If you were talking to a developer, what would you tell them should be their takeaway?
I think the takeaway is that these determinations appear to go a long way toward addressing the unfair trade that’s been present in solar panels, solar cells, for more than a decade. And I think these duties do send a signal that will help build up domestic manufacturing. We’ve seen historic investment next to the Inflation Reduction Act in U.S. solar manufacturing facilities – in places like Georgia with QCells, in Ohio for First Solar – and we’re at a critically important point here.
Those investments were being undercut by this unfair trade by these Chinese-owned companies. We think now hopefully that will be addressed and that should lead to a bright future for solar deployment, the growth of solar power in the United States.
How does the pursuit of a fairer trade landscape globally in the broader sense impact support for solar energy in the U.S.? I hear often that a “made without China” approach can shore up support for renewables. Do you find that to be the case?
Definitely, I find that to be the case.
The U.S. industry invented solar technology and perfected it. And then unfortunately, it was virtually wiped out due to the unfair trade practices of China and these Chinese-owned companies. If we want to have solar and not be dependent on other countries for renewable energy needs, the best way to do that is to have a strong manufacturing base and a strong supply chain.
What do you think the direction of this is going to be under the next administration? Even more ratcheting up of trade measures?
Well the trade laws are a calculation, right? They’re based on rules, they’re not political. I don’t expect this administration to necessarily change individual trade cases. But I do think trade policy will change in a way that tries to address these Chinese-owned companies that undercut the rest of the world.
For example, the IRA provides right now potential benefits for any company that sets up shop here, even if they are owned by a foreign entity of concern. That seems like something this administration is going to address. If you’re going to receive IRA money, you should not be affiliated with a foreign entity of concern.
Given the potential for an impact on pricing, combined with the impacts on limiting the tax credits in that way – wouldn’t that make it harder to build projects in the U.S. short term?
I don’t think so. The solar panels themselves are not anywhere close to the majority of the cost of a project. There are so many other things that impact project cost, from permitting to the land. I don’t think this will impact the costs of deployment of solar. It will just give us a more secure supply chain that is either here in the United States or at least more regional in nature, which is going to be better for the industry.
With foreign entities of concern – are you referring to 45X? You’re anticipating that tax credit will change with respect to the IRA?
I expect the Trump administration will focus on that. There are already other related products under IRA where “foreign entity of concern” participation is not allowed for those tax credits. So it seems like a ready fix to ensure that is the same for solar technologies.
Is that bad news, or is that saving the credit?
I don’t think it’s bad news. I think it’s good news. It means more of the credit will be available to U.S. companies and our allies who might want to set up here as well.
If Chinese companies want to come here and set up in the United States, that’s great, but they shouldn’t also receive subsidies because those are the same companies that have harmed our industry with unfair trade for more than a decade.
Okay enough serious talk. Can I ask you a fun question: what was the last band you listened to?
It’s sort of dad rock-ish right now: Spoon. When I get my Spotify Wrapped, it’s going to be Spoon. That’s my favorite rock band right now.
Battery opinion modeling in Cass County, Nebraska.Heatmap Pro Screenshot 
