Concerns of Chinese retaliation colour CASM’s victory

This was all brought to light by US-based manufacturer SolarWorld, who then formed an alliance with other companies to create the Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing in October. “Commerce’s careful measures could help thwart China's illegal drive to control the solar market and supplant manufacturers and jobs in America, the very country that invented, pioneered and innovated solar to today’s mainstream viability,” said Gordon Brinser, president of SolarWorld Industries America and leader of CASM.

He continued, “For the many former employees of at least 12 solar producers that have staged layoffs, shuttered plants or entered bankruptcies since 2010, it may be too late. But today's announcement gives rise to the possibility that domestic solar manufacturing, environmentally sustainable solar production and robust global competition might one day soon return to boosting U.S. manufacturing, jobs and energy security.”

However, there is now a great deal of speculation, leading to trepidation that China will retaliate.

The DoC’s response appeared as a surprise to many in the industry who were expecting tariffs at approximately 20%. Energy policy maker and regulator in the Chinese government and president of Chinese Renewable Energy Industries told the New York Times, “This is really a surprise. It’s really dangerous.” Li said Chinese companies would “certainly” respond by filing a trade case at China’s commerce ministry against polysilicon manufacturers.

Many Chinese companies have expressed their determination to maintain relations with the US and are optimistic that the final determination in October will yield more favourable results. Robert Petrina, managing director at Yingli, who will be subject to a preliminary anti-dumping tariff of 31.18%, commented that, “Today's preliminary anti-dumping tariff recommendation was not unexpected given the historical tariff levels in these types of cases. We will continue to aggressively defend ourselves and remain optimistic that we will persevere in the final determination.”

“We intend to strongly defend with data our position that these duties are unwarranted and serve as an impediment to the broader adoption of solar energy in a time of rising fuel costs”, said Mark Kingsley, chief commercial officer of Trina Solar.

The most vocal opponent to the DoC’s ruling is CASE – Coalition for Affordable Solar. Jigar Shah, president of CASE said, “It will ultimately come right out of the paychecks of American solar workers. This decision will increase solar electricity prices in the US precisely at the moment solar power is becoming competitive with fossil fuel generated electricity.”

This gloomy thought is being entertained and echoed by many others. According to Kevin Lapidus, senior vice president legal and government affairs for SunEdison, “The US solar industry has been growing, adding new solar electric systems, creating jobs and investing billions of dollars in the US energy infrastructure. By increasing the price of modules and therefore the price of solar energy, these tariffs will undermine the success of the US solar industry and reduce the ability of solar energy to compete with electricity generated from fossil fuel.”

Tore Torvund, CEO of REC Silicon said, “This decision is short-sighted in the extreme and a severe setback for President Obama’s clean energy program with its goal of expanding the use of solar and other renewables.”

CASE has labelled SolarWorld as “hypocritical” stating the company is selling its products below the cost of production in an effort to maintain market share just as it is accusing its China-based competitors.

Most perceptive of all was perhaps a statement issued by Solar Energy Industries Association calling for “a mutually satisfactory resolution of the growing trade conflict.

“It is imperative that the U.S., China, and other players in the dynamic global marketplace work constructively to avert or resolve trade disputes that will ultimately hurt consumers and businesses throughout the solar value chain,” cautions the SEIA.

The solar tariffs, which are retroactive to 90 days before the decision is officially published in the next several days, are in addition to anti-subsidy tariffs of 2.9 to 4.73% imposed in March.

Companies currently in the firing line with margins set at 31.18 include:

BYD
Canadian Solar
Changzhou NESL Solartech
China Sunergy
Chint Solar
CNPV Dongying Solar Power
CSG PVTech
Delsolar
Eoplly New Energy Technology
ERA Solar
ET Solar
Hangzhou Zhejiang University Sunny Energy Science and Technology
Hanwha Solarone (Qidong) Co., Ltd.
Himin Clean Energy Holdings
JA Solar
JA Solar
Jetion Solar
Jiangsu Green Power
Jiangsu Sunlink
Jiawei Solarchina
Jiawei Solarchina
JingAo Solar
Jinko Solar
Konca Solar Cell
LDK Solar
Leye
Lightway Green New Energy
MAGI Solar
Motech
Ningbo
Ningbo ETDZ Holdings
Perlight Solar
Risen Energy
Shanghai Solar Energy Science & Technology
Shenzhen Topray Solar
Solarbest Energy-Tech
Sopray Energy
Sumec Hardware & Tools
Sun Earth Solar Power
Suzhou Shenglong PV-Tech.
tenKsolar
Tianwei New Energy
Upsolar
Wanxiang
Yingli 
Yingli Energy
Yuhuan Sinosola Science & Technology
Yuhuan Solar Energy
Zhejiang