristopher]

8. Your perspective of the world is bizarre...

He didn't "slip" he pretended knowledge he didn't have in order to criticize the the CEO of a company that said something Adams didn't want to hear. His writings are characterized by false claims and outright lies.

And like I said, your attempts to mischaracterize what other people say are so common you can't even keep track of the facts. The"right now" meant 2011 vs some future year such as 2020. Your objection is nothing but an attempt to divert from the fact that solar power production can EASILY dwarf nuclear energy's potential because solar actually does what nuclear can only falsely claim to do - harness the benefits of mass production and capture the full value of economies of scale.

With 50 GW we are adding the equivalent production of 12-13 nuclear plants every year.
With 100GW we are adding the equivalent production of 25 or so nuclear plants every year.
And with 500GW we are adding the equivalent production of 120-130 nuclear plants each and every year.

in its wildest dreams nuclear power can't begin to approach that capability,

[FBaggins]

9. Easily

Rather than engage in all this fantasy talk of yours. Can you tell us what the total installed capacity actually is right now?

In the contest between solar and nuclear... only one is still in the "wildest dreams" neighborhood. That may change some day, but that day has not arrived yet. Let's see some actual performance before we talk about what it could do "easily".

He didn't "slip" he pretended knowledge he didn't have

He's actually closer than you realize. Exelon's profits very much tie to natural gas prices.

Arnie, OTOH, makes it up as he goes along and (again) got it flat wrong.

[kristopher]

10. Adams is a liar and a greedy fool.

He didn't "slip" he pretended knowledge he didn't have in order to criticize the the CEO of a company that said something Adams didn't want to hear. His writings are characterized by false claims and outright lies.

And like I said, your attempts to mischaracterize what other people say are so common you can't even keep track of the facts. The"right now" meant 2011 vs some future year such as 2020. Your objection is nothing but an attempt to divert from the fact that solar power production can EASILY dwarf nuclear energy's potential because solar actually does what nuclear can only falsely claim to do - harness the benefits of mass production and capture the full value of economies of scale.

With 50 GW we are adding the equivalent production of 12-13 nuclear plants every year.
With 100GW we are adding the equivalent production of 25 or so nuclear plants every year.
And with 500GW we are adding the equivalent production of 120-130 nuclear plants each and every year.

in its wildest dreams nuclear power can't begin to approach that capability,

[FBaggins]

11. Dodging all the questions, eh?

In your "wildest dreams" do you think anyone needs to guess why?


For the record... He's made plenty of errors (not sure why you wouldn't just stick to his biggest Fukushima error rather than pick nits at this one)... but he was closer to correct than your reply was . You always imagine that you know what you're talking about.

[kristopher]

12. More unethical rhetoric?

The only question you "asked" is addressed as well as it can be in the thread above and you know it. Your post 11 demonstrates just what I said earlier - the one thing you do NOT want to discuss is the relative capability of nuclear and solar to ramp up in order to effectively meet our AGW problem.

So to repeat yet again:
Adams is a liar and a greedy fool.He didn't "slip" he pretended knowledge he didn't have in order to criticize the the CEO of a company that said something Adams didn't want to hear. His writings are characterized by false claims and outright lies.

And like I said, your attempts to mischaracterize what other people say are so common you can't even keep track of the facts. The"right now" meant 2011 vs some future year such as 2020. Your objection is nothing but an attempt to divert from the fact that solar power production can EASILY dwarf nuclear energy's potential because solar actually does what nuclear can only falsely claim to do - harness the benefits of mass production and capture the full value of economies of scale.

With 50 GW we are adding the equivalent production of 12-13 nuclear plants every year.
With 100GW we are adding the equivalent production of 25 or so nuclear plants every year.
And with 500GW we are adding the equivalent production of 120-130 nuclear plants each and every year.

in its wildest dreams nuclear power can't begin to approach that capability.

[FBaggins]

13. Really?

You posted somewhere what the global installed solar capacity is?

You demonstrated that Adams was wrong rather than just repeating the claim multiple times after being challenges on it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=308561&mesg_id=308761

The"right now" meant 2011 vs some future year such as 2020

And "manufacture" meant "could if they wanted to", right?

[kristopher]

14. Yes, really.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=308561&mesg_id=308776

Your objection is nothing but an attempt to divert from the fact that solar power production can EASILY dwarf nuclear energy's potential because solar actually does what nuclear can only falsely claim to do - harness the benefits of mass production and capture the full value of economies of scale.

With 50 GW we are adding the equivalent production of 12-13 nuclear plants every year.
With 100GW we are adding the equivalent production of 25 or so nuclear plants every year.
And with 500GW we are adding the equivalent production of 120-130 nuclear plants each and every year.

in its wildest dreams nuclear power can't begin to approach that capability.

[txlibdem]

15. We know darn well the USA can't produce 50GW/yr - if China can ramp up to that then it's all good

  	Company name                       Estimate 	
1. 	LDK Solar Co., Ltd                  3,0 GW 			 
2. 	Sharp Solar                         2,8 GW 			
3. 	Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd      2,4 GW 			
4. 	First Solar Inc.                    2,3 GW 	  	  	
5. 	JA Solar Holdings Co., Ltd.         2,2 GW 			 
6. 	Canadian Solar Inc                  2,0 GW 			 
7. 	Trina Solar Limited                 1,9 GW 			 
8. 	Yingli Green Energy Holding Co      1,7 GW 			 
9. 	Hanwha SolarOne Co.,Limited         1,5 GW 			 
10. 	Jinko Solar Holding Co., Ltd        1,5 GW 			 

If we "assume" that those companies who list china
as part of their manufacturing actually do all of their
manufacturing in China, then we have:

  	Company name                       Estimate 	
1. 	LDK Solar Co., Ltd                  3,0 GW 			 
3. 	Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd      2,4 GW 			
5. 	JA Solar Holdings Co., Ltd.         2,2 GW 			 
6. 	Canadian Solar Inc                  2,0 GW 			 
7. 	Trina Solar Limited                 1,9 GW 			 
8. 	Yingli Green Energy Holding Co      1,7 GW 			 
9. 	Hanwha SolarOne Co.,Limited         1,5 GW 			 
10. 	Jinko Solar Holding Co., Ltd        1,5 GW 		

That gives us 8 out of the top 10 and 15.6 GW annual
production. Then we have the smaller players in the solar
market but I'm not counting on them because already China can
allocate 8 GW annually to domestic solar projects.

PS, what I found interesting is that China has zero solar
thermal.	 

[kristopher]

16. The economics don't work that way, but that's ok...

China is on track to have 35GW of module manufacturing capacity by the end of this year. The 50GW mentioned in the OP is global. I expected the global number to be closer to 45GW, but I haven't looked at the issue since before Fukushima, so perhaps there has been additional investment since then.

As to China and not having "solar thermal", you really need to specify concentrated solar thermal since they have most of the world's capacity of solar thermal for hot water.
From 2009:
"China is leading the world in installation of solar hot water heaters. According to the WorldWatch Institute, China accounts for roughly 60% of total installed solar hot water capacity worldwide, with nearly 1 in 10 households in Chinese households owning one. Buying solar hot waters in China is often a financial no-brainer. The average heater costs only about 1,600 yuan ($235), and can cover 100% of heating needs during the summer and usually at least half during the winter, drastically reducing energy bills."

http://chinagreenbuildings.blogspot.com/2009/01/solar-hot-water-in-china.html

[kristopher]

17. I didn't appreciate just how much solar hot water capacity had been installed...

...Solar heat has become a surprisingly big player. According to the 2011 report from the IEA solar heating and cooling programme Solar Heat Worldwide (authored by Werner Weiss and Frank Mauthner), the solar thermal collector capacity in operation worldwide at the end of 2009 was 172.4 GWth. Across the 53 countries covered in the report, the annual yield of these water-based collectors was 141,775 GWh, or 510,338 TJ (the relatively small amount of air-based solar thermal is excluded). This corresponds to an oil equivalent of 14.4 million metric tonnes and an annual CO2 saving of 46.1 million metric tonnes.

Though the final numbers for 2010 are not in, capacity was expected to have reached 196 GWth by the end of 2010, producing 162,000 GWh of output. This level of capacity is very close to that of wind power globally (194 GW), which admittedly has a greater yield than solar thermal. However, the contribution made by solar thermal heat far exceeds the capacity and output of solar PV, geothermal power, or any other 'new' renewable (though biomass and large hydro contribute more).

While most of the installed capacity is currently used for production of domestic hot water - the simplest solar thermal application - the scale and range of applications is becoming much more diverse. In some European countries solar combi-systems are widely used to provide space heating in addition to hot water, and district heating by solar is also expanding. Plus, the potential for solar process heat (for commercial/industrial uses where hot water is needed) is starting to be exploited. Figure 1 (shown overleaf on page 47) shows the distribution by application in the top 10 markets.

By the end of 2009, some 59 percent of the world's solar thermal (101.5 GWth), was installed in China, with Europe accounting for 32.5 GWth. The US and Canada had a combined capacity of 15 GWth. Much of this (over 80 percent in the US) is unglazed collectors for pool heating. These three regions together account for 86.4 percent of the global total....

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/08/sun-strikes-it-hot-whats-happening-in-the-global-solar-thermal-markets?cmpid=WNL-Friday-August19-2011

They go on to point out that 80.6 percent of the global solar hot water capacity installed in 2009 was in China. Meaning they installed 29.40 GWth that year alone....

I think we need to re-examine how fast solar PV can be rolled out...