Solar Cost Trends

SOLAR COST TRENDS Prepared by ENGIE Impact Updated October 4, 2023

info@engieimpact.com | engieimpact.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview

3

The Takeaway

3

US Solar Development Costs and Trends

4

1. Solar Panels and Inverters

5

Polysilicon

5

Ingots, Wafers, Cells, and Modules

6

Commodity Inputs: Aluminum, Copper, and Silver

7

Inverters

10

2. Balance of System Costs

10

Racking and Mounting

10

Electrical Cabling

11

3. Labor and Construction

11

4. Costs of Capital

11

5. Shipping

12

6. Regulatory Policies and Impacts

13

Federal Incentives and Trade Policies

13

State & Local Restrictions

13

PJM Interconnection Reform

14

Conclusion

15

© ENGIE Impact | 2

Overview Solar PPA prices jumped 40% last year. Will prices keep climbing?

Solar development costs had been steadily declining for the last decade until the trajectory was flipped on its head by COVID supply chain constraints, demand surges, international trade tensions, and inflation.

In the last year alone, solar PPA prices jumped 40% due to significant increases in: • • • •

Labor, material, and component cost increases Regulatory, trade, and supply chain disruptions Interconnection constraints Customer demand

The question we hear from most organizations with renewable energy or emission reduction targets is will these cost trends continue?

In the following analysis, Charles Benisch and Rick Margolin, Directors of Renewable Advisory at ENGIE Impact, shed light on solar energy’s five key cost drivers: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Solar panels and inverters Structural balance of system (BOS) components Labor and construction costs Costs of Capital Shipping Regulatory policies and impacts

The Takeaway Solar PPA prices will remain volatile Near-term (24-36 months) solar project prices are poised to continue rising, with relief thereafter as supply growth starts to catch up to demand growth. The solar market should see some price relief over the long-term, but the fragile supply chains and tenuous macroeconomic factors will create bouts of volatility.

© ENGIE Impact | 3

US Solar Development Costs and Trends

Source: NREL 2022.Q1

Component

Solar Panels and Inverters

% of Solar Cost

40-50%

Balance of System

20%

Labor and Construction

15%

Costs of Capital

~33%

Shipping

Sub-Component

Mid-term Cost Trend

Key Question

Polysilicon

Will capacity expansions outpace demand?

Wafers, Cells, Modules

How quickly will supply chains diversify?

Metals (Aluminum, Copper, Silver)

Will global demand out-pace supply?

Inverters

Will commodity input prices keep falling?

Structural

Will steel prices keep falling?

Electrical

Will copper prices climb?

Will economy grow or enter recession?

?

What will central banks decide?

Will supply chains continue opening?

© ENGIE Impact | 4

1. Solar Panels and Inverters Solar panel costs may be declining In the opening months of 2023, the world’s two largest panel makers, China’s LONGi and Tongwei, both announced 30% price reductions resulting from lower input material costs.

With panels representing 35%-45% i of a solar project’s total costs, this price reduction is significant and may result in lower development costs and PPA prices.

Examining the reliability of these price reductions, we should look to the cost of solar panel raw materials, which account for up to 50% of a solar panel’s overall cost according to the International Energy Agency.

The key materials ENGIE Impact examined in an effort to forecast solar panel cost trends include: • • • • •

Polysilicon Ingot, wafer, cell, and module production Aluminum Copper Silver

Each of these materials faces its own unique market conditions that will impact the overall price of solar panels and PPAs, but panel prices are trending downward into 2025.

Polysilicon Polysilicon is the base material for solar panels and has proven to be a volatile market, having moved from record highs to near-record lows in less than a year.

While polysilicon only comprises about 3%-4% of a solar panel’s total weight, it can account for nearly 50% of a panel’s total value. ii Skyrocketing polysilicon costs pushed solar panel costs higher from 2020 to 2022, but have since been in a precipitous decline with a surge of supply hitting the market.

Requiring roughly 2.7 grams of polysilicon per Watt, the $31/kg drop in polysilicon costs since December represents approximately $0.08/Watt reduction in the total cost of solar modules.

Solar Grade Silicon: Global Price Average 60 50 40

$/kg

Polysilicon prices reached an 11-year high in August 2022 at $39.19/kg. An already capacity-lean industry became constrained by COVID-related issues like workforce depletion and supply-chain disruptions, while at the same time demand was surging. Following that, however, several production capacity expansions came online, supply chains debottlenecked, and global demand started to slow. Prices have plummeted and are now flirting with record lows, reaching just $8.38/kg in June 2023.

30 20 10 0

Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance

The global polysilicon supply environment will become more robust over the next 18 months with several new production facilities scheduled to be built.

© ENGIE Impact | 5

With the reduced material cost and increased production, BNEF expects module prices to drop from an average $0.231/Watt as of January 9, 2023 down to $0.20/Watt by mid-2023.

Continued polysilicon price reductions are far from a guarantee, however. Polysilicon is heavily concentrated in China, which accounts for roughly 95% of global supply, including all of the aforementioned new-build capacity. As expressed by the IEA, “concentration along the PV supply chain at the jurisdictional, geographical, and company level make the supply chain vulnerable to single incidents, whether they be a country’s individual policy choices, a natural disaster, a war, a pandemic, technical failures or individual company decisions.”

Further complicating matters, about 40% of China’s polysilicon production comes from the Xinjian province where significant concerns about China’s treatment of the local Uyghur population have prompted numerous western markets to adopt restrictions or implement outright bans on products sourced from that region.

While the polysilicon costs are expected to decline over the long-term, concentrated supplies and geopolitical tensions may introduce short-term price volatility.

Ingots, Wafers, Cells, and Modules Solar panel manufacturing components include ingots, wafers, cells, and modules: • • • •

Ingots are rods of purified polysilicon.

Wafers are cut from ingots into thin squares form solar cells when wired together.

Cells are then connected to form modules.

Modules are glassed into a metal frame to form a solar panel.

We expect improvements in component production and system efficiency gains to relieve panel prices over the long-term, as technology advances, cutting and casting methods, and energy efficiencies have all reduced the cost of ingot production over the past decade.

Wafer manufacturing costs have declined as the amount of polysilicon needed to produce energy has been cut in half since 2008. The International Energy Agency (IEA) expects wafer efficiencies to continue improving, projecting a further 25% reduction in polysilicon intensity by 2030.

Solar cells are also becoming more efficient. Today’s cells are 20% more efficient than cells were 4-5 years ago.

The IEA believes new solutions could increase the efficiency of solar cells from 22% in real-life operating conditions currently to 30% at competitive costs.

© ENGIE Impact | 6

Most importantly, component production capacity is growing and is expected to far exceed demand. The 360 GW/year global wafer production capacity is already twice current demand levels, and the delta is expected to increase over the next several years.

The world’s leading manufacturers have issued a slew of recent expansion announcements. For example, in January 2023 LONGi, the world’s largest corporate ingot and wafer producer, announced plans to double its production capacity with the construction of a new plant in Shaanxi, China — slated for 2024.Q3. Trina Solar will open a new 6.5 GW wafer facility in Vietnam in 2023. South Korea’s QCells announced plans to build a 3.3 GW capacity, full-production chain plant near Atlanta, Georgia with US-sourced polysilicon.

As with polysilicon production, these sectors’ extreme concentration of production introduces upside price risks.

• • •

Nearly 97% of global wafer production and capacity is concentrated in China.

The three largest Chinese producers (LONGi, Tianjin Zhonghuan, and GCL) collectively produce 65% of world wafer supply.

China hosts 80% of global cell production and is actively developing an additional 250 GW of cell production capacity.

Module assembly is slightly more diversified with 38 countries across the globe with production capability. iii Only 19 of these have more than 1 GW of capacity, however. China still represents 75% of global module capacity and 30% of its capacity is concentrated in the Jiangsu province.

While we expect solar component costs to decline over the long term, the concentration of production and exposure to polysilicon costs may introduce price volatility in the short term.

Commodity Inputs: Aluminum, Copper, and Silver In addition to polysilicon, ingot, wafer, and cell costs, we should examine solar panel sensitivities to the remaining metals that make up a significant portion of a panel’s overall cost.

© ENGIE Impact | 7

Aluminum Aluminum is used to frame and box the solar panel and represents roughly 9%-12% of the panel’s overall value.

In April 2020, the onset of COVID lockdowns crushed demand and sent aluminum prices to all-time record lows at $1422/ton. Less than two years later, prices catapulted to record highs at $3985/ton in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Prices quickly retreated as the global supply environment reshuffled with idled capacity and new builds coming online, while demand restoration was tepid.

As of June 2023, prices have come off the record highs by about 45% to sit around $2200/ton.

$/ton

Aluminum prices have been highly volatile the past few years due to the Russia-Ukraine war and COVID-induced disruptions to both the supply and demand side, but prices are expected to moderate over the next few years as producers bring production back online at a pace that should exceed restored demand.

Aluminum (London Metal Exchange) 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0

We expect prices to remain volatile in the near-term. While the supply-side has benefitted from capacity expansions, Asian production is threatened by severe droughts exacerbating the cost of power to aluminum smelters, Russian exports remain hampered by global trade sanctions, and European production (accounting for roughly 16% of global supply) still grapples with high energy costs. On the demand-side, a surge is expected from China’s re-opening of its economy from COVID-lockdowns, while many major economies have so far dodged a severe recession.

Over the long-term, prices are expected to continue easing with production capacities increasing from expansions, new builds, and production plants coming back online after being idled during COVID. Additionally, supply should be enhanced by the fact that aluminum is a highly recyclable metal. At present, approximately 42% of aluminum that reaches the end of its useful life gets recycled. Those figures are expected to increase with investments in collection and recycling capacities.

Like panel polysilicon and panel production, aluminum supply concentration is a material price risk. China represents 60% of global supply and Russia is the world’s third largest producer. Weather, climate, geopolitical, and concentrated risk factors may result in bouts of price volatility.

Copper Copper is used in solar panels, inverters, and transmission lines for cables, wires, and connectors. Though the actual volume of copper used in solar projects is relatively small, copper inputs can account for anywhere from 5%-15% of a project’s costs.

Copper markets have been — and are expected to remain — volatile, with prices likely to follow an upward trajectory on the expectation that supply growth will not be able to match demand growth.

ENGIE Impact expects copper prices to trend higher as a result of supply shortages, political and environmental disruptions, and minimal capacity expansions. Copper demand, meanwhile, is expected to grow to support the energy transition, alongside China’s re-opening and global decarbonization efforts.

Along with other core metals, copper prices hit record highs in March 2022. Global recession concerns and economic lockdowns in China pushed prices lower through October, but prices have remained at nine-year highs.

© ENGIE Impact | 8

Copper 12,000 10,000 8,000

$/ton

The world’s largest copper producers have repeatedly warned in recent earnings calls that production growth will not be capable of matching demand growth — specifically citing demand from the clean energy transition.

Some estimates indicate clean energy projects may account for 40% of total copper demand by 2040. Wood Mackenzie predicts a 60% increase in copper production (from today’s levels) will be needed to support energy transition goals that limit global warming to 1.5 Celsius by 2050.

6,000 4,000 2,000 0

While copper supply is better diversified than polysilicon and other renewable inputs, it remains vulnerable to supply constraints as more than half the world’s copper production comes from four countries: • • • •

Chile: 30% Peru: 10% China: 8% Democratic Republic of Congo: 8%

Political turmoil in Peru represents a significant supply risk, as nation-wide protests against the Peruvian congress’ removal of the president has constrained production.

Moreover, water vulnerabilities and climate change add risk to copper prices as copper production is a waterintensive process. The IEA finds more than 50% of copper production is in areas deemed to be facing severe water shortages.

Unlike copper mining, copper processing is highly concentrated with China hosting more than 40% of the world’s processing capacity and few expansions or new builds anticipated outside of China.

Over the long-term, new capacity additions and increased recycling may alleviate some of copper’s price pressures, but we expect prices to remain elevated and subject to supply shocks in the near-term.

Silver Though silver accounts for less than 5% of the weight of a solar cell, it can account for 20% of a cell’s value.

Silver prices are expected to display great volatility in the near- and medium-terms due to concerns over broad macro-economic conditions, low inventories, and limited production expansions. Complicating matters, silver production is notoriously inelastic to price and demand trends. Bringing on new capacity is a slow process and only done when producers’ confidence in future prices is strong.

The start of COVID pushed silver prices to their highest marks in nearly a decade. An apex was reached towards the end of May 2021, after which prices slowly ground lower. However, prices remain 50% higher than the prevailing trend from 2014-2020.

Silver is broadly used as a monetary hedge, so its price is significantly influenced by macro-economic conditions.

With solar production accounting for 12% of global silver demand and potential demand increases resulting from macroeconomic uncertainty, we expect silver to maintain upward price pressures.

Global silver production is better diversified than some of the previously discussed commodities: three countries (Mexico, China, and Peru) produce a bit more than 45% of global supply, while the remainder is spread over more than 40 countries.

© ENGIE Impact | 9

Inverters Solar inverters convert direct current (DC) power from solar panels into alternating current (AC) for transmission and distribution and typically account for 2%-7% of a total utility-scale solar system’s costs. iv v Inverter costs have been on a steady decline for the past decade due to efficiency gains in manufacturing processes and economiesof-scale.

Inverter costs are expected to continue easing resulting from continued manufacturing efficiencies and expanded production capacity. EPC Power announced in November plans to build a new inverter factory in South Carolina, while SMA kicked off its latest program to expand its capacity from 21 GW to 40 GW by 2024 with announcement of a new gigafactory in Germany this year.

However, inverter unit costs are very dependent on input material prices — making prices vulnerable to broader commodity market moves. Copper, aluminum, and zinc are all primary component materials in solar inverters and subject to the short-term price shocks described above.

Unlike polysilicon, ingots, solar cells, wafers, and panels, the utility-scale inverter market is fairly diversified.

China’s Huawei and SunGrow produce 43% of global supply, but the remainder is spread across 15-20 companies including Germany, Israel, Switzerland, Thailand, and the U.S. vi vii

2. Balance of System Costs Balance of System (BoS) costs refer to the costs associated with all the components of a photovoltaic (PV) solar system beyond the panels and inverters, including but not limited to structural components such as racking and mounting systems, and electrical components such as wiring systems and switches. BoS costs account for roughly 20% of the total cost of a utility-scale solar project. viii

Racking and Mounting Racking and mounting costs represent 9%-14% of total system costs and are expected to decline with anticipated reductions in steel prices. ix Racks are used to hold several solar panels in tandem above ground or atop a roof. Mounts fix individual panels to a rack. Both the racks and mounts are primarily composed of steel, but also feature aluminum and zinc.

Steel prices increased sharply during COVID. Grappling with reductions in US-domestic output and tariffs on Chinese imports, steel costs (and thus racking costs) reached all-time highs in September 2021, and again in March 2022. Prices have since retreated as supply-chain bottlenecks have eased, demand growth has been tepid, and inventories have rebuilt, though prices remain above pre-pandemic levels.

Steel prices are expected to remain fairly stable over the next few years, but vulnerable to disruptions. While demand should be strong from China’s re-opening, North America and Europe’s energy transitions, and prospective avoidance of a global recession, the supply side growth is expected to more than keep pace. In the latest round of corporate earnings calls, the largest steel producers announced a variety of productive capacity expansions across the globe.

$/thousand tons

Steel Rebar 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2020.01

2021.01

2022.01

2023.01

As with aluminum, copper, and silver, steel is also highly recyclable and experiencing increases in recycling capacity worldwide.

© ENGIE Impact | 10

However, the steel market has risk exposure. Turkey — the world's 7th largest steel producer — was levelled by a mammoth 7.8 earthquake, with its epicenter in a region responsible for about 35% of Turkish production. Ongoing tensions between the U.S. and China has ensnared the steel industry in tariff and trade rulings — and is likely to continue. The Russia-Ukraine war continues to disrupt Russian supplies and European production. Additionally, the industry is energy intensive, leaving it vulnerable to fluctuations in energy market dynamics.

Electrical Cabling Copper price increases will almost assuredly lead to increased cabling and electrical BoS costs.

Cabling and the electrical balance of the systems typically make up 7%-10% of a solar system’s cost. x Wires and cables are used to connect cells and panels and units to inverters and transmission systems. The primary component of cables is copper. As such, it is probable that cable prices could rise over the next couple of years due to copper market conditions previously discussed.

3. Labor and Construction Labor costs typically account for approximately 10% of system costs. xi xii The U.S. labor market has become extremely tight — particularly in sectors related to construction — and is pushing solar development costs higher.

Unless the U.S. enters a significant recession, we expect that tightness to persist.

Demand for construction labor remains strong. The Associated Builder & Contractors survey of members shows project backlogs increased appreciably in 2022, breaching 3-year highs. xiii As a result of the tight market, labor wages are climbing. Compensation for construction workers in Texas, for example, experienced a 4.3% increase for the 12-month period ending September 2022.

4. Costs of Capital The cost to borrow capital is perhaps one of the most influential components of project costs, yet one that has only recently taken on a greater risk profile. For most of the last ten years, interest rates on debt have been extraordinarily and perpetually low. But now, central banks and their downstream lending partners are ratcheting up rates, which will drive up renewables project costs.

Renewable projects are acutely exposed to changes in borrowing costs. Renewables projects generally tend to be built by emerging market players who are more dependent on borrowing than entrenched incumbents.

Furthermore, energy projects – in general – rely on upfront borrowing on expectations of future revenue from power generation and sales. In this regard, renewables projects are particularly exposed to interest rate volatility because the bulk of a project’s costs are upfront, as opposed to a fossil-fueled plant that incurs costs of fuel through the life of its operation.

Energy transition projects can also be more expensive to finance because they feature relatively new technologies and markets that are less certain. As a result, renewables projects can carry debt risk premiums between 1-2%. xiv A global survey of utility-scale renewable projects finds the cost of capital for utility-scale solar PV and onshore wind range from 2-6%, and offshore wind project rates ranging from 4-7%.

© ENGIE Impact | 11

For renewables projects, these costs of capital can account for 1/3rd of a project’s levelized cost of energy, and up to ½ for utility-scale projects. xv xvi

6 5 4 3 2

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

0

2007

1 2006

Percentage

A study published in the journal Nature surmised that, if European interest rates were to return to early 2008 highs (pre-global financial crisis), the levelized costs of electricity for solar would increase by 11% and 25% for onshore wind. xvii Another study published by Energetic Insurance estimated that shifting interest rates from 3% to 5% could increase project costs by more than 11%. xviii

U.S. Federal Reserve Federal Funds Interest Rate

Source: U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

5. Shipping While transportation costs have dropped nearly 75% since January 2022 and are expected to remain subdued, the concentration of solar production within China specifically, and Asia broadly, leaves the market vulnerable to shipping cost spikes.

Global freight rates (both for seaborne and land-based transportation) catapulted to record highs during COVID. xix Shipping costs have since crashed back to pre-pandemic levels, and most analysts expect prices to stabilize as supply-chain disruptions resolve and recession concerns temper global demand. However, the past few years’ dynamic laid bare the freight-sector’s fragility and exposure to price spikes.

China-Global & Shanghai Export Container Freight Index

Source: MacroMicro

© ENGIE Impact | 12

6. Regulatory Policies and Impacts There are material headwinds and tailwinds at the federal, regional, and local levels that may impact solar system prices. We focus on three of the most consequential developments: • • •

Federal incentives and trade policies State & local policies PJM interconnection reform

Federal Incentives and Trade Policies The U.S.’ adoption of the Inflation Reduction Act is already bearing fruit. Shortly after its passage, a slew of new development projects and US-based manufacturing operations were announced. The IRA’s existence was threatened in the Spring of 2023 amid the U.S. potential to hit its debt ceiling. Negotiations between Congress and the President included proposals to impose major spending cuts, a large bulk of which would have come from the IRA. The debt ceiling issue was temporarily resolved without cuts to IRA, but the event demonstrated how the program is vulnerable to political fighting.

International trade issues continue to strain solar development costs and timelines.

Concerns over China’s treatment of its Uyghur population in the Xinjian province prompted global markets to restrictions on goods emanating from the province. In the U.S. alone, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) has led to approximately 3 GW of Chinese solar panels being held in embargo.

US Department of Commerce and other estimates indicate another 9-12 GW of Chinese panels could be detained for UFLPA in 2023.

Compounding the forced labor concerns associated with UFLPA, the U.S. is also confronting China over suspicions that Chinese solar producers are dumping product and/or finding ways to circumvent U.S. import tariffs.

The U.S. Department of Commerce opened an investigation in April 2022 in response to allegations that Chinese manufacturers were avoiding payment of U.S. duties by re-routing solar cells and modules through Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. In December, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a preliminary judgement finding four of eight companies in question attempted to avoid duties by re-routing supplies through Southeast Asia in December. xx The Chinese producers under investigation account for roughly 80% of U.S. panels.

U.S. President Biden issued a 24-month pause on solar tariffs from four Southeast Asian countries in June 2022.

In May 2023, Congress passed legislation to end the president’s moratorium and force collection of tariffs, both actively and retroactively. The President vetoed the bill, and Congress failed to override the veto, but the events demonstrate the contentiousness of the issue and pose the possibility for tariffs or other restrictions to reappear.

State & Local Restrictions The subject of renewables has increasingly become a political issue in many areas of the U.S. and abroad. While many states and localities adopt climate and energy policies that incentivize adoption of renewables, a seemingly equal number are proposing or adopting policies to stunt growth. In some instances, deployment of renewables is met with opposition based on local residents concerns about environmental and scenic impairments. In other instances, renewables are discussed in the context of energy grid reliability. In some cases, renewables have been incorporated into culture wars.

© ENGIE Impact | 13

In the Texas ERCOT market, this year’s biennial legislative session featured a slew of bills overtly or indirectly hostile to the renewables environment. While the session ultimately ended better for renewables than it could have been, a variety of bills and measures were adopted to make the power market a more challenging environment for renewables. Furthermore, advocates of some of the anti-renewables legislation have clearly indicated the end of the legislation session does not mark the end of their efforts. Advocates have said they will use regulatory forum to promote tighter permitting rules, grid reliability programs to incentivize fossil-power sources and penalize intermittent renewables, and cancel renewables incentives like tax breaks and zoning districts.

Restricting permitting of renewables has become a more widespread means of stunting renewables growth. Ohio has enabled county commissioners the right to adopt resolutions to restrict large wind and solar developments; to date, 13 counties have adopted such policies. In Arizona, the legislature passed a bill to do the same thing, but it was ultimately vetoed by the governor. Oklahoma has initiated rulemaking procedures to eliminate a variety of incentives for renewables projects, while a multitude of states have restricted state funds from being invested with any fund manager that utilizes Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria in their investment analysis.

All of these efforts indicate the need to closely monitor developments and state and local levels for prospective impact on renewables markets and developments.

PJM Interconnection Reform PPA prices in PJM are rising in-line with interconnection cost increases (which doubled from an average $42/kW from 2000-19 to $84/kW in 2020-22) and an interconnection backlog that ballooned 240% since 2019. xxi To streamline the interconnection process, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved PJM’s queue reform in 2022, which will transition the interconnection process from a first-come, first-served method to a first-ready, first served process. PJM has also adopted and proposed modifications to its capacity market rules to better enable integration of intermittent generation sources such as renewables.

While we expect these reforms to streamline processes and reduce cost over time, the reform instituted a twoyear hiatus on new interconnection applications — stifling the development of new renewable assets, limiting supply, and pushing prices higher.

© ENGIE Impact | 14

Conclusion Solar project costs are influenced by a multitude of components and factors, which are expected to drive price volatility. In the aggregate, indications are that near-term (12-24 months) solar system prices may gently ease with component price declines prospectively robust enough to outweigh upward price pressures from global trade issues, clogged interconnection queues, and uncertain policy environments. In the mid-term, prices should moderate: there is the prospect for input commodity costs on polysilicon and metals to rise, while demand is projected to continue growing. However, some of those upward price influences may be offset by improved manufacturing and cell efficiencies, and manufacturing capacity increases and supply diversification.

© ENGIE Impact | 15

i

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf

ii

Special Report on Solar PV Global Supply Chains, International Energy Agency. Link

Other countries of note with module production capacity include Vietnam (5% of global capacity); Malaysia (4%); South Korea (4%); United States (4%); Thailand (2%); Germany (2%); and India (1%). IEA iii

iv

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf

v

https://www.ioscm.com/blog/will-supply-chain-issues-scupper-the-solar-industrys-moment-in-the-sun/

vi

https://www.imarcgroup.com/solar-pv-inverter-manufacturers

https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/global-top-10-solar-pv-inverter-vendors-account-for-82-ofmarket-share/ vii

https://www.ioscm.com/blog/will-supply-chain-issues-scupper-the-solar-industrys-moment-in-the-sun/

viii ix

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf

x

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf

xi

https://www.ioscm.com/blog/will-supply-chain-issues-scupper-the-solar-industrys-moment-in-the-sun/

xii

https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/77324.pdf

https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-Releases/entryid/19740/abcs-construction-backlog-indicatorflat-in-december-at-highest-level-since-q2-2019 xiii

xiv

https://www.iea.org/articles/the-cost-of-capital-in-clean-energy-transitions

xv

https://www.iea.org/articles/the-cost-of-capital-in-clean-energy-transitions

xvi

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0375-2

xvii

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0375-2

xviii

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-rising-rates-mean-renewable-development-energetic-insurance/

xix

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/11/supply-chain-problems-solar-power-renewable-energy

The companies in violation are BYD, Canadian Solar, Trina Solar, and Vina Solar. Companies not found to be dumping are Boviet, Hanwha, Jinko, and New East Solar. xx

xxi

https://www.publicpower.org/periodical/article/study-finds-steeply-rising-interconnection-costs-pjm

© ENGIE Impact | 16