Another one bites the dust, Scottdale-based solar-dish

[ChandlerJr]

maker faces bankruptcy.

Stirling Energy Systems Inc., a Scottsdale-based manufacturer of mirrored solar dishes, has filed for bankruptcy, leaving a West Valley demonstration plant idle and parts manufacturers unable to create scores of jobs.

Stirling's 1.5-megawatt demonstration plant near 75th and Northern avenues in Peoria stopped running last week, around the time of the bankruptcy filing, Salt River Project spokesman Jeff Lane said.

Stirling and its partner solar-development company, Tessera Solar, had struggled for months as the cost of photovoltaic solar panels dropped, investment financing and a $1 billion federal loan guarantee failed to come through, and utility-scale projects planned in California and Texas were scrapped.


Stirling's bankruptcy filing lists assets of $1 million to $10 million and liabilities of $50 million to $100 million.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/2011/09/30/20110930scottdsale-solar-dish-maker-faces-bankruptcy.html#ixzz1ZVEJI9cl

[The Wielding Truth]

1. What is the problem ? Too expensive or too hard to make or no one wants them??

[dkf]

2. You think the Chinese would let their fledgling industries fail like this?

Hell no.

[The Wielding Truth]

3. Why aren't we supporting them? Is it the gas corp's?

[dkf]

4. It really beats me. Drives me nuts.

Sounds like Obama is freaking out over Solyndra too.

[kristopher]

13. Yes they do.

They too are having a shake-out. They have more than 400 solar manufacturing companies and many of them are expected to fold.

[skids]

7. Actually to be expected at this point.

Back 5+ years ago there was an opportunity to invest a lot of money/talent in bringing low-silicon solar solutions to mass market. Instead of investing the amount of money needed to do so, only a fraction of investors were willing to take that risk. Since then, there is no more silicon feedstock shortage, and the economic downturn has cut demand a bit below what some people were projecting (though demand is still doing better than the economy at large.)

Of the companies that were seeking to develop next generation solar technologies, only certain types will survive. Those who's technology is roll-to-roll printed and who got enough investment to build an expandable factory may do OK. Those who were doing solar thermal with heat storage for off hours generation may also do fine. Those who were selling technology that can be added to just about any silicon solar panel (anti-glare coating, better contacts/transparent wires, etc.) will probably do OK.

But as to scaling up technologies that require extra assembly or equipment that is highly specialized, we missed the bus. Also regardless of the technology if they just don't have a good business model, they will be shaken out of the market. To some extent that is healthy because that's what happens before a growing industry matures.

[The Wielding Truth]

10. That's logical. I wish though that the we would leaders in this. It is going to be so big.

[kristopher]

12. Demand is not below expectations, it is booming because of a supply glut.

The pace of Chinese investment has flooded the market and the decline in demand that WAS expected turned into a rush to invest.

Also, we haven't "missed the bus" on the manufacturing side any means. The growth potential for solar is so vast that what you are witnessing is just a small percentage of the manufacturing infrastructure expected to be built ove the next 20 years. Present world manufacturing capacity is about 50GWp, we will probably end up with between 500-1000GWp.

[Tesha]

8. Photovoltaic solar is emerging as the winner in this particular technology race.

All the "heat concentrating" approaches are failing, falling to the much simpler,
much more modular, much more reliable PV panels.

"District heating" may be the one place where the heat-concentrating approaches
manage to survive.

Tesha

[The Wielding Truth]

11. So if the one is failing do you know if we are involed in the other's production?

[Tesha]

14. It seems we're being out-raced by the Chinese in PV technology.

That's a shame, really, because it doesn't seem to me that large-scale
PV production is especially labor-intensive; it ought to be very susceptible
to automation.

Tesha

[The Wielding Truth]

15. Norwegian flag. Are you Norweigian? A favorite country since I read

Kristin Lavransdatter.

[Tesha]

16. A few weeks ago, after the brutal murders in Norway, a number of DUers changed their avatars...

...to the Norwegian flag as a show of solidarity.

(On the other hand, Mr. Tesha is part Danish, and
we're both fans of Scandinavian and the Nordic
lands. All modern successful socialist democracies,
don't you know? ;) )

Tesha

[The Wielding Truth]

17. Wish we could perfect our union.You know what they say about great minds.

[eppur_se_muova]

5. Damn! Stirling had a really neat idea. Probably shouldn't have tried to add PV to the mix.

I hope someone rescues the Stirling engine/generator project.

[43to42]

6. Solar

As soon as it can make a profit, I suppose someone will......

[NYC_SKP]

9. Oh, really? Would you care to elaborate? Are you suggesting there's no profit to be made?

I'd love to know more before I invest any money.

Thanks in advance.

[wtmusic]

18. Solar is not even remotely competitive.

"Natural gas and petroleum subsidies amount to $0.25 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced.
Coal subsidies amount to $0.44 per megawatt-hour.
Nuclear power subsidies amount to $1.59 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced.
Solar subsidies amount to $24.34 per megawatt-hour."

http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/06/solar-subsidies-are-saturated

Don't invest a dime.

[bananas]

19. Bullshit right-wing conservative oil industry Koch brothers climate denier anti-science propoganda

The author of your bullshit article, from your link:

http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/06/solar-subsidies-are-saturated

Solar Subsidies are Saturated
H. Sterling Burnett | Jun 28, 2011

<snip>

Dr. Burnett is a Senior Fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis, a non-partisan, non-profit research institute based in Dallas, Texas

Sourcewatch on the author H. Sterling Burnett:

"H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. is a Senior Fellow for the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). According to his biography on the NCPA website, "While Burnett works on a number of issues, he specializes in issues involving environmental policy and gun policy." Burnett's published articles are highly sceptical about the claims of the environmental lobby regarding global warming and fossil fuels".

Advisory Board, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow <1>

<snip>

Articles

• Enough oil to last for 500 years. "Every time oil prices rise for an extended period, the news media issue dire warnings that a crisis is upon us -- it's not! ... Dwindling supplies of oil are not a factor in the current price at the pump... Over the next several decades the world likely will continue to see short-term spikes in the price of oil, but these will be caused by political instability and market interference -- not an irreversible decline in supply."
  
  
• Climate science or science fiction? "Proponents of policies to control human-induced global warming cite science as the basis for their claims and proposals. There is only one problem -- as much as they claim otherwise, there is no scientific consensus for their theories.""
  

<snip>

Sourcewatch on the National Center for Policy Analysis:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Policy_Analysis

The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) is a free market think tank primarily funded by private foundations established by wealthy conservative business families and billionaires, including Charles and David Koch. It is a "communications and research foundation dedicated to providing free market solutions to today's public policy problems ... prides itself on aggressively marketing its products for maximum impact by 'targeting key political leaders and special interest groups, establishing on-going ties with members of the print and electronic media, and testifying before Congress, federal agencies, state lawmakers, and national organizations.'" -- NCRP, The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations<1>It develops and promotes private, free-market alternatives to government regulation and control, and encourages reliance on the private sector.<2>

<snip>

Sourcewatch on The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Committee_for_a_Constructive_Tomorrow

The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) was founded in 1985. It does policy and lobbying work on the environment from a libertarian perspective. It touts itself as a conservative answer to the Public Interest Research Groups (e.g. NYPIRG, ConnPIRG et al.), progressive lobbying groups concerned with environmental issues. The PIRGs raise much of their funding from student activity fees at college campuses around the country. CFACT has been involved in efforts to eliminate this funding, or found counter-organizations that would give right-wing causes a piece of the pie.

In December 2009 CFACT was a co-organiser of the Copenhagen Climate Challenge, a conference for climate change skeptics to co-incide with the COP15 climate change conference.<1>

<snip>