Solyndra sues Chinese solar companies

Solyndra, the recipient of hundreds of millions in government support, has sued Chinese solar companies claiming that their illegal pricing strategies were the reason why Solyndra could not meet the contracts it promised, according to OilPrice.com.

Robert Galbraith/Reuters/File
A view shows the headquarters of bankrupt Solyndra LLC in Fremont, Calif., in this September 2011 file photo. Last year US solar manufacturers complained about the solar panels being imported from China and asked for protection from the low prices, according to OilPrice.com.

Solyndra, the bane of Obama’s clean energy loan scheme, received $535 million in government support before it had to file for bankruptcy back in 2011.

It has now come out that Solyndra has filed a lawsuit against three US based, Chinese solar companies, claiming that their illegal pricing strategies were the reason why Solyndra could not meet the contracts that it had announced in 2008. (Related Article: Is a Larger Middle East War Inevitable?)

The lawsuit is against Suntech, Trina Solar Ltd, and Yingli Green Energy Holding Co., and is asking for a sum of $1.5 billion in compensation.

Solyndra claim that the Chinese trio coordinated their pricing strategies to drop them 75% in four years. They used predatory pricing and price fixing to drive out the competition in the US. (Related Article: Why we Need to Implement an Energy Transition - Quickly)

Last year US solar manufacturers complained about the solar panels being imported from China and asked for protection from the low prices. This eventually led to a trade dispute between the two countries, culminating in high import taxes being levied against Chinese solar panels.

In their case against the three companies Solyndra remarked that they had come to the US to destroy US solar manufacturers, and had used the stock market to raise the capital needed to achieve that goal.

Robert Petrina, Managing Director, Yingli Green Energy Americas, said that “we just received notice of this complaint, but from our initial review, these are unwarranted and misguided claims from a company that has a clear history of failed technology and achievements.”
Source: http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Solyndra-File-1.5-Billion-Case-Against-Three-Chinese-Solar-Companies.html

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.