From: Energy and Capital <eac-eletter@angelnexus.com>
Date: Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Subject: The Solar Blood is in the Street
![]()
Date: Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Subject: The Solar Blood is in the Street
The Solar Blood is in the Street
By Nick Hodge | Tuesday, May 22nd, 2012
I've had lots of requests lately to shed some light on the solar industry.
And it isn't hard to see why...
That's a one-year chart of the Dow Jones versus the Market Vectors Solar Energy ETF (NYSE: KWT), which holds well-known names like First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR), Suntech (NYSE: STP), and SunPower (NASDAQ: SPWR).
As you can see, the solar ETF has lost almost 80% of its value.
Let's see if we can figure out why, draw some historical comparisons, and find a way to make some money from this still nascent market.
Advertisement
Collect a $1,638 "Rent" Check Every Month
Some investors have found a way to collect huge "rent" checks every month by partnering with one of the world's biggest "landlords."
One man from Ontario gets $1,638/month. Another in Arizona gets an amazing $5,969/month. One Texas man's checks have grown to $23,220/month!
And they're receiving these checks without owning any real estate!
To learn how you can join them, click here.
Economies of Scale
Put on your freshman econ hat for a second while I give you a textbook definition:
In economics, economies of scale refers to the cost advantages that an enterprise obtains due to expansion. There are factors that cause a producer's average cost per unit to fall as the scale of output is increased.
Just think about the computer industry, to which I like to compare the solar industry.
In 1946 the first ever general purpose computer weighed 27 tons and cost over $5 million to build.
No company was getting rich selling those. Economies of scale had to be created, whereby the cost of production decreases as more units are produced and more customers are attracted.
I think today is the 1946 of the solar industry.
Dismissing it now would be just as foolish as dismissing the computer industry back then.
Solar Cliff's Notes
The main argument against solar is that it's expensive. That's true — but so was the first computer.
The important thing to notice is that it's getting cheaper.
And at this stage in the game, that's actually detrimental.
When solar stormed on the scene in 2004 and 2005, it was touted as a panacea to rising oil prices and An Inconvenient Truth.
Actually, it's neither.
It's just one part of the energy industry. That said, it's susceptible to the same booms and busts as any other industry.
Back then the main ingredient was polysilicon. And it was expensive... exorbitantly expensive.
It sold for about $100/kilogram in 2006, but more than quadrupled to $400/kilogram by 2008.
Two things happened as a result:
The first gave us the feed-in tariff programs in Europe that led to widespread solar adoption in Germany, Spain, and a few others. But as the Great Recession ensued, governments began taking a knife to those subsidies.
The second spawned the development of other solar technologies, like cadmium telluride and copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS). Those are the technologies used by First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR) and Solyndra, respectively.
As it turned out, the monumental spike in polysilicon prices leading up to 2008 was a red herring.
Between then and now, prices have plummeted from $400/kilogram all the way down to $23/kilogram last week.
Advertisement
This American Sector Will Lead the World
Just three short years from now, the United States will reclaim something it lost years ago.
This isn't just some title or bragging right — but perhaps the most important factor affecting modern economics and politics today...
By mid-decade, the U.S. will once again be the world's top oil producer.
It will create more new millionaires in the next couple years than we've seen in the last two decades...
If you want to know exactly how it will be done, click here.
You've already seen the impact that's had on the market.
Cheap silicon is killing competitive technologies.
Solyndra went bankrupt. So did Energy Conversion Devices. First Solar (NASDAQ: FSLR) has lost 90% of its value since last summer.
Makers of traditional crystalline solar panels have only fared moderately better...
When European nations started cutting subsidies, demand all but collapsed and took German and Chinese solar companies with it.
Q-Cells and SolarWorld were once the most dominant players in the industry. Now they're struggling to survive.
Chinese firms had it so bad, they were selling panels to the United States below market price, which led us to declare a 31% tariff on Chinese-imported panels last week.
The solar blood is in the streets.
Economics Again
Subsidy cuts and margin squeezes are part of an industry's maturation.
Those two hurdles, plus the current oversupply of polysilicon, will ebb.
Current lackluster demand and stiff competition from decade-low natural gas prices are forcing innovation and cost reduction.
There will also be consolidation.
This is all part of an industry's natural growth cycle.
The point here is that the industry is out of favor because prices are falling rapidly. That's what's supposed to happen.
And as prices fall, customers will once again be attracted. You know, all that supply and demand stuff.
In fact, it's already happening...
Solar attracted more than half of all clean energy investments last year, fetching $128 billion — up 44% from 2010. Installations were up 54% to 29.7 GW.
Once that hits the balance sheets, strong solar companies will start to rise once again. I'm looking at JA Solar (NASDAQ: JASO) on the module side and MEMC (NYSE: WFR) on the silicon side.
Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) shares fell from $26 to $8 in 2000... That's where solar is now.
Call it like you see it,
Nick is an editor of Energy & Capital and the Investment Director of the thousands-strong stock advisory, Early Advantage. Co-author of the best-selling book Investing in Renewable Energy: Making Money on Green Chip Stocks, his insights have been shared on news programs and in magazines and newspapers around the world. For more on Nick, take a look at his editor's page.
Follow Energy and Capital on
The Bottom Line
| |
This email was sent to jorgeus.george@gmail.com . You can manage your subscription and get our privacy policy here.
Energy and Capital, Copyright © 2012, Angel Publishing LLC, 1012 Morton St, Baltimore, MD 21201. All rights reserved. No statement or expression of opinion, or any other matter herein, directly or indirectly, is an offer or the solicitation of an offer to buy or sell the securities or financial instruments mentioned. While we believe the sources of information to be reliable, we in no way represent or guarantee the accuracy of the statements made herein. Energy and Capital does not provide individual investment counseling, act as an investment advisor, or individually advocate the purchase or sale of any security or investment. Neither the publisher nor the editors are registered investment advisors. Subscribers should not view this publication as offering personalized legal or investment counseling. Investments recommended in this publication should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company in question. Unauthorized reproduction of this newsletter or its contents by Xerography, facsimile, or any other means is illegal and punishable by law.Please note: It is not our intention to send email to anyone who doesn't want it. If you're not sure why you're getting this e-letter, or no longer wish to receive it, get more info here, including our privacy policy and information on how to manage your subscription. | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment