Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: solar panels

lightbulb

Let’s rewind to 2008 for a moment. At $13 per thousand cubic feet, the price of natural gas was soaring. Close to $91 a barrel, the price of oil was exceeding recent highs. Selling for more than $200 per kilogram, even the price of the silicon used to manufacture solar panels was very expensive.

At the U.S. Department of Energy, people were saying that we had better figure out some better alternatives. Soon, primarily for solar projects, billions dollars of loan guarantees and subsidies poured from federal coffers to support new clean tech energy production.

And then, everything changed. New technology emerged for natural gas production and its price declined from $13 to less than $3 per thousand cubic feet. The recession diminished the demand for oil and its price plummeted. Meanwhile, the solar panel world was radically changing. Attracting new producers, high silicon prices soon plunged when the supply side of the market was deluged.

Our bottom line: The power of the market.

This Wired article tells the whole story.

The Economic Lesson

During the 18th century and part of the 19th century, energy and illumination were all about whale oil. Comparable perhaps to Exxon Supreme or Gulf Premium, oil from the sperm whale was considered the best.  Originating in the large cavity of the sperm whale’s head, the spermaceti produced the highest quality whale oil to light the home and use in the factory.

Always, though, the march of creative destruction continued as new resources emerged. Oil wells in Pennsylvania, Thomas Edison and electricity, new uses for coal…wind, solar, coal, nuclear, petroleum, natural gas. And consistently, the market has selected the “winner.”

An Economic Question: Knowing “the power of the market,” how much through subsidies, taxes, and grants should government encourage the trajectory of our energy usage?

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

16592_1.11_000013695977XSmall

We could call it a double pay-off. Subsidized by stimulus spending, Solyndra could create jobs and develop “green” technology. But it did not work out that way.

According to the Washington Post and the NY Times, solar panel maker Solyndra got a $527 million stimulus-related loan from the US Treasury and an Energy Department loan guarantee. With total sales near $250 million at the end of 2010, the firm employed about 1000 people. Now though, they need bankruptcy protection and are stopping production.

Inexplicably, a Department of Energy representative said, “The project that we supported succeeded. The facility was producing the product it said it would produce, and consumers were buying the product.”

Here, an econlife post looks at how government is subsidizing electric car manufacture.

And here is another post on solar panels.

The Economic Lesson

When government subsidizes business, it affects the supply curve. Upward sloping, the supply curve shifts to the right because money from government cheapens the cost of production. As a result, it crosses the downward sloping demand curve at a lower point, and equilibrium price drops.

Even with the subsidy and supply shifting to the right, U.S. made solar panels are more expensive than China’s.

An Economic Question: Do you believe that the US government should subsidize an industry and a technology that it wants to encourage or should it let the market system make the decision?

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment