JSW Energy Limited, a part of JSW group, is soon coming out with its Initial Public Offer to raise Rs.3000 for its under construction 3000MW power projects. With this JSW Energy is targeting to be a leading power generator by 2015 with 11,400MW generation capacity.
JSW Energy is distributing its business and investments into renewables such as Solar Energy. As per the draft offer document, JSW Energy has been allotted a 5 MW Solar Power Plant based on photo voltaic technology by the Government of Gujarat. Apart from this it is also proposing solar power plant in Rajasthan with a capacity of 5-10MW. It is also exploring different technology options and suppliers.
As per the Gujarat policy 2009 a slew of incentives are available to prospective developers who want to set up solar projects in state. The Gujarat government has set a tariff of Rs 13 per KWhr for 1st twelve years,to know details about tariff of various states click here (for Gujarat Policy)
The company has installed 560 MW capacity power project in Karnataka and is implementing a 1,200 MW coal-based power project in Maharashtra and a 1,080 MW pit head lignite project in Rajasthan. The company also has one Hydro electric project of 240 MW under implementation in Himachal Pradesh.
JSW is planning to develop a 3,200 (4x800) Mw coal based power plant at Ratnagiri in Maharashtra near the upcoming 1,200 Mw and the second phase of the 2x135 MW power plant at Barmer in Rajasthan. Other projects are a 1,320 Mw coal-based thermal plant at Chhattisgarh, a 1,600 Mw domestic coal-based power plant in West Bengal and a 1,620 Mw coal-based thermal plant at Jharkhand.
Source:Solarindiaonline
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Baoding Tianwei Starts Mass Production of Thin Film Solar Panels with Oerlikon Solar Technology
One of the largest Thin Film Solar Fabs in Mainland China Ramps up in Record Time
Trubbach, Switzerland/Baoding, China, August 18th, 2009, — As China boosts solar
energy to meet growing power demand and reduce dependence on imported fuels,
Tianwei and Oerlikon Solar announced the completion of one of the mainland China’s
largest thin film solar panel factories. The facility was completed ahead of schedule.
This first phase of the Tianwei project produces 500,000 modules per year, which
generates a total of 46 megawatts of power.
Oerlikon Solar leads the thin film solar equipment sector with ten factories in production
and the fastest time to market. Thin film solar offers a cost-advantage over traditional
crystalline silicon, and is making strong efficiency gains. Tianwei is using Oerlikon
Solar’s Amorph High Performance PV technology for Phase 1.
“Oerlikon Solar surpassed its promised completion time and efficiency,” said Mr.Ma
Wenxue, General Manager of Baoding Tianwei Solarfilms Co.,Ltd. “Watching this state
of-the-art fab go from an empty room to full production in six months was stunning.”
Reaching production quickly is essential to allow Tianwei to address the rapidly growing
Chinese solar market. Under the “Golden Sun” program announced on July 21, China's
Ministry of Finance will subsidize half of the construction costs for on-grid solar power
plants. The ministry of finance will also pay for up to 70 percent of off-grid installations
and cover transmission costs where necessary. In response, analysts have predicted
that China could develop more than 500 megawatts of solar power within three years.
Just 50 megawatts of solar power were installed in 2008.
“Oerlikon Solar has designed, tested and perfected its methodology for bringing new
factories and equipment online on time and on budget,” said Jeannine Sargent, CEO of
Oerlikon Solar. “This is key in being the leader on the path to grid parity and placing
clean renewable solar power on equal footing with traditional fossil fuel sources.
Oerlikon Solar has the first thin film silicon technology to have IEC certification from TÜV
Rheinland for Amorph Basic, Amorph High Performance and Micromorph®. Certification
compresses the time to production by reducing administration efforts and guaranteeing
durability and performance. With more challenging credit markets, certification also
makes Oerlikon Solar’s customers projects more predictable and bankable. TÜV
certification for the Tianwei line is expected in September 2009.
About Baoding Tianwei SolarFilms Co. Ltd.
Tianwei is an international high-tech company with more than 50 years experience in the
energy industry and is the leading company in the power transmission industry and the
world’s biggest transformer supplier in output as the only state-owned enterprise in
China with a vertical industrial chain in PV industry. Its affiliate Tianwei SolarFilms Co
and specializes in designing, manufacturing, selling and installing thin film solar modules
and related accessories. Located in the National Renewable Energy & Equipment
Industry Base, with its well-recognized R&D teams and facilities Baoding Tianwei
SolarFilms Co., Ltd. invested about RMB 1.2 billion for Phase 1 and a capacity of round
50 megawatts.
About Oerlikon Solar
Oerlikon Solar offers field proven equipment and end-to-end manufacturing lines for the
mass production of thin film silicon solar modules. Engineered to reduce device cost and
maximize productivity, its end-to-end solutions are fully automated, high yield, high
uptime, and low maintenance.
The production lines are complete systems, yet modular and upgradeable in both
throughput and process technology. As a global leader in thin film PV technology, the
company provides its customers with extensive experience in both amorphous and high-
efficiency Micromorph® tandem technology.
Source: Oerlikon Solar
Trubbach, Switzerland/Baoding, China, August 18th, 2009, — As China boosts solar
energy to meet growing power demand and reduce dependence on imported fuels,
Tianwei and Oerlikon Solar announced the completion of one of the mainland China’s
largest thin film solar panel factories. The facility was completed ahead of schedule.
This first phase of the Tianwei project produces 500,000 modules per year, which
generates a total of 46 megawatts of power.
Oerlikon Solar leads the thin film solar equipment sector with ten factories in production
and the fastest time to market. Thin film solar offers a cost-advantage over traditional
crystalline silicon, and is making strong efficiency gains. Tianwei is using Oerlikon
Solar’s Amorph High Performance PV technology for Phase 1.
“Oerlikon Solar surpassed its promised completion time and efficiency,” said Mr.Ma
Wenxue, General Manager of Baoding Tianwei Solarfilms Co.,Ltd. “Watching this state
of-the-art fab go from an empty room to full production in six months was stunning.”
Reaching production quickly is essential to allow Tianwei to address the rapidly growing
Chinese solar market. Under the “Golden Sun” program announced on July 21, China's
Ministry of Finance will subsidize half of the construction costs for on-grid solar power
plants. The ministry of finance will also pay for up to 70 percent of off-grid installations
and cover transmission costs where necessary. In response, analysts have predicted
that China could develop more than 500 megawatts of solar power within three years.
Just 50 megawatts of solar power were installed in 2008.
“Oerlikon Solar has designed, tested and perfected its methodology for bringing new
factories and equipment online on time and on budget,” said Jeannine Sargent, CEO of
Oerlikon Solar. “This is key in being the leader on the path to grid parity and placing
clean renewable solar power on equal footing with traditional fossil fuel sources.
Oerlikon Solar has the first thin film silicon technology to have IEC certification from TÜV
Rheinland for Amorph Basic, Amorph High Performance and Micromorph®. Certification
compresses the time to production by reducing administration efforts and guaranteeing
durability and performance. With more challenging credit markets, certification also
makes Oerlikon Solar’s customers projects more predictable and bankable. TÜV
certification for the Tianwei line is expected in September 2009.
About Baoding Tianwei SolarFilms Co. Ltd.
Tianwei is an international high-tech company with more than 50 years experience in the
energy industry and is the leading company in the power transmission industry and the
world’s biggest transformer supplier in output as the only state-owned enterprise in
China with a vertical industrial chain in PV industry. Its affiliate Tianwei SolarFilms Co
and specializes in designing, manufacturing, selling and installing thin film solar modules
and related accessories. Located in the National Renewable Energy & Equipment
Industry Base, with its well-recognized R&D teams and facilities Baoding Tianwei
SolarFilms Co., Ltd. invested about RMB 1.2 billion for Phase 1 and a capacity of round
50 megawatts.
About Oerlikon Solar
Oerlikon Solar offers field proven equipment and end-to-end manufacturing lines for the
mass production of thin film silicon solar modules. Engineered to reduce device cost and
maximize productivity, its end-to-end solutions are fully automated, high yield, high
uptime, and low maintenance.
The production lines are complete systems, yet modular and upgradeable in both
throughput and process technology. As a global leader in thin film PV technology, the
company provides its customers with extensive experience in both amorphous and high-
efficiency Micromorph® tandem technology.
Source: Oerlikon Solar
Ban on scrap polysilicon to boost China solar sector
A Chinese ban on imports of a waste material used for solar wafers may be bad news for foreign competitors but it is a big boost to China's solar sector.
Scrap polysilicon, which can be reused to make solar wafers, is low-grade silicon that fails to meet the grade for chips found in most electronics.
Beginning this month, China stopped accepting scrap polysilicon to comply with environmental regulations.
The ban threatens the income of Chinese scrap polysilicon traders and limits the market for companies that sell to them, such as top contract chipmaker TSMC. It is particularly harsh for small and new domestic solar players who rely on the cheap material to make wafers and panels.
For China's polysilicon companies, including GCL-Poly Energy Holdings and LDK Solar, the ban is an opportunity to expand business. For foreign rivals South Korean OCI Co Ltd, MEMC Electronic Materials Inc or Japan's Tokuyama Corp the ban is a potential threat.
China produces over 60 percent of the world's solar panels, and is among the heaviest users of pure polysilicon and the scrap variety. Scrap polysilicon accounts for up to 30 percent of silicon fed into some of the solar wafers and panels in China.
"In a way, the ruling was designed to protect (China's) very young polysilicon industry," said KK Chan, chief executive of private equity firm Nature Elements Capital. "The sector needs all the help it can get given a supply glut of the material."
The ban comes at a time when Chinese polysilicon companies are ramping up production, despite an oversupply of the key solar component.
GCL-Poly, which acquired $3.4 billion worth of solar assets in June, is on track to produce about 3,000 tons of polysilicon by year end. LDK Solar aims to produce 5,000 tons by 2010.
Yingli Green Energy Holding Co, ReneSola and Tongwei Co should benefit.
After the credit crunch dried up funding for solar projects, the sector was hit by a massive oversupply of polysilicon. Prices fell to $69 per kilogram from its peak of $400 in 2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR
China's Environmental Protection Ministry said it imposed the ban because the heavy chemicals that come in contact with scrap polysilicon when reused to make solar wafers and panels produce waste that could harm the environment.
The ministry said in a notice posted on its website last month that the regulation was imposed in line with China's solid waste pollution laws.
A ministry spokesman declined to comment.
"This is positive for China's polysilicon sector, and the environment," said GCL-Poly president Hunter Jiang.
The new rule is slowly having a positive impact for local makers of the solar component. Spot prices of polysilicon in China rose to $72 per kg in August from $67 in July weeks after the rule was enforced, said New Energy Finance analyst Julia Wu.
"The segment most likely affected by the policy are local panel and wafer makers, especially the smaller ones," Wu said.
Established Chinese solar wafer companies are least affected.
"It should not have an impact, given there is sufficient supply of polysilicon in the market," said Renesola chief financial officer Charles Bai.
Source: Reuters
Scrap polysilicon, which can be reused to make solar wafers, is low-grade silicon that fails to meet the grade for chips found in most electronics.
Beginning this month, China stopped accepting scrap polysilicon to comply with environmental regulations.
The ban threatens the income of Chinese scrap polysilicon traders and limits the market for companies that sell to them, such as top contract chipmaker TSMC. It is particularly harsh for small and new domestic solar players who rely on the cheap material to make wafers and panels.
For China's polysilicon companies, including GCL-Poly Energy Holdings and LDK Solar, the ban is an opportunity to expand business. For foreign rivals South Korean OCI Co Ltd, MEMC Electronic Materials Inc or Japan's Tokuyama Corp the ban is a potential threat.
China produces over 60 percent of the world's solar panels, and is among the heaviest users of pure polysilicon and the scrap variety. Scrap polysilicon accounts for up to 30 percent of silicon fed into some of the solar wafers and panels in China.
"In a way, the ruling was designed to protect (China's) very young polysilicon industry," said KK Chan, chief executive of private equity firm Nature Elements Capital. "The sector needs all the help it can get given a supply glut of the material."
The ban comes at a time when Chinese polysilicon companies are ramping up production, despite an oversupply of the key solar component.
GCL-Poly, which acquired $3.4 billion worth of solar assets in June, is on track to produce about 3,000 tons of polysilicon by year end. LDK Solar aims to produce 5,000 tons by 2010.
Yingli Green Energy Holding Co, ReneSola and Tongwei Co should benefit.
After the credit crunch dried up funding for solar projects, the sector was hit by a massive oversupply of polysilicon. Prices fell to $69 per kilogram from its peak of $400 in 2008.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR
China's Environmental Protection Ministry said it imposed the ban because the heavy chemicals that come in contact with scrap polysilicon when reused to make solar wafers and panels produce waste that could harm the environment.
The ministry said in a notice posted on its website last month that the regulation was imposed in line with China's solid waste pollution laws.
A ministry spokesman declined to comment.
"This is positive for China's polysilicon sector, and the environment," said GCL-Poly president Hunter Jiang.
The new rule is slowly having a positive impact for local makers of the solar component. Spot prices of polysilicon in China rose to $72 per kg in August from $67 in July weeks after the rule was enforced, said New Energy Finance analyst Julia Wu.
"The segment most likely affected by the policy are local panel and wafer makers, especially the smaller ones," Wu said.
Established Chinese solar wafer companies are least affected.
"It should not have an impact, given there is sufficient supply of polysilicon in the market," said Renesola chief financial officer Charles Bai.
Source: Reuters
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Deepak Lal: Spiking the road to Copenhagen
The Western obsession with curbing carbon emissions is wicked and also economically foolish, says Deepak Lal
Three cheers for Jairam Ramesh! India at last has an environment minister who is willing and able to denounce the hypocrisy and immorality of the West in twisting the arms of India and China to curb their carbon emissions. He is right to make it clear that India has no intention of signing the new ‘climate change’ treaty in Copenhagen in December, which would put curbs on the carbon emissions of the Third World. If they do not comply they are being threatened by the draft bill going through the US Congress to levy carbon tariffs on their exports.
As this column has argued many times, this is a blatant attempt to prevent these countries from industrialising and achieving the standards of living of the West. For, until technological advances can allow alternative ‘green’ energy sources to compete with the fossil fuels, whose use is gradually eliminating poverty in the Third World as in the West’s own ascent from poverty, a call to put any curbs on carbon emissions is in fact to condemn their billions to continuing poverty. Whilst numerous Western economists and do-gooders shed crocodile tears about the Third World’s poor, they are willing at the same time to prevent them from taking the only feasible current route out from this abject state. Nothing is more hypocritical and immoral than rich Westerners driving their gas-guzzling SUVs emoting about the threat to Spaceship Earth from the millions of Indians who want to drive Nanos. Whilst the salving of their consciences by buying carbon offsets (as Al Gore claims to do every time he jets around the world) is akin to the Papal indulgences sold by the Catholic Church, which allowed its richer adherents to assuage their guilt and ‘fornicate on clean sheets’. For Gore to have the lights on his mansion blazing throughout the night, and seek to restrict the emissions from Indian power stations, when most Indians don’t even have an electric light bulb, is deeply wicked.
A study of the costs to the Indian poor of curbing carbon emissions has estimated that, over a 30-year time horizon, with a 10 per cent annual emission restriction the number of poor increases by 21 per cent, even in the short run, and by nearly 50 per cent for a 30 per cent annual emission reduction (Murthy, Panda, Parikh: ‘CO2 emission reduction strategies and economic development of India’, Margin, 2007). Those development economists and sundry celebrities, who on the one hand, want to see the end of world poverty and on the other, to curb Third World carbon emissions, should be ashamed of themselves for advocating the latter path which will make the former goal impossible to achieve.
This is particularly heinous as the claim by the IPCC that, it is scientifically proven, CO2 emissions are the cause of global warming, is increasingly being questioned by climatologists. Particularly, as since 1997, both the terrestrial and more accurate satellite temperature readings (which are not contaminated by the ‘heat island’ urbanisation effect) show global cooling, even though there has been a large increase in CO2 emissions. This is also the period in which the sunspot activity in the Sun has ceased. My earlier column on climate change (June 2007) had outlined the rival theory for climate change developed by the Danish physicist and climatologist, Henrik Svensmark — cosmo-climatology. In a remarkable March 2009 internal study on climate science suppressed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but put into the public domain by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (see www.cei.org) the whole scientific basis of the current CO2 theory of climate change is put into question. It emphasises that “global temperatures have declined — extending the current downward trend to 11 years with a particularly rapid decline in 2007-8. At the same time atmospheric CO2 levels have continued to increase and CO2 emissions have accelerated”(p. iii). This means that “the IPCC projections for large increases [in global temperature] are looking increasingly doubtful” (p.3). On the IPCC’s rejection of the alternative explanation of solar variability as the cause of climate change, it states: “There appears to be a strong association between solar sunspots/irradiance and global temperature fluctuations”. “A new paper by Scafetta and Wilson (Geophysical Research Letters, 3 March 2009) suggests the IPCC used faulty solar data in dismissing the direct effect of solar variability on global temperatures. Their research suggests that solar variability [rather than green house gasses] could account for up to 68% of the increase in Earth’s global temperature.” (p.iv)
It then provides a table (p.58) from K Gregory (Climate Change Science 2009) which summarises the evidence for CO2 and the Sun/Cosmic Ray Warming hypotheses for climate change. This table, reproduced here, shows that, on a number of predictions involving observable evidence on the two hypotheses, the sun/cosmic ray explanation for climate change wins hands down. Moreover, as on this hypothesis it is the sunspot activity which controls the climate, as the sun seems to have gone to sleep over the last 12 years there is a growing likelihood “that sunspots may vanish by 2015. Given the strong association between sunspots and global temperatures, this suggests the possibility that we may be entering a period of global cooling” (p.60). Perhaps another ice age.
This new and growing scientific evidence that human CO2 emissions have little to do with climate change makes the current Western political obsession to curb carbon emissions at a vast economic cost extremely foolish. For India it would mean not only reversing the current trends in poverty alleviation, but a vast increase in the numbers of the poor who would otherwise be pulled out of poverty. India should have nothing to do with Copenhagen. If this means there is no climate change treaty, it might also save the West from its current path to committing economic hara-kiri.
Source: Business Standard
Three cheers for Jairam Ramesh! India at last has an environment minister who is willing and able to denounce the hypocrisy and immorality of the West in twisting the arms of India and China to curb their carbon emissions. He is right to make it clear that India has no intention of signing the new ‘climate change’ treaty in Copenhagen in December, which would put curbs on the carbon emissions of the Third World. If they do not comply they are being threatened by the draft bill going through the US Congress to levy carbon tariffs on their exports.
As this column has argued many times, this is a blatant attempt to prevent these countries from industrialising and achieving the standards of living of the West. For, until technological advances can allow alternative ‘green’ energy sources to compete with the fossil fuels, whose use is gradually eliminating poverty in the Third World as in the West’s own ascent from poverty, a call to put any curbs on carbon emissions is in fact to condemn their billions to continuing poverty. Whilst numerous Western economists and do-gooders shed crocodile tears about the Third World’s poor, they are willing at the same time to prevent them from taking the only feasible current route out from this abject state. Nothing is more hypocritical and immoral than rich Westerners driving their gas-guzzling SUVs emoting about the threat to Spaceship Earth from the millions of Indians who want to drive Nanos. Whilst the salving of their consciences by buying carbon offsets (as Al Gore claims to do every time he jets around the world) is akin to the Papal indulgences sold by the Catholic Church, which allowed its richer adherents to assuage their guilt and ‘fornicate on clean sheets’. For Gore to have the lights on his mansion blazing throughout the night, and seek to restrict the emissions from Indian power stations, when most Indians don’t even have an electric light bulb, is deeply wicked.
A study of the costs to the Indian poor of curbing carbon emissions has estimated that, over a 30-year time horizon, with a 10 per cent annual emission restriction the number of poor increases by 21 per cent, even in the short run, and by nearly 50 per cent for a 30 per cent annual emission reduction (Murthy, Panda, Parikh: ‘CO2 emission reduction strategies and economic development of India’, Margin, 2007). Those development economists and sundry celebrities, who on the one hand, want to see the end of world poverty and on the other, to curb Third World carbon emissions, should be ashamed of themselves for advocating the latter path which will make the former goal impossible to achieve.
This is particularly heinous as the claim by the IPCC that, it is scientifically proven, CO2 emissions are the cause of global warming, is increasingly being questioned by climatologists. Particularly, as since 1997, both the terrestrial and more accurate satellite temperature readings (which are not contaminated by the ‘heat island’ urbanisation effect) show global cooling, even though there has been a large increase in CO2 emissions. This is also the period in which the sunspot activity in the Sun has ceased. My earlier column on climate change (June 2007) had outlined the rival theory for climate change developed by the Danish physicist and climatologist, Henrik Svensmark — cosmo-climatology. In a remarkable March 2009 internal study on climate science suppressed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but put into the public domain by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (see www.cei.org) the whole scientific basis of the current CO2 theory of climate change is put into question. It emphasises that “global temperatures have declined — extending the current downward trend to 11 years with a particularly rapid decline in 2007-8. At the same time atmospheric CO2 levels have continued to increase and CO2 emissions have accelerated”(p. iii). This means that “the IPCC projections for large increases [in global temperature] are looking increasingly doubtful” (p.3). On the IPCC’s rejection of the alternative explanation of solar variability as the cause of climate change, it states: “There appears to be a strong association between solar sunspots/irradiance and global temperature fluctuations”. “A new paper by Scafetta and Wilson (Geophysical Research Letters, 3 March 2009) suggests the IPCC used faulty solar data in dismissing the direct effect of solar variability on global temperatures. Their research suggests that solar variability [rather than green house gasses] could account for up to 68% of the increase in Earth’s global temperature.” (p.iv)
It then provides a table (p.58) from K Gregory (Climate Change Science 2009) which summarises the evidence for CO2 and the Sun/Cosmic Ray Warming hypotheses for climate change. This table, reproduced here, shows that, on a number of predictions involving observable evidence on the two hypotheses, the sun/cosmic ray explanation for climate change wins hands down. Moreover, as on this hypothesis it is the sunspot activity which controls the climate, as the sun seems to have gone to sleep over the last 12 years there is a growing likelihood “that sunspots may vanish by 2015. Given the strong association between sunspots and global temperatures, this suggests the possibility that we may be entering a period of global cooling” (p.60). Perhaps another ice age.
This new and growing scientific evidence that human CO2 emissions have little to do with climate change makes the current Western political obsession to curb carbon emissions at a vast economic cost extremely foolish. For India it would mean not only reversing the current trends in poverty alleviation, but a vast increase in the numbers of the poor who would otherwise be pulled out of poverty. India should have nothing to do with Copenhagen. If this means there is no climate change treaty, it might also save the West from its current path to committing economic hara-kiri.
Source: Business Standard
Friday, August 21, 2009
CEO ROUND TABLE AT 3rd RE India EXPO 2009
CEO roundtable on the theme “Financing renewable energy projects, current experience, challenges and roadmap for the future” was organized as part of the 3rd Renewable Energy India Expo 2009. The roundtable saw participation from senior leaders from the industry and was moderated by Mr Kuljeet Singh, Partner, Ernst & Young.
Mr. Singh set the tone of the discussion by highlighting the key drivers and challenges faced by different segments of the renewable energy space viz wind, solar, etc. As per him, the key drivers for solar industry are favorable geographical location of India and government initiatives taken in the recent years. But the industry faces certain challenges such as high capital costs, slow commercialization of technology, high dependence on imported raw material and requirement of large tracts of land.
The first point of discussion, as is the question always with the industry, was the limited usage of solar energy. Though the use of renewable energy in India has increased significantly in the past, grid connected power has been dominated by wind. Solar energy has not been used there. As an answer to this Mr Arun Seth, ACME said, “We need certainty for this to happen – certainty in the revenue stream.” As per him him there is access to people and technology, but financing is not available. Solar sector needs to be provided priority sector lending and that too for long term so that it would bring certainty in the revenue stream, which investors are looking for. Mr. K. Subramanya, CEO, TataBP Solar added, “16% return is guaranteed to the convention energy power producers, so why cant it be done for solar as well.” As per Mr. Rabindra Satpathy, President, Reliance Industries, something on lines of infrastructure bonds for this sector could be a good option to get low cost long term finance.
Thus lack of appropriate financing structure was felt as the main issue in attracting investment in the sector. As per Mr Craig O’Connor, Director Exim Bank, though state schemes for generation based incentives are bankable, depending on the state, it is better to have long term PPAs. This will allow the project to get lower interest rate. A time frame of 20-25 years for the PPA is what he sees is required.
The other often asked question for this sector is the time to achieve grid parity. To this Mr. Singh also added that participants should also mention the technology that they think will help in this.
As per Dr. Rajeewa Arya, CEO, Moserbaer PV, “Solar is application based and each technology is suitable as per conditions. So the premise of one winner is wrong.” As regards grid parity, he sees the costs reducing throughout the value chain by about 2020. As per Mr. Hari Surapaneni, President and CEO, Solar Semiconductor, grid parity has already been achieved at peak power rate and a price of 10-12 cents may be seen by 2011. The same view is reiterated by Mr. Seth, as per whom, we would achieve parity within 2-3 years if subsidy from conventional energy is removed at various points.
The participants in the roundtable were:
Anchor: Mr Kuljeet Singh, Partner, Ernst & Young.
Particpants:
• Mr K. Subramnaya, CEO, Tata BP Solar Idnia Ltd.
• Mr. Rabindra Satpathy, President, Reliance Industries
• Dr. Rajeewa Arya, CEO, Moserbaer PV Limited.
• Mr. Arun Seth, ACME TelePower Ltd.
• Mr. Mark Ginsberg, Sr Executive Board Member, US Department of Energy USA – Energy Efficiency
• Mr Craig O’Connor, Director, Exim Bank
• Mr. Hari Surapaneni, Presidnet and CEO, Solar Semiconductor
• Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Deputy Managing Dircetor, RRB
• Mr. Harish Mehta, Director, Suzlon Energy Ltd
• Mr. Rajindra Valsalan, Managing Director, WinWinD Power Energy P Ltd
• Mr. Pranav Nahar, Managing Director, Evolutions Markets India.
Mr. Singh set the tone of the discussion by highlighting the key drivers and challenges faced by different segments of the renewable energy space viz wind, solar, etc. As per him, the key drivers for solar industry are favorable geographical location of India and government initiatives taken in the recent years. But the industry faces certain challenges such as high capital costs, slow commercialization of technology, high dependence on imported raw material and requirement of large tracts of land.
The first point of discussion, as is the question always with the industry, was the limited usage of solar energy. Though the use of renewable energy in India has increased significantly in the past, grid connected power has been dominated by wind. Solar energy has not been used there. As an answer to this Mr Arun Seth, ACME said, “We need certainty for this to happen – certainty in the revenue stream.” As per him him there is access to people and technology, but financing is not available. Solar sector needs to be provided priority sector lending and that too for long term so that it would bring certainty in the revenue stream, which investors are looking for. Mr. K. Subramanya, CEO, TataBP Solar added, “16% return is guaranteed to the convention energy power producers, so why cant it be done for solar as well.” As per Mr. Rabindra Satpathy, President, Reliance Industries, something on lines of infrastructure bonds for this sector could be a good option to get low cost long term finance.
Thus lack of appropriate financing structure was felt as the main issue in attracting investment in the sector. As per Mr Craig O’Connor, Director Exim Bank, though state schemes for generation based incentives are bankable, depending on the state, it is better to have long term PPAs. This will allow the project to get lower interest rate. A time frame of 20-25 years for the PPA is what he sees is required.
The other often asked question for this sector is the time to achieve grid parity. To this Mr. Singh also added that participants should also mention the technology that they think will help in this.
As per Dr. Rajeewa Arya, CEO, Moserbaer PV, “Solar is application based and each technology is suitable as per conditions. So the premise of one winner is wrong.” As regards grid parity, he sees the costs reducing throughout the value chain by about 2020. As per Mr. Hari Surapaneni, President and CEO, Solar Semiconductor, grid parity has already been achieved at peak power rate and a price of 10-12 cents may be seen by 2011. The same view is reiterated by Mr. Seth, as per whom, we would achieve parity within 2-3 years if subsidy from conventional energy is removed at various points.
The participants in the roundtable were:
Anchor: Mr Kuljeet Singh, Partner, Ernst & Young.
Particpants:
• Mr K. Subramnaya, CEO, Tata BP Solar Idnia Ltd.
• Mr. Rabindra Satpathy, President, Reliance Industries
• Dr. Rajeewa Arya, CEO, Moserbaer PV Limited.
• Mr. Arun Seth, ACME TelePower Ltd.
• Mr. Mark Ginsberg, Sr Executive Board Member, US Department of Energy USA – Energy Efficiency
• Mr Craig O’Connor, Director, Exim Bank
• Mr. Hari Surapaneni, Presidnet and CEO, Solar Semiconductor
• Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, Deputy Managing Dircetor, RRB
• Mr. Harish Mehta, Director, Suzlon Energy Ltd
• Mr. Rajindra Valsalan, Managing Director, WinWinD Power Energy P Ltd
• Mr. Pranav Nahar, Managing Director, Evolutions Markets India.
Conergy, Solarworld Seek Protection From Chinese Price Dumping
German solar companies Conergy AG and Solarworld AG want their government and the European Union to discourage renewable energy investors from buying Chinese panels and cells they say receive improper support.
Chinese prices “border on dumping” and those levels are impossible to maintain without state aid, Dieter Ammer, chief executive officer of Conergy, was cited as saying in Handelsblatt today. Alexander Leinhos, a company spokesman, confirmed the comments. The EU should implement import tariffs to protect its solar industry, Ammer added.
Prices and demand for solar products have dropped this year as recession-struck photovoltaic power plant builders struggle to fund projects and a colder European winter caused residential clients to shy away from installing panels on their roofs. Solar module and cell makers will have to boost output in low-cost regions to be competitive in the future, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts wrote this week in a note.
“They’re playing with fire, it could have big consequences for the industry,” said Karsten von Blumenthal, an analyst with SES Research GmbH in Hamburg. “The Chinese are helping to make solar power competitive by making equipment cheaper.”
Germany’s BGA exporters group said in June that rules obliging Chinese and U.S. manufacturers to give preference to local products and services are “poison” for the recovery of the world economy.
‘Raise Concern’
China’s solar industry subsidies “raise concern,” given the scarcity of foreign companies selected as suppliers for projects, von Blumenthal said. The measures Ammer and Solarworld CEO Frank Asbeck suggest may help non-Chinese companies profit from that program, he said by phone today.
The Chinese Ministry of Finance said last month that it will “in principle” provide subsidies amounting to 50 percent of the total investment in solar power projects. That contrasts with Germany, where the government pays generators fixed sums for the electricity they feed into the nation’s grid.
Solarworld’s CEO says his Chinese rivals could hold out selling at a loss for another two to three years, thanks to interest free credit from the country’s government and lenders.
Asbeck is in favor of Germany only subsidizing power from panels where more than 50 percent of the manufacturing process took place in the EU. That would mean solar cells could be made in Asian countries and assembled in Europe, he said by phone from Bonn.
Falling Sales
Solarworld’s sales fell 6 percent to 401.6 million euros ($575 million) in the first half, while the industry’s prices slumped about 25 percent, the company said in July.
Germany, as the world’s biggest exporter, has suffered as the global financial crisis damped demand for German goods, forcing manufacturers to curb production and cut jobs. Q-Cells SE, the country’s largest solar company, said Aug. 13 that it will shut down production lines in its hometown of Thalheim, resulting in the loss of about 500 jobs.
Von Blumenthal at SES Research recommends investors sell Q- Cells and Conergy stock and buy shares in Solarworld, the third- largest German solar company.
Source: Bloomberg.com
Chinese prices “border on dumping” and those levels are impossible to maintain without state aid, Dieter Ammer, chief executive officer of Conergy, was cited as saying in Handelsblatt today. Alexander Leinhos, a company spokesman, confirmed the comments. The EU should implement import tariffs to protect its solar industry, Ammer added.
Prices and demand for solar products have dropped this year as recession-struck photovoltaic power plant builders struggle to fund projects and a colder European winter caused residential clients to shy away from installing panels on their roofs. Solar module and cell makers will have to boost output in low-cost regions to be competitive in the future, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. analysts wrote this week in a note.
“They’re playing with fire, it could have big consequences for the industry,” said Karsten von Blumenthal, an analyst with SES Research GmbH in Hamburg. “The Chinese are helping to make solar power competitive by making equipment cheaper.”
Germany’s BGA exporters group said in June that rules obliging Chinese and U.S. manufacturers to give preference to local products and services are “poison” for the recovery of the world economy.
‘Raise Concern’
China’s solar industry subsidies “raise concern,” given the scarcity of foreign companies selected as suppliers for projects, von Blumenthal said. The measures Ammer and Solarworld CEO Frank Asbeck suggest may help non-Chinese companies profit from that program, he said by phone today.
The Chinese Ministry of Finance said last month that it will “in principle” provide subsidies amounting to 50 percent of the total investment in solar power projects. That contrasts with Germany, where the government pays generators fixed sums for the electricity they feed into the nation’s grid.
Solarworld’s CEO says his Chinese rivals could hold out selling at a loss for another two to three years, thanks to interest free credit from the country’s government and lenders.
Asbeck is in favor of Germany only subsidizing power from panels where more than 50 percent of the manufacturing process took place in the EU. That would mean solar cells could be made in Asian countries and assembled in Europe, he said by phone from Bonn.
Falling Sales
Solarworld’s sales fell 6 percent to 401.6 million euros ($575 million) in the first half, while the industry’s prices slumped about 25 percent, the company said in July.
Germany, as the world’s biggest exporter, has suffered as the global financial crisis damped demand for German goods, forcing manufacturers to curb production and cut jobs. Q-Cells SE, the country’s largest solar company, said Aug. 13 that it will shut down production lines in its hometown of Thalheim, resulting in the loss of about 500 jobs.
Von Blumenthal at SES Research recommends investors sell Q- Cells and Conergy stock and buy shares in Solarworld, the third- largest German solar company.
Source: Bloomberg.com
Trina Solar: First Solar Won’t Be Low-Cost Leader for Long
For Trina Solar (TSL), it won't be long before its solar panel manufacturing costs will fall enough to become comparable to the industry low-cost leader, First Solar (FSLR).
"Next year, our cost reduction roadmap will allow us to compete with First Solar in the balance of system level, so that module wise we will compete with them some time next year," said Terry Wang, Trina's chief financial officer, in a conference call to discuss the company's earnings late Monday.
Wang's comment came as the company returned to profit in the second quarter. Trina posted a net income of $18.9 million, or 71 cents per American depositary share, on $150 million in revenue. The Chinese company posted a loss of $10.6 million, or 42 cents per share, on a revenue of $132.1 million for the first quarter; and a net income of $17.1 million, or 68 cents per share, on a revenue of $204.2 million for the second quarter of 2008.
Trina posted much better quarterly financial figures than other Chinese solar companies over the past week. JA Solar (JASO) and ReneSola (SOL) delivered mixed results while LDK Solar (LDK) performed poorly.
Trina makes solar panels using its own silicon cells. Silicon solar panels dominate the market today. Tempe, Ariz.-based First Solar makes cadmium-telluride panels and has grown quickly to become one of the top 10 (and only non-silicon) panel makers in the world.
First Solar has long prided itself on being able to keep its manufacturing costs low. The company lowered its production costs to $0.87 per watt in the second quarter from $0.93 per watt in the first quarter of this year. It expects to reach $0.65 to $0.70 per watt by 2012.
Its silicon competitors, in general, aren't able to compete on the pricing alone. Silicon panels are able to convert more of the sunlight that strikes them into electricity than cadmium-telluride panels. As a result, silicon panels are more suitable for rooftop installations, where space is a constraint.
First Solar has enjoyed a cost advantage partly because the price of silicon has historically been high. But silicon pricing has dropped significantly, as much as 50 percent for long-term contracts, over the past year.The financial market crisis has made it difficult for developers to line up financing for solar power projects. Spain, which added a few gigawatts of solar in 2008 alone, now has a 500-megawatt cap for 2009. All these forces have led to an oversupply of silicon panels.
To fend off the silicon competitors, particularly those from China, First Solar plans to give out rebates to customers who do business in Germany, its largest market. The customers would get the rebates after an installation is complete.
Source:Seekingalpha.com
"Next year, our cost reduction roadmap will allow us to compete with First Solar in the balance of system level, so that module wise we will compete with them some time next year," said Terry Wang, Trina's chief financial officer, in a conference call to discuss the company's earnings late Monday.
Wang's comment came as the company returned to profit in the second quarter. Trina posted a net income of $18.9 million, or 71 cents per American depositary share, on $150 million in revenue. The Chinese company posted a loss of $10.6 million, or 42 cents per share, on a revenue of $132.1 million for the first quarter; and a net income of $17.1 million, or 68 cents per share, on a revenue of $204.2 million for the second quarter of 2008.
Trina posted much better quarterly financial figures than other Chinese solar companies over the past week. JA Solar (JASO) and ReneSola (SOL) delivered mixed results while LDK Solar (LDK) performed poorly.
Trina makes solar panels using its own silicon cells. Silicon solar panels dominate the market today. Tempe, Ariz.-based First Solar makes cadmium-telluride panels and has grown quickly to become one of the top 10 (and only non-silicon) panel makers in the world.
First Solar has long prided itself on being able to keep its manufacturing costs low. The company lowered its production costs to $0.87 per watt in the second quarter from $0.93 per watt in the first quarter of this year. It expects to reach $0.65 to $0.70 per watt by 2012.
Its silicon competitors, in general, aren't able to compete on the pricing alone. Silicon panels are able to convert more of the sunlight that strikes them into electricity than cadmium-telluride panels. As a result, silicon panels are more suitable for rooftop installations, where space is a constraint.
First Solar has enjoyed a cost advantage partly because the price of silicon has historically been high. But silicon pricing has dropped significantly, as much as 50 percent for long-term contracts, over the past year.The financial market crisis has made it difficult for developers to line up financing for solar power projects. Spain, which added a few gigawatts of solar in 2008 alone, now has a 500-megawatt cap for 2009. All these forces have led to an oversupply of silicon panels.
To fend off the silicon competitors, particularly those from China, First Solar plans to give out rebates to customers who do business in Germany, its largest market. The customers would get the rebates after an installation is complete.
Source:Seekingalpha.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
