Under Trump's Tariffs, The US Lost 20,000 Solar Energy Jobs

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesel.../#50138ccc76ba

2016 was the best year on record for solar energy in the United States. A report from the U.S. Department of Energy at the time showed that solar energy was responsible for a much larger share of employment in the electric power sector (43%) than the whole of the fossil fuel industry combined (22%). With such robust numbers, it seemed as though solar energy, and renewables more broadly, were about to revolutionize the energy sector in the United States and lead the push towards cleaner energy and lower carbon emissions.

Trump Tariffs Challenge Growth

However, solar energy jobs have stagnated and dipped for two consecutive years since the Department of Energy’s initial report, with a loss of 10,000 jobs in 2017 followed by a further 8,000 in 2018. Although some job losses were foreseen as a result of project finalizations in several states, the biggest contributing factor was President Trump’s tariffs on solar panels . The first shot fired in what would become a wide-ranging trade war with China in 2018, the U.S.’ decision to add a 30% tariff on foreign-produced solar panels had a negative effect on its domestic solar industry, which heavily relies on cheap imports.

The Solar Foundation’s latest report has called the last two years “challenging”. Since that record year, the solar sector has lost close to 18,000 jobs, but the Foundation is confident that 2019 will be the year they bounce back, as it explains: “Based on the Census survey, the solar industry expects a jobs turnaround with 7% growth in 2019.” That being said, the Foundation also acknowledges that its predictions could be wrong, as it was when it projected a 5.2% job growth in the sector for 2018. Despite this, it believes that “there is considerable evidence that the outlook for the solar industry is improving, and that solar employment will resume a growth path in 2019 and beyond.”



Unheeded Warnings

Prior to the implementation of the tariffs, many industry leaders such as the Solar Energy Industry Association’s President and CEO Abigail Hopper warned of the potential damage that could be caused: “The current solar market, including its production and trade patterns, was both foreseeable and predicted by experts across the globe. What's also been predicted are the inevitable job losses in the US and economic harm if tariffs are imposed on one of the fastest-growing industries in America. We urge the president to put America first and say no to solar tariffs."

More at link.

[juleswin]

@Zippyjuan and how many coal, steel and other manufacturing jobs did we gain under his rule?

[oyarde]

Solar jobs are lost because the companies go under . Many of them probably grew under the graft of the obama administration .

[Zippyjuan]

@Zippyjuan and how many coal, steel and other manufacturing jobs did we gain under his rule?

Under King Trump, coal added 120 jobs in the first quarter of 2018. Not thousands but just over a hundred. 1400 were added in 2017. https://www.npr.org/2018/02/23/58623...f-his-policies



Steel added about 870 jobs last year (an increase of just one percent).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ore-steel-jobs

The Crawfordsville facility, set amid sprawling acres of farmland, looks like many other plants. But the 30-year-old factory has the ability to shrink or expand production at will, depending on demand by customers, while employing pretty much the same number of workers.

That flexibility is why, as the first year of Trump’s steel tariffs comes to a close, the U.S. industry’s biggest players are enjoying increasing demand and revenue but adding few of the jobs promised during the campaign. “They’re expanding production, demand is really strong in the country, and crude steel production will rise as imports remain low, but they’re not hiring much,” says Cicero Machado, a steel analyst at metals researcher Wood Mackenzie. The firm forecast that the number of U.S. steel jobs barely budged last year despite a bump in output from the tariffs.

The number of employees at the country’s iron and steel mills has tumbled 53 percent since 1990, to 87,700 in November 2018, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whereas U.S. steel production dropped only 2.2 percent in the same period, according to the World Steel Association.

Yet Wood Mackenzie predicts that while steel production rose 4 percent, the total number of American steel jobs increased just 1 percent in 2018. “I was expecting much more jobs to be created,” Machado says.

[phill4paul]

So despite doomsday predictions that Trumps tariffs would be the death of the industry they are starting to bounce back. Good news!

[Zippyjuan]

So despite doomsday predictions that Trumps tariffs would be the death of the industry they are starting to bounce back. Good news!

Which industry are you talking about? Coal? Solar? Steel? Tariffs were supposed to aid all of them- not destroy them.

[phill4paul]

Which industry are you talking about? Coal? Solar? Steel? Tariffs were supposed to aid all of them.

The industry in your title of course.

[Superfluous Man]

@Zippyjuan and how many coal, steel and other manufacturing jobs did we gain under his rule?

It's not possible to have a control group of a world without Trump's tariffs to compare what would have happened without them to what is happening with them. But we do know with absolute infallible certainty that they've had a net negative effect on the economy as a whole.

[Dr.3D]

As I understand it, photovoltaic solar panels are a net loss of energy after they are produced.

Takes more energy to build them than they will produce in their lifetime.

Let's see a photovoltaic powered factory that can make those things and not run out of energy doing so.

All they are good for is allowing people who are out in the sticks, the ability to have electricity.

[Superfluous Man]

As I understand it, photovoltaic solar panels are a net loss of energy after they are produced.

Takes more energy to build them than they will produce in their lifetime.

Let's see a photovoltaic powered factory that can make those things and not run out of energy doing so.

All they are good for is allowing people who are out in the sticks, the ability to have electricity.

I haven't really kept up with it, but supposedly that was true until recently and isn't any more.
https://www.popsci.com/science/artic...icity-they-use

The way I see it is if the government would get out of the way and let the market pick winners and losers, I don't really need to worry about what those winners or losers would be. But winning in the market without the government's help is what would really prove that solar energy had become a genuine good investment, since those energy costs in producing them that you mention would translate into higher costs to buy them, which consumers would recognize as not making up for their future savings in energy costs, except in unusual circumstances.

[Stratovarious]

Solar is inefficient.

We need more charts.

[phill4paul]

Don't worry, 'bout a thing, 'cause every-little-thing, gonna be alright....

The announced tariffs on foreign solar panels in early 2018 left international module manufacturers with an interesting question: If we want to sell in the United States tariff-free, should we buy one of these dormant legacy manufacturing plants or start fresh with a new facility? With technological advances quickly outpacing the abilities of previously successful manufacturing lines (updating old lines to four or five busbars takes a lot of time, money and effort), many foreign manufacturers announced brand new facilities for 2019 openings. Here’s our latest roundup of what’s new in U.S. solar panel assembly—from those actually moving material and others just blowing smoke. If plants are up and running, whether they’re working at their quoted megawatt capacity is another story.

https://www.solarpowerworldonline.co...ening-in-2019/

[Superfluous Man]

Don't worry, 'bout a thing, 'cause every-little-thing, gonna be alright....

That's a strange way to introduce a paragraph describing bad news.

[Dr.3D]

I haven't really kept up with it, but supposedly that was true until recently and isn't any more.
https://www.popsci.com/science/artic...icity-they-use

The way I see it is if the government would get out of the way and let the market pick winners and losers, I don't really need to worry about what those winners or losers would be. But winning in the market without the government's help is what would really prove that solar energy had become a genuine good investment, since those energy costs in producing them that you mention would translate into higher costs to buy them, which consumers would recognize as not making up for their future savings in energy costs, except in unusual circumstances.

I've looked at that information, but I have serious doubts about it's source.

With the leftist educational system, what's to say they are not trying to make it look viable so as to satisy political goals?

I'd rather see a solar powered solar panel factory. lol

[phill4paul]

That's a strange way to introduce a paragraph describing bad news.

It's great news. Manufacturing is coming back to America. Employing American workers. You have been keeping up with job numbers haven't you? Or just sticking your head in the sand hoping for failure?
I was told that the tariffs would destroy the American solar energy installers business. Decimate. Rip it to shreds!
Despite all the M$M prognostications Americans are going back to work. Coming off welfare. I know you hate that. But, some of us love it. LOVE IT!
MAGA!, beeyatch!.

[Stratovarious]

I've looked at that information, but I have serious doubts about it's source.

With the leftist educational system, what's to say they are not trying to make it look viable so as to satisy political goals?

I'd rather see a solar powered solar panel factory. lol

Yes, and solar powered charging stations for electric cars, actually throw in a battery exchange and
a 5 minute swap time.
Solar is not efficient enough to keep up though, not on a per 'site' basis.

Hopefully , solar at some point becomes more efficient and affordable.

[Superfluous Man]

It's great news. Manufacturing is coming back to America.

If that manufacturing coming back is a result of tariffs, then it must mean that it would have been better if it didn't come back so that economic actors would still be able to reap the benefits that they determine would be available to them by purchasing things made in other countries rather than here. The fact that it takes tariffs to manipulate their actions to engage in transactions that they otherwise would not is proof that it's a net negative for the economy.

[angelatc]

Good, it's a garbage technology anyway.

[phill4paul]

If that manufacturing coming back is a result of tariffs, then it must mean that it would have been better if it didn't come back so that economic actors would still be able to reap the benefits that they determine would be available to them by purchasing things made in other countries rather than here. The fact that it takes tariffs to manipulate their actions to engage in transactions that they otherwise would not is proof that it's a net negative for the economy.

Blargh, blargh, I hate America. Blargh, blargh, I hate Americans coming off unemployment. Blargh, blargh, I just want to see it all burn.

Shaddup.

[Superfluous Man]

Blargh, blargh, I hate America. Blargh, blargh, I hate Americans coming off unemployment. Blargh, blargh, I just want to see it all burn.

Shaddup.

Since it's you who favors burdening Americans with tariffs to punish them for and prevent them from making decisions that they find to be in their best interests, it's you who hates America.

[Zippyjuan]

Tariffs are the government's way to pick winners and losers in the economy.

[timosman]

Since it's you who favors burdening Americans with tariffs to punish them for and prevent them from making decisions that they find to be in their best interests, it's you who hates America.

Says Mr. Superfluous.

[timosman]

Tariffs are the government's way to pick winners and losers in the economy.

Now tell us what are subsidies.

[Superfluous Man]

Says Mr. Superfluous.

Also, Ron Paul.

[phill4paul]

Since it's you who favors burdening Americans with tariffs to punish them for and prevent them from making decisions that they find to be in their best interests, it's you who hates America.

Lol. Shaddup, America hater. Ain't no one buying what ya got to sell.

[Superfluous Man]

Lol. Shaddup, America hater. Ain't no one buying what ya got to sell.

Is Ron Paul an America hater too?

All I'm selling is free market economics. Everyone who support's this site's mission is buying that.

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/09/ron-...consumers.html

Ron Paul to Trump: Tariffs won't help US economy because they're really just hidden taxes on consumers

If threatened U.S. trade tariffs against China go into effect, they'll hurt working Americans, Ron Paul told CNBC on Monday.

President Donald Trump needs to stop "blaming a free market and capitalism" for the U.S. trade imbalances with China and other nations, said Paul, a former 12-term GOP congressman from Texas and three-time presidential candidate.

"If we can't compete then we have to say, 'Why can't we compete?'" he said.

But trying to fix decades of "mismanaged" trade with tariffs is the wrong approach, Paul argued on "Squawk on the Street."

"A tariff can't fix this. A tariff is a tax and the tax is on the people who live in the country who raises it," he said. "People that might be enjoying $25 tennis shoes will have to pay $100. That doesn't help anybody."

Earlier Monday, White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told CNBC the tariffs announced by Trump last week are just a proposal. Kudlow, formerly a CNBC senior contributor and ex-Wall Street economist, said he hopes it brings China to the negotiating table to reconcile "decades of misdeeds" on trade.

More at link.

[phill4paul]

Is Ron Paul an America hater too?

All I'm selling is free market economics. Everyone who support's this site's mission is buying that.

But, we do not live in a free-market. Head in ass, again? We have what we have. And what we have now is a building middle-class. After decades of being wiped out. More off welfare and government dependence. Once off welfare a more conservative view takes place. A sense of place and pride. Liberty is built upon a strong middle class. I can understand why you'd hate that. Burn it down. Burn it ALL down. I just don't care for your mantra.

Edit: And shove your neg. rep. up your ass to dwell with your head. If you've got a statement to make make it here in the forums.

[Zippyjuan]

Now tell us what are subsidies.

They are distortions as well.

[TER]

Donald Trump is the best President of our lifetime.

Please proceed...