News:

Long overdue maintenance happening. See post in the top forum.

Main Menu

George Kaiser's $10 Billion Bet

Started by Teatownclown, September 21, 2011, 11:29:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Conan71

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 04, 2011, 09:30:33 AM
They won't go bust because their government subsidizes them.

And even UniSolar is selling their fancy flexible cells for under $ 3.00 per watt.  

I could see silicon going up some - maybe even double - but at that point, more companies will move in to fill the vacuum if there IS a vacuum and the price will go down again.  They just won't be a Solyndra.  It's a lot like silicon memory...lots of ups and downs likely in the future, but more and more production, causing more watts for the same amount of money.


Admittedly, I'm not an economist.  How long can China continue to subsidize industries before they have their own debt crisis, or do they just keep printing cash and de-valuing their currency?
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first" -Ronald Reagan

heironymouspasparagus

#31
Quote from: Conan71 on November 04, 2011, 09:59:00 AM
Admittedly, I'm not an economist.  How long can China continue to subsidize industries before they have their own debt crisis, or do they just keep printing cash and de-valuing their currency?

Following our example, they have probably 70 years to go....

And yet, we are still cruising along subsidizing big oil, big agriculture, big banks, big insurance.  And all it would take to fix the present situation would be some spending cuts and let the Bush tax cuts lapse and we would be back to paying down the Federal debt.  You think that wouldn't be the biggest help markets have seen in decades?  Yes, it would.  End of crisis - for a long, LONG time - past the point where all the Baby Boomers are dead, those pending expenses gone, and the population increasing only due to illegal immigration.

And every politician knows this, but still they refuse to do what it takes to help the country.  Because the stated intent and hope is the hope that "Obama will fail" - quote from you-know-who.




"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?"  --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.

I don't share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently.  I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.

nathanm

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 04, 2011, 09:30:33 AM
They won't go bust because their government subsidizes them.

Surprisingly, the Chinese don't subsidize solar much. They're too busy keeping the state-owned businesses afloat. The problem is fairly fundamental, though. There is a certain cost to create silicon ingots that doesn't really change no matter how much volume you're doing. And three bucks a watt is over three times what the Chinese companies are selling their cells. (which then go to panel makers to get put into solar panels, at a not insignificant markup)
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln

swake

Quote from: Conan71 on November 04, 2011, 09:59:00 AM
Admittedly, I'm not an economist.  How long can China continue to subsidize industries before they have their own debt crisis, or do they just keep printing cash and de-valuing their currency?

You should read up on the coming Chinese debt crisis. It's likely to be worse than ours was, but it should have an even smaller impact on our economy that Europe is. A prediction, there will be a positive outcome long term, the end of Chicom rule.

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbusiness/aap/8366628/debt-crisis-hits-chinas-private-firms

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/business-views/171062-chinese-city-triggers-debt-crisis-alarm.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonchang/2011/10/23/chinese-ministry-saved-from-default/




heironymouspasparagus

Quote from: nathanm on November 04, 2011, 02:28:20 PM
Surprisingly, the Chinese don't subsidize solar much. They're too busy keeping the state-owned businesses afloat. The problem is fairly fundamental, though. There is a certain cost to create silicon ingots that doesn't really change no matter how much volume you're doing. And three bucks a watt is over three times what the Chinese companies are selling their cells. (which then go to panel makers to get put into solar panels, at a not insignificant markup)

That's for sure - the bottom has been reached on cost of silicon processed for whatever.  The big savings now, and it is only in other semiconductors, is the feature size.  A solar cell has pretty much one feature size.  Not much room to improve.  Only real difference at this point is to find a new source of slave labor.


$3 UniSolar is for the flexible sheet cells that can be used for roofing material.  Worth a little premium.  They are about 15" x 18 feet long.  Goes well on a roof.  I can see a place for that - as did Coca Cola.  I will be using standard silicon for my system, though.

Even $3 is tremendous value, especially compared to the $100 per watt of 1980.


"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?"  --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.

I don't share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently.  I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.

nathanm

Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on November 07, 2011, 09:22:46 AM
$3 UniSolar is for the flexible sheet cells that can be used for roofing material.  Worth a little premium.  They are about 15" x 18 feet long.  Goes well on a roof.  I can see a place for that - as did Coca Cola.  I will be using standard silicon for my system, though.

Even $3 is tremendous value, especially compared to the $100 per watt of 1980.
The flexible cells are less efficient than mono cells. Installing on a roof at a suboptimal pitch angle and possibly not even pointed due south reduces efficiency even further. IMO, it would be great tech if you could get it below a buck a watt. Beyond that, the fixed costs begin to drown out the energy savings. (Of course, if energy prices included all the negative externalities, energy would be much more expensive)
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln

heironymouspasparagus

Quote from: nathanm on November 07, 2011, 11:30:27 PM
The flexible cells are less efficient than mono cells. Installing on a roof at a suboptimal pitch angle and possibly not even pointed due south reduces efficiency even further. IMO, it would be great tech if you could get it below a buck a watt. Beyond that, the fixed costs begin to drown out the energy savings. (Of course, if energy prices included all the negative externalities, energy would be much more expensive)

Right!  No where near as efficient, and more costly per watt.  I suspect installation is the place where they make up the difference.  Glue them to the roof versus frames, racks, heavier roof support requirements.

In my world, the standard cells are the solution of choice, but for Coca-Cola with 486 acres of flat roof, it could make sense.  Installation is viciously expensive for standard cells.
"So he brandished a gun, never shot anyone or anything right?"  --TeeDub, 17 Feb 2018.

I don't share my thoughts because I think it will change the minds of people who think differently.  I share my thoughts to show the people who already think like me that they are not alone.