Friday, April 1, 2011

Trina Solar's (TSL) Rise an Anomaly, or Sustainable?

Trina Solar jumped 4 percent recently, coming close to a share price it hasn't reached since January. What remains to be seen is whether this move is sustainable or not. It appears it isn't, even though the media and pundits in love with "green" technology are attempting to make it appear to be.

Several factors are in play surrounding the solar sector, with most being negative.

The only element that offers some strength to the industry is what, if any, response will there be from countries as a result of the media coverage of the nuclear industry because of the earthquake in Japan.

In reality it doesn't look like over the long term it will have an impact, as the need for energy hasn't changed, and the silly idea solar or wind can in any way make a significant impact at this time can't be taken seriously.

Other than that, most of the news in the solar industry is negative.

The continuous high price of energy produced produced by solar continues to be the most negative, and while there are obvious calls for companies to lower prices, that's much easier said than done, and it'll get harder as cash-strapped and debt-laden nations cut back on their subsidies, without which there would be no solar industry, speaking to the extreme weakness and vulnerability it faces, as the market isn't generating demand, but governments are, making solar a very risky proposition indeed.

One report, this one from Reuters, cited unnamed sources saying China is going to double its installation goal over the next five years for solar, a dubious assertion at best, and unproven as to its veracity.

China has already publicly stated it's going to continue on with its nuclear strategy, even with the relatively irrelevant situation in Japan.

It's not irrelevant because of those that may be harmed from valiantly fighting to reduce the damage from radioactive release, but because it has been far over a century since Japan had experienced a earthquake of that magnitude, making it a situation that could never be planned for or necessarily expected to happen more than once in a couple of generations.

So to make decisions and plans based on those times of anomalies isn't something leaders will do, because it isn't realistic, as actions will prove out.

Solar isn't going to gain because of the earthquake in Japan, contrary to the rhetoric governments and politicians are employing at this time.

Think of how people would respond if they aren't allowed to have needed energy. That guarantees nuclear will be a key part of the energy future. Period!

All the hoopla about renewable energy and other dishonest assertions will quietly go away once the situation in Japan fades out of memory, and the reality of energy needs today kick in.

Solar will continue to be a risky and unpredictable sector for years, always getting some positive sentiment when negative news appears to strengthen it, only to fall back again when the emotional response falls by the wayside.

So Trina Solar, along with its peers, will continue to be in for a rough ride as they are dependent on factors like demand which is completely out of there control and not dependent on market forces, but government subsidies and decisions; a fickle scenario at best.

Trina Solar closed Thursday at $30.12, gaining $0.48, or 1.62 percent.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Again, you're a moron.

Anonymous said...

...and at least, disclose the fact that you are short solar. Your thought process and analysis is incredibly worthless.

Singing Competition Montreal said...

Can we really afford to use the word, "Irrevant", as the blogger put it, in any context related to the situation in Japan?

Can we afford to have these natural disasters taking place even in "once in few dacades" like the blogger put it, and distroy and negatively affect the livelihood of so many people? I bet he / she is not Japanese who live in Fukushima or Tokyo. Would he / she change his opinion only if something like that took place in his area? Moreover, he / she speaks of statics that these events take place only once in few dacades, but does he / she really know that it's not going to take place next year?

Can we really afford to overlook the imperfections of the engineers' ability in the nuclear industry? I am a damn good engineer myself, but I would not trust it one bit if someone says our nuclear plant will be safe no matter what. In fact, didn't the Japanese government always say that it's safe no matter what?

Can we afford to ignore possible attacks from terrorister groups, North Korea, etc., to nuclear plants, when it comes to the type of damages that are likely to occur with the nuclear disaster?

Well, the blogger may take a chance to all of the above concerns, but again, I am certain that he / she does not live in Japan. As well, he / she may be ignoring the concept of our well being and fundamental needs in feeling safe in our living environments.

The three nuclear accidents in the last three decades have already proven to me that anything can happen.

I find also the blogger ignores our collective ability to take necessary measures and steps to the eventual elimination of nuclear power. How about we mix the renewable energy sources in our energy policy as much as we can afford and we do that progressively as quickly as possible rather than counting it out? I wonder if he / she has vested interest in the nuclear industry.

Anonymous said...

Ironically, the price of gold is highly inflated due to governments using it as a symbol of wealth. If gold were strictly used as a commodity like other minerals, and not as currency, it would be worth a 10th of what it is.

As for solar energy, the author's argument is so poor, it does not deserve a response.