The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Q&A

An America First Strategy for Renewable Energy?

A conversation with Tim Brightbill of Wiley Rein LLP

Tim Brightbill of Wiley Rein LLP.
Heatmap Illustration

Today we’re talking with Tim Brightbill, a trade attorney at Wiley Rein LLP and lead counsel for a coalition of U.S. solar cell and module manufacturers – the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing Trade Committee. Last week, his client won a massive victory – fresh tariffs on south Asian solar panel parts – on the premise that Chinese firms are dumping cheap products in the region to drive down prices and hurt American companies. It’s the latest in a long series of decadal trade actions against solar parts with Chinese origin.

We wanted to talk to Tim about how this move could affect developers, if an America-first strategy could help insulate solar from political opposition, and how this could play out in next year’s talks over the future of the IRA. The following conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

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.

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Trump’s Onshore Wind Pause Is Still On

Six months in, federal agencies are still refusing to grant crucial permits to wind developers.

Donald Trump and a wind turbine.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Federal agencies are still refusing to process permit applications for onshore wind energy facilities nearly six months into the Trump administration, putting billions in energy infrastructure investments at risk.

On Trump’s first day in office, he issued two executive orders threatening the wind energy industry – one halting solar and wind approvals for 60 days and another commanding agencies to “not issue new or renewed approvals, rights of way, permits, leases or loans” for all wind projects until the completion of a new governmental review of the entire industry. As we were first to report, the solar pause was lifted in March and multiple solar projects have since been approved by the Bureau of Land Management. In addition, I learned in March that at least some transmission for wind farms sited on private lands may have a shot at getting federal permits, so it was unclear if some arms of the government might let wind projects proceed.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Fox News Takes on ‘Farm Wars’ Solar Attacks

And more of the week’s top news about renewable energy conflicts.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Nassau County, New York – Opponents of Equinor’s offshore Empire Wind project are now suing to stop construction after the Trump administration quietly lifted its stop-work order.

  • The lawsuit filed in federal court argues that the government violated the Administrative Procedures Act by allowing work to continue without “a factual basis for the reinstatement” or studies ordered by President Trump about the ecological impacts of offshore wind.
  • I personally struggle with how to read this lawsuit and would recommend our readers expect the project to continue construction unless a surprise comes in court proceedings. While the order may have facially been lifted “arbitrarily,” it was also put in place arbitrarily – which would’ve been the basis of litigation against the stop-work order had it been filed.

2. Somerset County, Maryland – A referendum campaign in rural Maryland seeks to restrict solar development on farmland.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

U.S. Offshore Wind Investment is Essentially Dead, Analyst Says

A conversation with Biao Gong of Morningstar

The Fight's Q and A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Biao Gong, an analyst with Morningstar who this week published an analysis looking at the credit risks associated with offshore wind projects. Obviously I wanted to talk to him about the situation in the U.S., whether it’s still a place investors consider open for business, and if our country’s actions impact the behavior of others.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow