Trumps 30% tariff on imported solar panels

[Coveny]

For the Solar panel tariff:
The solar panel tariff started with solar panel-maker Suniva (who filed bankruptcy) filed the complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission. And the trade commission sided with them.
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/09/trade-commission-decision-finds-solar-manufacturers-harmed-by-imports/

“On behalf of the entire solar cell and panel manufacturing industry, we welcome this important step toward securing relief from a surge of imports that has idled and shuttered dozens of factories, leaving thousands of workers without jobs.”
-Juergen Stein, CEO and president of SolarWorld Americas
https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2017/09/industry-reaction-solar-panel-tariff-ruling/

Against the Solar panel tariff
Those in the solar industry installation business however are very unhappy about the tariff siting previous failed attempts.
(six years ago) “The first time the United States tried to protect solar industry manufacturing jobs from foreign competition, things did not go exactly as planned. Chinese solar panel makers evaded U.S. tariffs by relocating to Taiwan, and the Chinese government retaliated with its own duties on U.S. exports of the raw material used in making the panels — leading U.S. manufacturers to lay off more than 1,000 workers and scrap a new $1.2 billion factory.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/trump-tariffs-will-save-some-solar-jobs-and-destroy-others/2018/01/22/756feb60-fca2-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?utm_term=.49156f9d7313

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) estimates that the tariff “will cause the loss of roughly 23,000 American jobs this year”
https://www.seia.org/news/presidents-decision-solar-tariffs-loss-america

Corruption
The oil, gas and coal companies stand the most to gain from sluggish growth in the renewable energy market. The raised $107 million for Trump’s inauguration, and have spent 36.1 million on federal lobbying efforts from Jan. 1 through March 31. And the money seems to be paying off:
1) Rescinding ban dumping toxic heavy metals into waterways
2) Keystone XL Pipeline and the Dakota Access Pipeline
3) Rolling back the Clean Power Plan
4) Opening up protected lands to drilling and mining interests
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2017/05/02/20848/oil-gas-and-coal-interests-filling-donald-trump-s-swamp-cash

Going so far as to nominate them to his cabinet
1) ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State
2) Rick Perry for Secretary of Energy
https://www.oilandgasinvestor.com/trump-cabinet-positions-fill-oil-gas-advocates-1453571

Closing
All this in the face of climate change disasters we’re seeing in places like fires in California, flooding in Houston, and Puerto Rico four months later still has 450k people without power, and “Power may not be fully restored until May”.
https://weather.com/news/news/2018-01-26-hurricane-maria-puerto-rico-power-outages-restoration

[iNow]

What did you wish to discuss, exactly?

Perhaps you confused this site with a blog?

[Coveny]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

What did you wish to discuss, exactly?

Perhaps you confused this site with a blog?

The solar panel tariff. It's a forums, and there are several things discussion worthy in there if you are interested in discussing one of them I'm open to it.

Nope. I'm making my case to remove/repeal the tariff, and I think it has to do with both science and politics.

[EdEarl]

There are people here who sympathize with you. However, the current gang of Washington politicians are greedy and indifferent to human suffering. They are creating havoc in many ways, which make it difficult to know which malevolent act to oppose. Since the congress and senate are bought by big money, we the people have little or no leverage to influence politicians to do as we wish. We must get the money out of politics if we are to regain control, (See Wolf-PAC.com) which requires a constitutional amendment unless the Supreme Court reverses its ruling on Citizen United. Without an amendment to give the people power, trying to change the tariff will be difficult or impossible.

[Ten oz]

The average person has no idea where their electricity comes from. They know which utility company they pay but not how the energy is produced. Additionally people have no idea where the energy produced goes.

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_energy_home

Residential consumption actually accounts for a small amount of overall consumption. Due to heating and cooling needs people in the Midwest and South use considerable more power to cool and heat their homes than do people in the Northeast and West. It is true that solar makes up a tiny amount of the energy consumed or produced. However Residential homes is account for a small portion of whats consumed. Most homes, specific in the Northeast and West could get 100% of their power from solar. However the talking typically seems to be that alternative energies aren't ready yet. They can't meet our needs and are expensive. While true if looking at consumption across all sectors it is false if we look at Residential specifically. 

Separately a lot of different energy industries receive a lot of different types of govt assistance. Whether it is in the form of tax cuts, access to land, or off shore protection from using federal agencies which cost billions a year. The "free market" is actually a very manipulated market and the costs the average consumer pays is influence by numerous things they are completely ignorant of. In my opinion anything that stymies the growth of the solar market in the U.S. is a bad thing. Average consumers who have very different needs at home continually allow their costs to be mixed into the national energy debate along side manufacturing and etc. 

[swansont]

If the point of the tariff was to help oil and coal, then the fact that it harms solar makes sense. Also, the president doesn't understand how economics works, so the prospect of retaliatory tariffs probably didn't enter into the equation. And looking at factual data of what happened in the past is not the GOP's forte.

[StringJunky]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

If the point of the tariff was to help oil and coal, then the fact that it harms solar makes sense. Also, the president doesn't understand how economics works, so the prospect of retaliatory tariffs probably didn't enter into the equation. And looking at factual data of what happened in the past is not the GOP's forte.

Yes,I think, fortunately, that stuff is outside of his skill set.; that ignorance may have helped the Canadian plane firm Bombardier who were threatened with a 300% tariff.

Quote

The ITC commissioners voted 4-0 that Bombardier’s prices did not harm Boeing and discarded a U.S. Commerce Department recommendation to slap a near 300 percent duty on sales of the company’s 110-to-130-seat CSeries jets for five years. It did not give a reason immediately. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-itc-ruling/u-s-trade-body-backs-canadian-plane-maker-bombardier-against-boeing-idUSKBN1FF2MB

 

[MigL]

No different than the complaint filed by Boeing, a member of the most heavily Government subsidized industries ( defense ), which was 'rewarded' by the current Administration with a 300% tariff against the Canadian Bombardier C Series order by United Airlines, on the grounds of subsidization by the Canadian Government.

[StringJunky]

41 minutes ago, MigL said:

No different than the complaint filed by Boeing, a member of the most heavily Government subsidized industries ( defense ), which was 'rewarded' by the current Administration with a 300% tariff against the Canadian Bombardier C Series order by United Airlines, on the grounds of subsidization by the Canadian Government.

See my post. 

[Coveny]

On 1/27/2018 at 7:55 AM, Ten oz said:

The average person has no idea where their electricity comes from. They know which utility company they pay but not how the energy is produced. Additionally people have no idea where the energy produced goes.

Residential consumption actually accounts for a small amount of overall consumption. Due to heating and cooling needs people in the Midwest and South use considerable more power to cool and heat their homes than do people in the Northeast and West. It is true that solar makes up a tiny amount of the energy consumed or produced. However Residential homes is account for a small portion of whats consumed. Most homes, specific in the Northeast and West could get 100% of their power from solar. However the talking typically seems to be that alternative energies aren't ready yet. They can't meet our needs and are expensive. While true if looking at consumption across all sectors it is false if we look at Residential specifically. 

Separately a lot of different energy industries receive a lot of different types of govt assistance. Whether it is in the form of tax cuts, access to land, or off shore protection from using federal agencies which cost billions a year. The "free market" is actually a very manipulated market and the costs the average consumer pays is influence by numerous things they are completely ignorant of. In my opinion anything that stymies the growth of the solar market in the U.S. is a bad thing. Average consumers who have very different needs at home continually allow their costs to be mixed into the national energy debate along side manufacturing and etc. 

I agree solar accounts for a small portion of energy productions in the US, but the growth of both residential and commercial solar power installation will be slowed because of this. (and it was booming)

 

I will gladly give up the penance of subsides that renewables get so long as the massive subsidies that fossil fuels are removed as well. These subsidies are the ONLY reason why renewables have not reached grid parity in the majority of the US.

On 1/27/2018 at 8:52 AM, swansont said:

If the point of the tariff was to help oil and coal, then the fact that it harms solar makes sense. Also, the president doesn't understand how economics works, so the prospect of retaliatory tariffs probably didn't enter into the equation. And looking at factual data of what happened in the past is not the GOP's forte.

It seems like that is the point to me, and I feel like it's going to work as planned. I don't think it's the president's understanding of economics that is in charge here, I think it's the the fossil fuel industries understand of economics. (and I feel like they understand economics just fine)

On 1/27/2018 at 11:20 AM, StringJunky said:

Yes,I think, fortunately, that stuff is outside of his skill set.; that ignorance may have helped the Canadian plane firm Bombardier who were threatened with a 300% tariff.

I'm not a fan of tariffs in general, they stop trade and that means we sell less because we buy less. In a consumer driven capitalist economy like the US, the less money is moving the worse off we'll be. (which is why I have such an issue with the 1% hoarding the money and not spending it)

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Coveny said:

I agree solar accounts for a small portion of energy productions in the US, but the growth of both residential and commercial solar power installation will be slowed because of this. (and it was booming)

It was booming and saving residential home owners lots of money. Sadly those who pay the most for electricity in the South and Midwest voted against their own self interest by electing to double down on coal mistakingly accepting the line that deregulation of that industry would lower their costs. It is why I referenced people not being educated on where their electricity comes from. Solar has the greatest potential to reduce home electrical costs. 

Edited January 28, 2018 by Ten oz
Typo

[Coveny]

6 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

It was booming and saving residential home owners lots of money. Sadly those who pay the most for electricity in the South and Midwest voted against their own self interest by electing to double down on coal mistakingly accepting the line that deregulation of that industry would lower their costs. It is why I referenced people not being educated on where their electricity comes from. Solar has the greatest potential to reduce home electrical costs. 

Agreed.

[Sensei]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

It was booming and saving residential home owners lots of money. Sadly those who pay the most for electricity in the South and Midwest voted against their own self interest by electing to double down on coal mistakingly accepting the line that deregulation of that industry would lower their costs. It is why I referenced people not being educated on where their electricity comes from. Solar has the greatest potential to reduce home electrical costs. 

Sun made coal, sun made oil, sun made gas, indirectly, millions year ago, now it can make energy directly.. But that's pissing off, people like Trump, and his colleagues, as they are not smart enough to join solar panel business, they prefer to have steady income for coal&oil&gas, day by day, month by month, clients addicted and relying on stuff they sell, instead of sell-solar-panel-once-and-have-no-more-client-ever..

I would buy 14-18 m^2 of solar panels, and would never see electricity bill ever again..

That's what pisses off (and scares) these people.

 

Expect more damages made by these people..

 

[Ten oz]

39 minutes ago, Sensei said:

people like Trump, and his colleagues, as they are not smart enough to join solar panel business, they prefer to have steady income for coal&oil&gas, day by day, month by month, clients addicted and relying on stuff they sell, instead of sell-solar-panel-once-and-have-no-more-client-ever..

That and they are already so heavily invested in Fossil Fuel. Building an offshore platform isn't cheap. Beyond future profits they would lose incredible amounts of money they have already invested in the infrastructure needed to produce Fossil Fuels. In my opinion those investments serve as a point of no return for some. They simply have so much skin in the game they'd do anything to protect themselves. Of course they can never make enough to be whole, never be able to leave the casino ahead, so they continue. Average people don't have to play along though. Don't have to subsidise the fossil fuel industry. People can choose solar for their homes and slowly wean the residential market off fossil fuel. 

[Sensei]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

That and they are already so heavily invested in Fossil Fuel. Building an offshore platform isn't cheap. Beyond future profits they would lose incredible amounts of money they have already invested in the infrastructure needed to produce Fossil Fuels. In my opinion those investments serve as a point of no return for some. They simply have so much skin in the game they'd do anything to protect themselves.

So, buy their coal&oil&gas companies.. so they won't feel like "ripped off"..

Then we can continue with the real green energy..

GMO modify algae, microorganisms, and let them produce methane/ethane/methanol/ethanol/benzene etc.. from CO₂ from air, water and Sun's energy..

 

Edited January 29, 2018 by Sensei

[Coveny]

4 hours ago, Sensei said:

So, buy their coal&oil&gas companies.. so they won't feel like "ripped off"..

Then we can continue with the real green energy..

GMO modify algae, microorganisms, and let them produce methane/ethane/methanol/ethanol/benzene etc.. from CO₂ from air, water and Sun's energy..

Then you would just be giving them money to attempt to convince them to be rational. I don't expect them to be rational in the least...

[Sensei]

1 hour ago, Coveny said:

Then you would just be giving them money to attempt to convince them to be rational. I don't expect them to be rational in the least...

No. Rational will be new buyers, to which I addressed my previous post..

Buy stocks, behind their back, so they won't be able anymore to lobby for keeping current state (destruction of this planet)..

Oil&gas exploration company can become oil&gas producing farm. Product the same, but different method used to get it.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Sensei

[MigL]

Sorry did not mean to tread on your toes, Stringy.

But the tariff did force Bombardier to negotiate a 'free', 51% acquisition of the C series jets by Airbus.
( Airbus builds some jets in the US and can get around the tariffs )

It has made Airbus, the only winner in this situation, an even greater challenge to Boeing.
With their ( and the State Department's ) bullying tactics, both Boeing and Bombardier ( and Canadian taxpayers ) have lost out.

Now Boeing is trying a merger/acquisition with Embraer, so as to be able to compete with Airbus' more complete lineup.
( Brazilian government has already quashed that idea, and unwilling to give up control )

[StringJunky]

45 minutes ago, MigL said:

Sorry did not mean to tread on your toes, Stringy.

But the tariff did force Bombardier to negotiate a 'free', 51% acquisition of the C series jets by Airbus.
( Airbus builds some jets in the US and can get around the tariffs )

It has made Airbus, the only winner in this situation, an even greater challenge to Boeing.
With their ( and the State Department's ) bullying tactics, both Boeing and Bombardier ( and Canadian taxpayers ) have lost out.

Now Boeing is trying a merger/acquisition with Embraer, so as to be able to compete with Airbus' more complete lineup.
( Brazilian government has already quashed that idea, and unwilling to give up control )

That's alright. You've brought more accuracy.