The stock market took a beating this week, after rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded U.S. bonds -- but clean tech stocks have been falling even faster than the market as a whole.
Shares in clean energy companies have been hit by a "triple whammy" -- producing too much capacity for the demand, problems with government debt, and broader risk aversion among investors. As a part of this, clean energy venture capital funding has dropped 44 percent when compared with last year.
Analysts from the global bank HSBC said wind energy stocks are undervalued and their prices could fall more as debt crises in both the United States and European Union stand to cut wind subsidies further. There are more than seven gigawatts of wind projects under construction now -- but few planned beyond 2013 because of uncertainty about policies.
Solar stocks were down after many companies reported dismal second-quarter results, as prices on panels fell -- but not as fast as the costs of producing them--and as their margins shrank. First Solar, the biggest solar panel manufacturer outside of China, boosted production but suffered a large drop in profits -- and their share price. Suntech, the biggest manufacturer, also saw its stock fall, hitting a one-year low.
But some analysts say renewables stocks are bottoming out, and are set to rise again.
Adjusting to No Nukes
Germany decided to phase out nuclear power within 10 years and rely more heavily on renewables, and the country's utilities are scrambling to adjust. E.ON, the world's biggest utility in terms of sales, suffered its first-ever quarterly loss and is laying off 11,000 workers as it aims to boost its spending on renewables.
Another utility, RWE, is also selling off assets to cope with poor performance -- but is planning to stick with its renewables investments.
Making the Military Green
The U.S. military is the single biggest user of oil in the world, and has been warned by analysts its dependence is a security threat. Now the U.S. Army has formed a new renewables office that may spend $7 billion over the next decade on renewable and alternative energy power.
Although the military has a target of using 25 percent renewable energy by 2025, many installations lack the expertise to move forward quickly enough, said the U.S. Department of Defense, and the new office aims to fill that gap.
Meanwhile, units within the mega-corporations Boeing and Siemens have teamed up to pursue military contracts for smart-grid technologies, which the military could develop and bring down the costs, helping them reach the market later.
Risky Business
With oil prices high and political uncertainty in many oil-exporting countries, the U.S. faces near-record energy security risks, according to a new U.S. Chamber of Commerce report. In 2010, their energy risk index is as high, as in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and near the record high of 2008. The Chamber predicts the risk level will remain high for another 25 years.
With gloomy economic prospects, the International Energy Agency (IEA), the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries all agreed oil demand later this year is likely to be less than they had thought.
With Saudi Arabia boosting its production to the highest level in 30 years, oil prices have fallen a bit in recent weeks, but this is largely because of weak economies, the IEA said.
The Climate Post offers a rundown of the week in climate and energy news. It is produced each Thursday by Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/energy/renewable/wind.php
They took lots of money from the government and promised 800 jobs. When they found the market wouldn't support their prices, they first moved the jobs to China. Now they have filed for bankruptcy.
Beware the 'green jobs' myth. There is nothing magical about green tech. It follows the same rules as any other high tech investment. If competing technologies are available at better prices the investment will fail and the jobs will be lost.
Evergreen would still be in business if Obama had not raised the expectations of an American feed in subsidy for solar energy and then completely failed to deliver on his “green jobs” promise what so ever. Obama is on your side (Fiddler3) because just you wanted he has done nothing to support green jobs, so please hold the crap and stop attempting to blame “green Jobs” for wrecking the economy????? WTF!!
Second Solar energy in the past five years has been one most successful growth industries in the world thanks to European subsides and in spite what tis comparatively a complete lack of support from the U.S. The fast growth of industry just the past few years has enable solar panel companies to produce with greater economies of scale, which have driven the market price straight down faster than anyone ever imagined. The price unsubsidized market price for solar energy is now coming closer and closer with the cost traditional dirty power sources (at the current rate it would reach parity in the next two years). Solar subsidies are one of the biggest global success stories of the decade! Too bad the United State had almost nothing to do with it.
Third Obama did indeed campaign on green jobs then claimed he would deliver new green jobs with the $800 billion dollar stimulus bill. Well guess what anyone working in green energy or attempting to start a company in green technologies learned right away “HE Lied”!! In the end only a billion was set aside for green initiatives (mostly credits for resealing window or buying hybrid golf carts). The other $899 billion went to fund state government worker pensions (which of course does not do anything to stimulate the economy or create jobs).
It wouldn't be so bad if the intent was at least pure -- but these deals are usually done in an opaque way, with backroom agreements and slick marketing. In the end, the communities are stuck with an awful system that doesn't perform as advertised and that will be an albatross around their necks for decades.
How did the rest of the venture market drop? as much? more?
The big problem is the green tech have only 1/100th as much money to buy politicians.
Coal and nukes get way more subsidies, even though they supposedly mature, and profitable, why? because they buy politicians.
http://www.grist.org/list/2011-06-14-your-tax-dollars-subsidize-the-sht-out-of-coal
http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2010/08/01/solar-energy-cheaper-than-nuclear-energy/
http://www.ncwarn.org/2010/07/solar-and-nuclear-costs-the-historic-crossover/
http://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/NCW-SolarReport_final1.pdf
http://www.grist.org/article/2011-06-16-german-rooftop-solar-price-averages-less-than-4-per-watt
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=sunergy-offers-5-cent-solar-billing-2009-12
Even if true, it means nothing. Does Chernobyl define nuclear power?
rooftop pv, offshore wind, and waste bio fuels together can supply all our energy needs, 24/7, carbon negative, land negative, forever, already cheaper then nukes, clean coal and oil wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamont_Pass_Wind_Farm
are absolutely dependent upon government subsidies for their capital and government mandated premium prices for their product.
They are a TERRIBLE investment in an era of shrinking governments....
I've been arguing for some time now that changing the way the real estate market functions is the easiest way to inject the financial capital needed to affect broad change. For most of us, real estate is the single largest transaction we will ever make. Collectively, the US real estate market represents trillions of dollars of private wealth. Why not use this money to build communities that reflect our values and aspirations? Why do we let developers decide what are communities will look like and then pocket the enormous profits?
What is needed is a venue to buy homes collectively, instead of as individuals, purchasing sustainable communities, instead of homes. This perhaps sounds daunting, but the internet and social networking provide a perfect medium, it is only a matter of building support and awareness for the concept.
http://omegaproject.us
The end of the tumultuous week? Oil is where it was and the Dow is down a 100.
Welcome to the BS of Wall Street. Where everything is an illusion. Especially your money.
With the US government less able to subsidize any business/market these technologies are exposed to normal market pressures and their true current value becomes visible. The stock market investors are anticipating a cut in government subsidies.
You are kidding, right? Wind energy has been around a LONG LONG time.
http://www.1900s.org.uk/windmill-edmonton.htm
Wind energy is great - if you ignore the capital costs. With all commodities going up, capital costs will only get worse.....
Wind powered electrical generation still has some very real cost challenges to overcome as well as a couple of environmental issues. We've seen a 40% increase in efficiency in the past ten to twelve years. But more is available. And maintenance costs are still not well contained. But that too is improving significantly.