Forgot your password?
China United States

China Probes US Renewable Energy Policy 240

Posted by samzenpus
from the good-for-the-goose-good-for-the-gander dept.
PolygamousRanchKid writes "China's Commerce Ministry on Friday announced an investigation into U.S. government policy and subsidy support for renewable energy, after a U.S. decision earlier this month to probe sales of Chinese-made solar panels in the United States. 'The Ministry of Commerce has decided to initiate a trade barrier investigation into policy support and subsidies for the U.S. renewable energy sector,' a statement on the ministry's website ( said. The announcement said Chinese companies argued that the U.S. policies 'constitute a trade barrier against the export of Chinese renewable energy products to the United States.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Probes US Renewable Energy Policy

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Remember Solyndra (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 27, 2011 @01:10PM (#38182520)

    Oh, and Chinese made solar panels sold for cheaper than the cost of them being made is not an advantage?

    In the 1980s, Harley was nearly shuttered by motorcycles from abroad being dumped on the US market for cheaper than they could be produced. Congress stopped the BS and even though one may not like hawgs, they are still around, and a decent choice. Now our congress just stands back and lets foreign companies do business practices that would have caused war declarations in the past, especially vital infrastructure decisions.

    Remember, alternative energy is likely how our economy will get out of the shitter. There is a lot of innovation that can occur in every place for energy generation, storage, and conservation. China dumping their panels to shutter US companies is them attacking the economy and wanting to keep that from happening.

    Oh, their WTO complaints? The WTO agreement in itself is in violation of the Constitution and fundamental US sovereignty. Once we get the current crop of cretins in Congress out of office (regardless of "D", "R", or in the case of one Internet-hostile senator, an "I" by their names), maybe it can go with them.

  • by MichaelCrawford (610140) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @01:19PM (#38182592) Homepage Journal

    The us forbids the importation of manufactured goods that are sold for less than what they cost to manufacture. Otherwise foreign firms with deep enough pockets could drive their American competitors completely out of business.

    Any us firm that suspects that this "dumping" is taking place can ask the Feds to investigate, which may result in a punitive tariff being used to level the playing field.

    Ubuntu comes frOm south Africa and is distributed free of charge. Why can't Microsoft request a punitive tariff on it's import?

    Such tariffs are applied quite a lot but I've never heard of them being applied to software.

  • by hedwards (940851) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @01:27PM (#38182642)

    It goes somewhat beyond that. The issue isn't just the lending, but where the money is coming from in the first place and all the deals in China denominated in USD rather than RMB. Additionally, much of the money that they've been lending the US should have been going to the workers to help them climb out of poverty or improve workplace safety.

    Not that I can blame the Chinese government in this instance, they're in a really tough spot and even a relatively modest appreciation in the RMB can lead to huge numbers of job losses. I just think that if the shoe fits...

  • The obvious difference here is that, while the Fed manipulates currencies, there is an international effect due to that manipulation, ie the price of the dollar rises or falls against other currencies. There may even be intentional manipulation to try to force an outcome, but the fact remains that value in monetary markets is NOT set by the Fed, it is set by what money market buyers believe the real value of the dollar to be. China, however, has pegged the yuan to the US dollar, and artificially lowered it's value in order to obtain a more competitive stance in international markets. It's estimated that the yuan may be undervalued by as much as 37% when compared to its actual purchasing power. And yet the US is the biggest currency manipulator? I think that's a bit of hyperbole that we're better off without.
  • by cavreader (1903280) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @02:07PM (#38182886)
    China did not extend US credit. They purchased government bonds and securities for secure investments. US investments are still considered one of the safest places for foreign countries to park and grow their cash. Even with all of China's investments to date they amount to only 6% of outstanding bonds and securities. And while we are at it how about we interject a few more facts? The US is still the largest economy and the number #1 manufacturer in the world even after we have supposedly sent all our jobs overseas. China has narrowed the gap, and may one day become the largest but but they have started running into problems just like the US subsidizing the renewable energy market and they are facing more competition from the other southeast Asian countries who can pay slave wages to compete. China may one day reach #1 but they have population of 1.3 billion compared to the US population of 300 million. They should be able to produce more but for some reason they have not quite got the hang of it yet.
  • Re:Remember Solyndra (Score:5, Interesting)

    by tp1024 (2409684) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @02:28PM (#38183002)
    Just let the dollar depreciate to a fair value (meaning: a lot) and the US industry will be competitive in no time. You would have to pay a lot more for your oil and Chinese consumer products though. When all the other countries have artificially depressed currencies, you should start to wonder about yourself. You know, just as you should when all the other jerks are driving on the wrong side of the road.
  • Re:Remember Solyndra (Score:3, Interesting)

    by man_of_mr_e (217855) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @04:52PM (#38183912)

    Harley's are designed to be "touring" bikes. The "potato-potato" noise is part of their trademark, and deliberately designed into it.

    The exact same engine you see in a harley is used in performance bikes made by Buell, and they are pretty big in the racing circuit. They're just tuned differently.

  • Re:Not True! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by KingMotley (944240) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @06:40PM (#38184658) Journal

    Let's continue the list of people involved with the loans:
    Teachers from high school economics class
    Oh.. And the guy/girl who actively went looking for a loan.

    Let's also give the list of people involved with McDonalds being able to sell Big Macs:
    City Council
    McDonalds Corporate
    State Business License Department
    The engineer who built the building
    The workers who put in the asphalt drive through
    The company who made the drive through
    Thomas edison for inventing the technology for the drive through speaker
    Oh, and the lard ass who ordered 2 big macs for lunch.

  • by roman_mir (125474) on Sunday November 27, 2011 @07:08PM (#38184848) Homepage Journal

    Income disparity is a symptom.

    - yes, a symptom of government interference with the competition in the markets.

    The real problem is that when you concentrate the wealth in a small percentage of the population with more than enough wealth than they could ever spend.. that money just sits there, rather than flowing through the economy.

    - pure nonsense.

    Steve Jobs heirs will have to pay around 900 million dollars in death taxes. They will have to SELL their shares in various companies, that's not money 'sitting' somewhere, that's money that is working in the economy.

    Few people hold their money under their mattress (figuratively or literally, whatever), but the number of people doing it increases as government destroys ability to earn interest (0% interest and huge inflation) with all this anti-business policies of income/payroll taxes and various regulations and competition destruction with all the unelected offices that create the regulation and all the counterfeiting and borrowing.

    So people buy hard assets that are just bought to PROTECT against the ill effects of inflation that is created by the government. So people buy gold, silver, other commodities, they take possession because they don't want the counterparty risk either. That's a response to a stagnating economy, which stagnates due to gov't intervention.

    People who have money want to grow their money, and since they already have the large incomes, it means that they know how to grow their money, definitely they do it in the private sector (unless they are connected to the corrupt government one way or another), that's why we want as little government as possible - so people would use their money productively.

    Again, Jobs didn't have to work a day past 1985, yet he did. He didn't spend 1% of his money, so what? It's not sitting around, it's now going to be a firesale probably, and Warren Buffet will benefit from his position as the largest investor into BH yet again (maybe not this time, Apple shares probably won't go down much in this firesale, but they will go down). Buffet is large hypocrite, making money off death taxes by restructuring companies that are destroyed in fire sales when large fortunes are taxed after death. Oh, also he pays whatever tax that is corporate tax of his company, of which he owns about 30%, so whatever his corporation pays is his first tax, then it's 15% dividend tax. All of this is bad for the economy of-course.

    Any extraction of private funds from the economy and waste of this funds by government is a bad thing, it literally destroys jobs and companies.

    Put the money in the hands of people that need it, and they will spend it.. on food, clothing, things they need to survive, and maybe a few luxuries.

    - no, this is totally unproductive way to trade.

    I wouldn't want my products to be sold to people who don't produce anything and live on welfare, because trade is about comparative advantage, not about nominal dollar signs. I don't want to trade with people who can't give me any valuable product/service in return for the pieces of paper they get for free.

    What's stupid about this is that the wealthy should understand this. They should understand that their money gains value when the economy is strong. They should understand that stockpiling their money makes it worth LESS.

    - no, what is stupid is that you don't understand anything about money and you think that the people who make money don't understand it.

Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable.