The announcement came after SunPower executives said last week that demand in the hot Japanese market exceeded what the company could deliver during the first quarter. Last month, market research firm IHS reported that the average wholesale prices for silicon panels delivered to Europe rose for the first time in several years.

The shift has come at a heavy cost to solar manufacturers like First Solar and SunPower, however. For over two years, solar panel makers have had to reduce production or even shutter factories while posting losses quarter after quarter. Dozens have filed for bankruptcy, including Germany’s Alfasolar, as reported by PV Magazine Monday. The bankruptcy of Suntech Power’s main subsidiary in March rattled the industry, particularly those who have bought the Chinese company’s solar panels.

First Solar, which makes solar panels and develops solar power plants, closed its big manufacturing plant in Germany last year and suspended plans to build new factories in Vietnam and Arizona. Those moves as well as First Solar’s efforts to reduce its spending on administration and, to a lesser extent, research development and sales, have allowed the company to survive the downturn. First Solar brought in new top executives over the past year and presented a convincing plan last month for improving its technology and sales in emerging markets for the next several years.

For the past three years, First Solar’s executives have discussed in earnest the need to grab market share in emerging markets such as India, China, the Middle East and Latin America. Germany was once its largest market, but the country, which has steadily reduced its government incentives for solar energy generation, accounted for just three percent of its sales in 2012, according to First Solar’s 2012 annual report.

In an earnings discussion with analysts on Monday, First Solar’s CEO Jim Hughes pointed out that the company has expanded its market reach since early 2012. Back then, it was talking mostly about sales in the United States, Canada, India, Europe and Australia. Its purchase of a Chilean solar power developer earlier this year created a new talking point about Latin America. The Chilean company was developing about 1.5 GW of projects when First Solar announced the acquisition. Overall, First Solar is working on about 1.8 GW of projects in Latin America, though those projects are under development and the company isn’t promising that all of them will succeed.

Hughes also announced that the company has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese city of Ordos in Inner Mongolia for the second phase of a 2GW plan that it first announced in 2009. The second phase will see First Solar supplying 300 MW-500 MW of solar panels, and construction could start in the second half of 2014. The first phase, a 30MW project, is set to start construction in the third quarter of this year, he added.

Meanwhile, the company is building some of the world’s largest solar power plants right here in California. One of them, the 230MW Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One in Los Angeles County, has run into “weather-related delays” during the first quarter of this year. That partly contributed to lower earnings from the previous quarter. Completion of the project is now set for the end of this year rather than the second quarter.

The company generated $755 million in sales for the first quarter of this year, down $320 million from the previous quarter but up $258 million from the year-ago period. It posted $59.1 million in net income, or $0.66 per share for the first quarter, $154.2 million in net income, or $1.74 per share for the fourth quarter of 2012. It reported $449.4 million, or $5.20 per share, in losses for the first quarter of 2012.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Flash analysis: lessons from Solyndra’s fall
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast

This week eight Chinese banks asked a court to find Suntech subsidiary Wuxi Suntech insolvent and to allow it to begin restructuring. Suntech responded to the court and said it would not object. The New York Times reported that the bankruptcy is “expected to lead to a takeover of the Wuxi operations by Wuxi Guolian, a financial conglomerate controlled by the city government of Wuxi.”

The solar market has seen an oversupply of solar panels and plummeting prices for those panels for over two years now. Two thirds of solar cells are made in China, where the Chinese government has given Chinese solar makers access to large low cost loans. The oversupply and drop in prices has led to huge solar manufacturers like Q-Cells to startups like Solyndra and Abound Solar to file for bankruptcy.

Suntech solar panels

Suntech may be the largest to date, but it won’t be the last solar maker to crash. As MIT Tech Review put it earlier this week: “hundreds of solar companies need to fail to help bring the supply of solar panels back in line with demand.”

The weeding-out process will help slow the fall in solar panel prices and allow demand to rise back up again. Down the road the re-balancing will enable these companies to continue to invest in more efficient cells and new innovations, which will bring down the cost of solar through technology even more. Another 180 solar panel makers could reportedly disappear by 2015 due to consolidation.

At the same time, Suntech’s woes partly come from a financial scandal. The company got in trouble with a fund it controlled that financed solar power plant development in Europe.

Of course, it’s not all positive that Suntech has declared bankruptcy. As Ucilia Wang wrote for us last week:

The drama presents an ugly turn for a company that was solid and took technology and market risks to grow. . . Chinese companies in general had been known more as mass producers rather than innovators. . . Suntech’s decline also leaves a depressing note in the efforts by the federal and local governments to expand solar manufacturing in the U.S.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Cleantech and investment in 2013
• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Flash analysis: lessons from Solyndra’s fall

Now the company seems to be on its way to becoming the biggest casualty yet of a shakeup of the global solar industry and its own financial oversight problems. Suntech reportedly is running out of cash and could be taken over by the government of the city in which it’s headquartered, according to the New York Times on Wednesday. The takeover possibility was reported by the China Business Network earlier this week. The company has declined to comment.

What’s next?

The fact that Suntech is teetering financially has been well documented in recent months. The big question is what will become of a company and the what kind of impact will its decline have on the industry? In the near term, the support from the Wuxi government will keep Suntech afloat and at least part of its large workforce employed. Long term, the chances of the company’s survival are low if it remains under government control. A sale of Suntech’s intellectual property and manufacturing assets is likely.

Suntech can’t afford to take a long pause to right itself when its competitors are fighting more fiercely than ever to keep their footing in a market that has seen an oversupply of solar panels and plummeting prices for those panels for over two years. That has led to dozens of solar manufacturers worldwide — from stalwarts such as Q-Cells in Germany to American startups such as Solyndra and Abound Solar — to file for bankruptcy. The large Chinese solar manufacturers, who rose to prominence over the past five years thanks largely to strong support from state-owned banks, have been posting losses for many quarters.

But the fact that Suntech’s woes partly come from a financial scandal means it could be less likely to get a greater government bailout. The scandal has seriously tainted the company’s reputation, so helping it out will not send a good message. The Chinese national government also has been working on building a domestic market for its solar equipment makers while figuring out which companies to support and which companies should consolidate because there are just too many players. In fact, the government said publicly last year that it was promoting mergers and acquisitions of solar companies and planning to prohibit local governments from helping ailing solar companies.

Suntech solar panels in the U.S.

Suntech got in trouble with a fund it controlled that financed solar power plant development in Europe. The company announced last summer that an internal investigation revealed that the Global Solar Fund used faked German bonds to guarantee the funding that Suntech secured for GSF. The fund also came under legal scrutiny in Italy when a criminal investigation alleged that the fund built projects illegally to take advantage of lucrative government subsidies for solar electricity generation.

Those fake bonds have made it difficult for Suntech to pay over $541 million to holders of its convertible bonds. Last week announced a settlement with Global Solar Fund and its top executive. Earlier this week, The company said it managed to get most of its note holders to agree to give the company more time. The company replaced its founder, Zhengrong Shi, as CEO last year and recently forced him out as chairman. Shi is fighting with Suntech over his ouster.

Implications in the U.S.

The drama presents an ugly turn for a company that was solid and took technology and market risks to grow. Suntech invested heavily on research and development of new technology and received glowing media coverage for its effort, including recognition in the Technology Review. Chinese companies in general had been known more as mass producers rather than innovators.

Suntech’s new solar panel

Suntech’s decline also leaves a depressing note in the efforts by the federal and local governments to expand solar manufacturing in the U.S.

Suntech opened a factory in Arizona in 2010 to assemble the cells from its factories in China into panels. The factory opened to much fanfare because optimism ran high then about rebuilding a solar manufacturing sector in the U.S. With the stimulus package, the federal government was approving billions of dollars in loans and guarantees to help U.S. solar manufactures to build factories domestically.

That effort hasn’t been successful so far, however, in light of the bankruptcy of Solyndra in 2011 and Abound Solar in 2012. It’s achieved better results promoting the installation of solar power plants and rooftop systems at homes and businesses.

Suntech scaled back its production at the Arizona factory and yesterday announced its plan to shutter it on April 3. Its demise will not make the U.S. a more attractive place to set up production. That’s a sentiment that will be hard to change.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The fourth quarter of 2012 in cleantech
• Cleantech and investment in 2013
• Cleantech third-quarter 2012

The ITC agreed in a 6-0 vote that Chinese solar producers have benefited from illegal subsidies from the Chinese government and sold products at below fair market value. The ITC’s findings corroborate with the decision by the U.S. Commerce Department in October. The two agencies have to agree on the allegations before the tariffs set by the commerce department last month officially take effect.

Whether slapping tariffs on imported Chinese solar cells will achieve the ultimate goal of the trade dispute – to even the playing field and foster healthy competition – remains to be seen. So far, the dire predictions about the impact of tariffs from both sides of the disputes haven’t taken hold even though the U.S. government began collecting tariffs –as a result of a preliminary decision by the commerce department – earlier this year. The government collected the tariffs retroactively.  Those tariffs will be returned, though, because the ITC didn’t agree with that decision by the commerce department.

Though the tariffs are in place going forward, Chinese companies already have found ways to minimize their impact. They can sidestep the tariffs by using solar cells made in countries other than China and assemble those cells into panels in their factories in China. This approach raises the production cost but not as much as what paying the tariffs would entail. Major Chinese solar manufacturers include Suntech Power, Trina Solar, Yingli Green Energy and JA Solar.

The ITC decision drew to a close a contentious fight brought by a group of U.S. solar cell and panel makers led by SolarWorld, who filed the complaint in October 2011 as the global solar industry saw a rapid decline of solar panel prices because supply far exceeded demand. That glut, which began in early 2011, has contributed to the bankruptcies of dozens of solar cell and panel makers worldwide and stirred up strong resentment against Chinese solar manufacturers, who rose to dominate the world market in the past six years. Silicon solar panels are made up of rows of solar cells, and Chinese companies that make solar panels typically also produce their own solar cells.

Both Solyndra and Abound Solar cited the Chinese companies’ ability to lower prices quickly as a reason for their demise. Solyndra, which is still going through the bankruptcy proceedings, filed an anti-trust lawsuit against Chinese solar manufacturers last month and is seeking $1.5 billion in compensation.

The glut of solar panels has remained, the prices of solar panels are still falling, and the number of manufacturers that are leaving the business is still increasing. GTM Research has predicted that 180 solar panel makers worldwide will disappear by 2015.

The intense competition has triggered similar trade complaints against Chinese manufactures in Europe. The Chinese government, in turn, recently filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization over government subsidies received by European solar panel makers.

On the other hand, the falling prices for solar panels have been a boon for companies that buy and install solar panels. A group that formed to oppose the U.S. trade complaint includes not only Chinese solar manufactures but also project developers and residential solar service providers. Most of the solar power projects that are bidding for power sales agreement contracts with utilities propose to use solar panels instead of other types of solar technologies.

The intense competition, bankruptcy filings and the difficulties of making profits also have generated concerns about the quality of solar panels being made these days. At a conference last week, a Wells Fargo executive said he had been noticing a fair number of substandard solar panels because manufacturers were “cutting corners.”

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Green IT Q3: Solar stumbles while car sharing zooms ahead
• Cleantech and investment in 2013

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Cleantech and investment in 2013
• Electric vehicle outlook: 2012–2017

The commerce department’s decision capped a year-long investigation to look at whether Chinese silicon solar cell makers have received financial and other help from the Chinese government that gave them an unfair advantage over rivals, and whether they have been selling products at prices that are less than their production costs or less than what they sell in their home market. The complaint, filed last October, came from a group of solar cell and panel makers led by SolarWorld. The tariffs are meant to counter the effects of the unfair government subsidies and pricing practices.

Solar cells from Suntech Power, the world’s largest solar cell and panel maker, will be hit with a 31.73 percent anti-dumping duty, which is a slight increase from the preliminary tariff of 31.14 percent that the commerce department issued in May. Trina Solar’s cells will face 18.32 percent opposed to 31.22 percent. Other solar cell makers that asked the commerce to hand out specific tariffs will get 25.96 percent instead of 31.18 percent. The rest of the Chinese manufacturers will face 249.96 percent, the same as the preliminary tariff. But the amount that these companies or their importers will fork over will be lowered by 10.54 percentage points in order to avoid double-counting an export subsidy, the commerce department said.

The commerce department significantly upped the anti-subsidy tariffs, however. Its preliminary tariffs, handed down in March this year, were less than 5 percent for all Chinese solar cell makers. But its final decision has increased that from 2.9 percent to 14.78 percent for Suntech, 4.73 percent to 15.97 percent for Trina, and 3.59 percent to 15.24 percent for all the rest.

Overall, the final decision gave Suntech a slightly higher combined rate, and the same for companies that didn’t ask for specific tariffs. Trina and those who asked for individual tariffs, such as Yingli Green Energy, now face lower combined rates.

Suntech, which already is reeling from a financial fraud in Italy, saw its founder stepped down as CEO in August. Earlier this week, Suntech announced plans to reduce production and other steps to reduce its costs.

Both the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy tariffs apply only to silicon solar cells made in China. Silicon solar cells are the dominant form of solar cell and panel production and and Chinese manufacturers have squeezed out rivals in Europe, Japan and the United States in recent years. The tariffs would be paid by whoever are the “importers of record,” and that could be the manufacturers themselves or their customers.

SolarWorld was hoping that the commerce department would impose tariffs on Chinese solar panels as well, but the commerce department didn’t budge. Adding solar panels would’ve inflicted a greater pain on the Chinese companies, many of which sidestepped the preliminary tariffs by using solar cells from countries such as Taiwan and assembling the cells into panels in China.

SolarWorld, which is based in Germany and runs a factory in Oregon, said previously that tariffs are necessary to help American manufactures stay competitive and in business. The other side, which includes not only Chinese manufacturers but also project developers and equipment retailers that have benefited from cheaper solar panels, warned of rising installation costs and severe job losses. As we pointed out last week, neither prediction has come true so far since the preliminary tariffs went into effect.

In fact, solar panel prices have continued to fall because of other global economic market forces at work. The biggest factor: supply and demand remains out of whack for the global solar market. The glut began to show its impact and push down solar panel prices in early 2011, and its presence still lingers. Chinese manufacturers have continued to suffer big financial losses, along with their rivals in Europe, Japan and the U.S. After building up a big solar manufacturing base and export business, the Chinese government now is reportedly working on rescuing some of the biggest solar manufacturers and forcing a consolidation.

But lower panel prices have benefited project developers and installers. The U.S. market for solar panel installations is forecast to grow 71 percent in 2012 from the previous year.

The commerce’s decision isn’t the end of the trade case though. The U.S. International Trade Commission is investigating the same complaint, and it’s set to decide whether Chinese manufacturers’ actions have hurt American manufacturers. The final decision on the tariffs by the commerce department will be in effect only if the trade commission finds that American manufacturers have suffered harm. The commission, which did find harm in a preliminary decision last December, is set to issue its final decision on Nov. 7.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Cleantech third-quarter 2012
• Green IT Q3: Solar stumbles while car sharing zooms ahead

The Department of Commerce’s decision determined that Chinese companies have indeed been selling products at below fair market prices, and the ruling addressed part of a broader trade complaint filed by SolarWorld and other manufacturers last October. To offset the impact of the below-market pricing, the commerce department reached a preliminary ruling to impose an import tariff of about 31 percent on solar cells from 61 Chinese manufacturers and nearly 250 percent for the rest.

It’s worth noting that the tariffs will affect only silicon solar cells made in China but not solar panels made in China with silicon solar cells from another country. Plus, the commerce department could modify the tariffs when it issues a final decision in October.

Paper tiger

The 250 percent tariff sounds scary, but the fact is the biggest Chinese solar companies such as Suntech Power, Trina Solar, Yingli Green Energy and Canadian Solar will face the 31 percent tariff. While that 31 percent tariff will likely raise the wholesale prices, there are ways to manage it.

For months Chinese manufactures have been brainstorming around ways to lessen the impact of any tariffs. They have been talking to solar cell makers in Taiwan about buying and shipping their cells to China or elsewhere to be assembled into panels. A company like Canadian Solar, for example, could buy Taiwanese solar cells and assemble them in its Canadian factory (most of the company’s manufacturing is in China, hence it’s considered a Chinese company) or hire a manufacturer in Korea. Chinese companies also could set up solar cell production outside of China.

Shyam Mehta, a senior analyst at GTM Research, estimated that hiring Taiwanese companies to make cells will increase production costs for Chinese companies by 6 percent to 12 percent, which “is meaningful but manageable.”

Solar installers

While manufacturers figure out their strategies, solar service providers – from companies that provide consumer financing to roofers who install solar panels – need to come up with plans to cope with higher solar panel prices. People in the solar retail sector, understandably, have strongly opposed the trade complaint. They contend that the solar market growth could slow if they have to pay more for solar panels.

Certainly, profits will shrink if costs increase. But that doesn’t mean retail service providers will raise their prices or raise by a whole lot. They will likely absorb the added costs and still make good money, especially by increasing the sales volumes (the solar market is hardly saturated). We are not talking about razor-thin margins that will be rendered non-existent by the tariffs.

For a while now, investors and solar retail service providers have talked about how they could deliver or receive very good (double digit) and long-term returns. We’ve seen banks and other types of investors such as Google putting up funds in hundreds of millions to finance leases and power purchase agreements, which are long-term contracts in which consumers pay a monthly fee for solar electricity instead of the high upfront cost of installing and owning solar panels. Consumers opt for these financing plans because they take away the hassles of doing research and picking equipment manufacturers, and because they are often promised lower utility bills. That promise of lower utility bills is a key selling point, and any solar retailer who took that away will lose a serious competitive edge.

Competition in the retail sector has intensified in recent years, and that, too, will make it difficult to raise prices and still compete effectively. Venture-backed startups such as Sungevity, SolarCity and Sunrun started in 2006 or 2007 and have expanded well beyond their home turf of California. Many more have shown up and some of them that first made their fortunes in a different business, such power company NRG Energy, home security company Vivint and roof installer PetersenDean. Consumers only benefit when they have more companies to choose from.

Lastly, solar panels don’t make up the bulk of the price of a solar electric system. In fact, they take up around 20 percent, and the rest comes from the costs of other components, sales and marketing, permits and labor. A bigger worry for installers has been these non-solar panel costs, particularly in permitting and marketing and sales. The average price for a residential system by the end of last year was just over $6 per watt (and less $5 per watt if a homeowner bought a system outright rather than doing a lease), GTM said, while the wholesale price for solar panels was near $1 per watt (it was $1 per watt when I caught up with Chinese solar panel makers at PV America West in March). UPDATE: Solar panel prices fell around 50 percent in 2011 while the average price for a residential system dropped 3.6 percent during that time.

The solar industry wants to show critics that solar electricity can be affordable and compete with power from fossil fuels and it deserves government subsidies to help reduce costs. To raise prices in a big way will only give ammunition to critics that solar is far from prime time. That’s one outcome everyone in the solar industry, regardless of which side they are on in the trade dispute, would hate to see.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Cleantech third-quarter 2012
• A 2011 Green IT Forecast

As you can see, the list is dominated by Chinese companies, though U.S. firm First Solar is now the largest. Lux Research also says that Japanese solar thin-film maker Solar Frontier is within the top 25, and the researchers “expect to see a major rise in market share from Japanese and Korean suppliers.”

And the results:

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• Cleantech third-quarter 2012
• Green IT Q4: solar, subsidies and the outlook for EVs

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Green IT’s Q4 Winners: Wind Power, Solar Power, Smart Energy
• Green IT Overview, Q2 2010
• Green IT Q1: Cleantech Breaking Out — and Bracing for Hard Times

In the ruling issued last Friday, the commerce department said it’s found enough evidence to show that Chinese manufacturers might have benefited from illegal subsidies back home and that they might have shipped a much larger-than-usual amount of products into the U.S. in recent months to head off any decision by the government on the trade complaint.

The ruling is important because it paves the way for the commerce department to make another decision that could impose duties retroactively by 90 days. That means if the commerce department sides with SolarWorld and its coalition of manufacturers, then Chinese solar cell and panel makers (or their importers) will have to pay the so-called “countervailing duties” starting with their shipments made back in early December. The commerce department said Monday it plans to announce the official ruling for that on March 5.

Countervailing duties are meant to offset unfair subsidies in order to even the playing field. China is the biggest exporter of solar cells and panels into the U.S. Chinese companies have expanded production by gigawatts in recent years to take advantage of a growing demand for solar energy around the world. At the same time, the massive production also contributed to a glut of solar panels that led to a drop of around 50-percent in prices over the past year. The price collapse has cause big financial losses not just for Chinese companies but also manufactures from other countries as well, and it’s led to big layoffs, factory closures and bankruptcies.

The complaint, filed by SolarWorld and six other manufacturers (who wouldn’t reveal their identities publicly), contends that Chinese solar companies have received unfair government subsidies that allow them to sell products at far lower prices than their rivals from other countries. The U.S. International Trade Commission is looking at the same allegations, and both the commission and the commerce department have to agree in their final decisions before any duties become permanent.

The complaint has deeply divided the solar industry. On one hand the petition calls for creating a fair marketplace by following U.S. and international laws. On the other hand, the rulings outcome could lead to an increase in solar panel prices and that goes against the industry’s goal of reducing solar energy costs so that it’s more expensive than power from coal or natural gas power plants (and it could reduce profits for developers, too). Some U.S. manufacturers also worry that the complaint will invite retaliation from the Chinese government, which already has vowed to investigate whether the U.S. government has unfairly subsidized its silicon producers. The U.S. sells a lot of silicon and solar factory equipment to China.

The commerce department hasn’t indicated how much Chinese manufactures might have to pay for the countervailing duties. It’s still investigating the claim that Chinese silicon solar cell and panel makers have received Chinese government subsidies that has made it difficult for their rivals in the U.S. to compete fairly. The commerce department will have to calculate the amount of unfair subsidies before deciding how much countervailing duties it will impose on Chinese imports, said Tim Brightbill, the lead attorney for the SolarWorld-led group.

Anti-dumping

The complaint isn’t just asking for countervailing duties to be imposed on imported silicon solar cells and panels from China. There is a second part to the complaint that accuses Chinese companies of flooding the market with cells and panels at prices that are less than the production cost or less than what they sell at home, Brightbill said.

The anti-dumping complaint could lead to additional duties being imposed on Chinese solar cell and panel. The commerce department is looking at whether Chinese companies are selling their products at anywhere from 50 percent to 250 percent below the fair market value. What that below-market value is will help determine the amount of anti-dumping duties. For example, a $100 shipment of solar panels with a 250 percent anti-dumping duty will require the manufacturers or importers to pay $250 to the U.S. Customs. The commerce department is scheduled to decide on the anti-dumping claim on March 27, SolarWorld said.

If Chinese companies have to pay countervailing and anti-dumping duties, they will have a hard time finding customers in the U.S. Major Chinese solar companies, such as Suntech Power, Trina Solar and Yingli Green Energy, all have publicly refuted the allegations. Trina, in particular, said last week that it shipped more solar panels to the U.S. in the fourth quarter because there was a rush by developers to get projects underway before a key federal incentive expires on Dec. 31.

Resentment against Chinese manufacturers has been brewing for a few years now as they gained in size and influence with financial help from the Chinese government. SolarWorld, which is based in Germany but runs a factory in Oregon, has been vocal about fending off what it sees as anti-competitive practices by its Chinese rivals long before it filed the trade complaint with the U.S. government last October.

A group of project developers aligned with major Chinese solar companies last November to oppose the trade complaint. That group issued a report on Monday to highlight the number of jobs that it said will not be created if the U.S. government imposes heavy duties on Chinese products. The report, prepared by the Brattle Group, said a 100 percent duty on Chinese imports could cut the number of new jobs by up to 50,000 over the next three years.

Photo courtesy of Maxintosh via Flickr, Suntech Power.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• After Solyndra: analyzing the solar industry
• The race for cost-effective and efficient solar power
• Green IT Q4: solar, subsidies and the outlook for EVs