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
Q&A

What a Tax Expert Thinks of Trump’s IRA Order

A conversation with Bob Moczulewski, tax director for Baker Tilly’s federal credits and incentives practice

What a Tax Expert Thinks of Trump’s IRA Order
Heatmap Illustration

Given the Trump administration’s new pause on grants under the Inflation Reduction Act, this week’s conversation is with Bob Moczulewski, tax director for Baker Tilly’s federal credits and incentives practice. We asked him to explain this 90-day pause via executive order, because if anyone’s going to cut the nonsense and tell you what actually matters here, it’ll be a tax expert.

The following chat was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Hotspots

A Fine Week For Solar, Bad For Everyone Else

And more of the week's news in renewable energy fights.

Map of contested renewable energy projects.
Heatmap Illustration

1. Magic Valley, Idaho – It’s never a dull day for the Lava Ridge wind project.

  • Trump’s executive order also put a moratorium on the wind project site and essentially invalidated its environmental review under Biden. As we’ve explained, the project got permits in the final days of the previous administration.
  • But opponents to the project – most notably Senator Jim Risch – got the president to turn this into a Keystone XL-style situation. Idaho Governor Brad Little yesterday issued an executive order instructing state regulators to comply with anything Trump’s folks do to stop the project, an executive order of his own he jokingly dubbed the “Gone With The Lava Ridge Wind Act.”
  • Lava Ridge has been crickets since Trump’s order and its developer Magic Valley Energy has not issued a public statement. The most recent statement available on their website is still about its permits being approved under Biden.
  • I’ve tried to get in touch with them via the most recently-listed media contact for the project all week over phone and email – most recently this afternoon – but have had no luck. (Amy, please call me back.)

2. Multiple counties, Ohio – Regulators in Ohio issued final decisions for two contested solar projects, clearing the way for one while all but stopping another.

Keep reading...Show less
Spotlight

Trump’s Wind Order Could Hit ‘More Than Half’ of New Projects

The American wind industry faces a potentially existential threat.

Trump and wind turbines.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

President Trump’s executive order halting permits and leases for wind projects is starting to look like a potential existential threat to the industry’s future. Just don’t expect everyone to say it out loud.

On Monday, Trump issued an order pausing new federal approvals for wind projects, pending a “comprehensive assessment” of permitting practices, while opening the door to a review of existing leases and previously-issued permits subject to litigation. In the days following the order, lawyers, industry trade representatives, and professionals who work for renewable energy developers explained to me how this could impact essentially any wind project, even ones not sited on federal lands. Wind projects are just so large and impactfulthat it’s hard to avoid a federal permit.

Keep reading...Show less