Data: Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (mcc-berlin.net)
Are we thinking about the emission of greenhouse gasses such as methane and carbon when we do day to day activities like: driving a car, using energy to cook or heating our houses? Probably not. But by doing this we are making our small but constant contribution to the problem of Global Warming. We see from worsening weather disasters around the world that this returns as a boomerang back to our houses and families.
of all natural disasters were related to climate change
USA share of global world cumulative CO₂ emission
people can be pushed into poverty by 2030 because of climate change impact
Statistics Source: https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/united-states?country=~USA
Statistics Source: Executive Summary - Climate Science Special Report
The overall trend in global average temperature indicates that warming is occurring in an increasing number of regions. Future Earth warming depends on our greenhouse gas emissions in the coming decades.
At present, approximately 11 billion metric tons of carbon are released into the atmosphere each year. As a result, the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is on the rise every year, as it surpasses the natural capacity for removal.
warmest years on historical record have occurred since 2010
is the total increase in the Earth's temperature since 1880
warming rate since 1981
Observations from both satellites and the Earth’s surface are indisputable — the planet has warmed rapidly over the past 44 years. As far back as 1850, data from weather stations all over the globe make clear the Earth’s average temperature has been rising.
In recent days, as the Earth has reached its highest average temperatures in recorded history, warmer than any time in the last 125,000 years. Paleoclimatologists, who study the Earth’s climate history, are confident that the current decade is warmer than any period since before the last ice age, about 125,000 years ago.
Clean hydrogen has 3 main uses: energy storage, load balancing, and as feedstock/fuel. Used in all sectors, including steel, chemical, oil refining & heavy transport. Actions to accelerate decarbonization & increase clean hydrogen use include:
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and achieving carbon neutrality requires widespread renewable energy and a huge increase in vehicles, products, and processes powered by electricity.
Electricity generated from increasingly renewable energy sources is the right way to create a clean energy system. Switching from direct use of fossil fuels to electricity improves air quality by reducing emissions of local pollutants.In order to increase the use of electricity, we can do the following:
As the foremost element in the periodic table, hydrogen holds a unique position in the universe, given its status as the lightest and one of the most ancient and abundant chemical elements.
Hydrogen, in its pure form, needs to be extracted since it is usually present in more intricate molecules, such as water or hydrocarbons, on Earth.
Hydrogen powers stars through nuclear fusion. This creates energy and all the other chemicals elements which are found on Earth.

Hydrogen is an essential part for manufacturing Ammoniam Nitrate fertilizers. Half of the world's food is grown using hydrogen-based ammonia fertilizer.
Hydrogen is used in the production of methanol, where hydrogen is reacted with carbon monoxide to produce chemical feedstocks.
Hydrogen fuel cells make electricity from combining hydrogen and oxygen. Power plants are showing increased interest in using hydrogen, and gas turbines can convert from natural gas to hydrogen combustion.

Hydrogen is an alternative vehicle fuel. It allows us to power fuel cells in zero-emission electric drive vehicles.
Hydrogen heat is used in order to reduce emissions in the manufacturing process.
Steelmaking is an industry that is beginning to successfully use hydrogen in two ways to eliminate almost all greenhouse emissions from the steelmaking process. First for Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) replacing coke (from coal) with hydrogen to remove oxygen from iron ore. Second for heat to melt the iron ore into DRI and then into low carbon steel.
Liquid hydrogen has been used by NASA as a rocket fuel since the 1950s.
Hydrogen is used in production of explosives, fertilizers, and other chemicals; to convert heavier hydrocarbons to lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals; to hydrogenate organic compounds; and to remove impurities like sulfur, halides, oxygen, metals, and/or nitrogen. It's also in household cleaners like ammonium hydroxide.

Hydrogen is used to make vitamins and other pharmaceutical products.
In the production of float glass, hydrogen is needed to provide heat and to prevent the large tin bath from oxidizing.
It is used to hydrogenate unsaturated fatty acids in animal and vegetable oils, to obtain solid fats for margarine and other food products.
Using clean hydrogen makes it possible to reduce emissions while "cracking" heavier petroleum into lightweight hydrocarbons to produce many value-added chemicals.
By 2030
Statistics Source: IEA Global Hydrogen Review 2022
SMR is a way of producing syngas (Hydrogen and Carbon monoxide) by mixing hydrocarbons (like natural gas) with water. This mixture goes into a special container called a reformer vessel where a high-pressure mixture of steam and methane comes into contact with a nickel catalyst. As a result of the reaction, hydrogen and carbon monoxide are produced.
To make more hydrogen, carbon monoxide from the first reaction is mixed with water through the WGS reaction. As a result, we receive more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide. For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced and in almost all cases released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a harmful gas causing climate change.
$863 ($0.86 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity = $474 + Methane $383 + Water $6 US EIA May 2024*)
The SMR method involves combining natural gas with high-temperature steam and a catalyst to generate a blend of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Then, more water is added to the mixture to make more hydrogen and a gas called carbon dioxide.
For each unit of hydrogen produced there are 6 units of carbon dioxide produced. In a few experimental trials, to help the environment, the carbon dioxide is captured and stored underground using a special technology called CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage). This leaves almost pure hydrogen.
One of the main problems with carbon capture and storage is that without careful management of storage, the CO2 can flow from these underground reservoirs into the surrounding air and contribute to climate change, or spoil the nearby water supply. Another is the risk of creating earthquake tremors caused by the storage increasing underground pressure, known as human caused seismicity.
$1,253 ($1.25 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $474 + Methane $505 + Water $4 US + CCS $270 EIA May 2024*)
This technology based on natural gas emits no greenhouse gases as it does not produce CO2. Methane Pyrolysis refers to a method of generating hydrogen by breaking down methane into its basic components, namely hydrogen and solid carbon.
Oxygen is not involved at all within this process (no CO or CO2 is produced). Thus, for the production of hydrogen gas there is no need for an additional of CO or for CO2 separation.
$1,199 ($1.20 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $433 +Methane $766 EIA May 2024*)
The concept of Green Hydrogen involves generating hydrogen from renewable energy sources by means of electrolysis, a process that splits water into its fundamental constituents, hydrogen and oxygen, using an electric current. This process can be powered by a range of renewable energy sources, such as solar energy, wind power, and hydropower.
The electricity used in the electrolysis process is derived exclusively from renewable sources, ensuring a sustainable and environmentally-friendly production of hydrogen. It generates zero carbon dioxide emissions and, as a result, prevents global warming.
$3,289 ($3.29 per kilogram of Hydrogen)
(Electricity $3,278 + water $11 US EIA May 2024*)
Known as "White" hydrogen, it can be generated through various geological processes. The study of geologic hydrogen and its potential as an energy resource is an active area of research, as it holds promise for renewable energy applications, particularly in the context of hydrogen fuel cells and clean energy production.
It's important to note that the creation of geologic hydrogen is generally a slow and long-term process, occurring over geological timescales. This is because the other methods are human production technology methods and this is creation by a natural phenomena. The availability and abundance of geologic hydrogen can vary significantly depending on the specific geological setting and the interplay of various factors such as rock composition, temperature, pressure, and the presence of suitable reactants.
Serpentinization is a chemical reaction that occurs when water interacts with certain types of rocks, particularly ultramafic rocks rich in minerals such as olivine and pyroxene. This process results in the formation of serpentine minerals and produces hydrogen gas as a byproduct. Serpentinization typically takes place in environments such as hydrothermal systems, oceanic crust, and certain tectonic settings.
In regions with high concentrations of radioactive elements, such as uranium and thorium, the decay of these elements releases radiation. This radiation can interact with surrounding water or other fluids, splitting the water molecules and generating hydrogen gas through a process called radiolysis. This mechanism is believed to contribute to the production of hydrogen in certain deep geological settings, such as deep groundwater systems and radioactive mineral deposits.
Geothermal systems, which involve the circulation of hot water or steam through fractured rocks, can generate hydrogen gas as a result of various processes. High-temperature hydrothermal systems can cause the thermal decomposition of hydrocarbons, releasing hydrogen gas. Additionally, the interaction between water and hot rocks in geothermal reservoirs can lead to the production of hydrogen through serpentinization or other geochemical reactions.
Abiotic methane refers to methane gas that is not directly derived from biological sources, such as microbial activity. In certain geological environments, abiotic methane can be generated through processes like thermal decomposition of organic matter or reactions between carbon dioxide and hydrogen. This methane can subsequently undergo thermal or catalytic cracking, producing hydrogen gas.
Keep current hydrogen production methods BUT
make additional steps to broaden them with cleaner production methods
And as a result the world will get more vital hydrogen and become one step closer to net zero emission
The market is dominated by grey hydrogen produced from natural gas through a fossil fuel-powered SMR process. Every year, the production of grey hydrogen amounts to approximately 70 to 80 million tons, and it is primarily used in industrial chemistry. More than 80% is used for the synthesis of ammonia and its derivatives (fertilizer for agriculture, 50 perecent of food worldwide) or for oil refining operations. Unfortunately, for every 1 kg of grey hydrogen, almost 6-8 kg of carbon dioxide is emitted into the atmosphere.
More than 95% of the world's hydrogen production is based on fossil fuels with greenhouse gas emissions. Nevertheless, to achieve a more stable future and promote the transition of pure energy, the global goal is to reduce the use of other “colors” of hydrogen and focus on the production of a clean product, such as green or turquoise hydrogen. Reaching the zero carbon footprint will require a gradual transition from grey to green/turquoise hydrogen in the coming years.
It is possible to produce decarbonized hydrogen. An option is to use another feedstock, namely water, and convert it in large electrolyzers into H2 and oxygen (O2), which are returned to the atmosphere. If the electricity used to power the electrolyzers is 100% renewable energy (photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, etc.), then hydrogen becomes green. Currently, it is about 0.1% of the total production of hydrogen, but it is expected that it will increase since the cost of renewable energy continues to fall.
U.S. additions to electric generation capacity from 2000 to 2025. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that the United States
is building power plants at a record pace. As indicated on the chart, nearly all new electric generating capacity either already installed or planned
for 2025 is from clean energy sources, while new power plants coming
on line 25 years ago, in 2000, were predominantly fueled by natural gas. New wind power plants began to come on line in 2001 and new solar plants, 10 years, later in 2011. Since 2023, the U.S. power industry has built more solar than any other type of power plant. The EIA predicts that clean energy (wind, solar, and battery storage) will deliver 93% of new power-plant capacity in 2025.
Global surface air temperature departures between 1940 and 2024 from the average temperature for the period 1991-2020 (averages below the 11-year average are blue and those above are red). The average in October 2024 was +0.80 degrees Celsius above the reference period average, down from +0.85 degrees Celsius above the reference period average in 2023, which was the warmest October on record.
No major economy had previously received over half its electricity from solar across an entire month. Thank the mild, sunny spring weather, and batteries.
While the Trump administration is busy pointing out that the sun doesn’t shine at night, solar is breaking records around the world, including in sunny California.
Solar panels produced 51% of California’s electricity in May, the first time the clean energy source surpassed the halfway mark for an entire month. The data counts both large-scale installations and the state’s bounty of rooftop arrays.
This isn’t just a milestone moment for California; it’s a milestone for the entire world. Think tank Ember says the state is the globe’s first major economy to cross the 50% threshold. (Hungary, at 47% in June 2025, is knocking at the door, though it has a far smaller GDP.)
Solar’s rise has helped California cut polluting energy sources out of its power mix. Natural gas is the only fossil fuel that California power plants burn at appreciable levels, and solar is steadily squeezing it out of the system. Case in point: Solar outproduced gas not only during its record month of May but throughout every month in 2026 leading up to it, too.
Solar could not have reached these heights alone. It needed batteries to get here — and California has that crucial energy storage in spades. The California Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state’s grid, now boasts 16 gigawatts of batteries that can shift abundant midday solar production to later in the evening. It’s not uncommon for batteries to meet over one-quarter of the state’s electricity demand for a portion of the night.
All this solar and storage would have been hard to imagine a decade ago. Back then, in its best month — also sunny, mild May — solar accounted for just 17% of electricity. That number is well above the current national average for solar, but a far cry from 51%. CAISO’s battery fleet, meanwhile, was a measly 61 megawatts. So, storage has grown by, uh … 26,129% over the last decade, a number so cartoonishly large that I’m almost hesitant to print it.
Expect California to see more months break the 50% threshold soon. And in the coming years, expect more states and countries to cross the halfway mark, too.
Panamint Capital broke ground on a $1.7 billion solar and storage project at the Calvert coal mine. The mine and an adjacent coal plant will stay online.
Construction is underway on a $1.7 billion solar and battery storage project in Texas that will turn existing coal mining land into a hub of clean energy generation.
Panamint Capital announced last week that it broke ground on the 1.2-gigawatt Big Rooter Power solar farm in Bremond, about halfway between Dallas and Houston. The project will use some of the land and assets from the adjacent Twin Oaks coal-fired power plant and Calvert surface coal mine, both of which will continue operating.

Panamint’s clean energy project will be among the largest in the nation — and, the developer claims, the biggest solar array ever built at a brownfield site in North America.
“We believe deploying new capacity at existing energy sites is the clearest way to benefit communities, ratepayers, and the environment alike,” said Apolka Totth, CEO of Panamint, a Nevada-based investment firm.
The giant installation will further boost Texas’ thriving solar sector, which this year is expected to generate more electricity than coal in the Lone Star State. The renewable resource is helping meet the state’s energy demand from data centers, manufacturing facilities, and rising air-conditioning use amid more frequent and extreme hot weather.
Panamint, which is backed by the private equity firm KKR, launched in 2019 with the goals of squeezing more life out of existing fossil-fuel infrastructure while building lower-emission facilities on the same sites. In 2023, Panamint acquired the 310-MW Twin Oaks coal plant and Calvert mine “with the express intention of leveraging the site’s existing characteristics to massively and rapidly expand generating capability at the lowest possible cost,” Totth said by email.

Work has started on the first phase of the solar farm, a 491-MW section that is set to go online in August 2028. Construction will begin in December on the remaining 658 MW, which could start producing power in August 2029.
The 10,000-acre Big Rooter site will also include 1.6 gigawatt-hours of battery storage and 20 miles of new extra-high-voltage transmission lines. The investment firm says it also has the infrastructure and natural gas access needed to build at least 800 MW of gas-fired generation, either for the grid or customers like data center developers.
“Big Rooter is a landmark project that reflects the scale of investment being made in America’s energy future,” George Hershman, CEO of Solv Energy, said in a news release. The contractor is building the site’s solar array, substation, and transmission infrastructure.
Big Rooter’s pairing with active coal operations makes it unique within the nation’s small but growing coal-to-solar subsector, which has mainly focused on putting panels on former mine lands and retired industrial sites.
The largest of these projects is the 186-MW Tilden Solar Project in southern Illinois, followed by the 111-MW Martin County Solar Project in eastern Kentucky, which both went online last year atop abandoned coal mines.

In Louisiana, the 240-MW Dolet Hills Solar Project is now being built on a former coal mine property. And the developer BrightNight is advancing the Starfire installation on remediated mine land in Kentucky.
In 2023, when BrightNight announced the Appalachian project, electric truck startup Rivian signed on as the anchor customer, with a 100-MW power purchase agreement. Starfire was initially envisioned as a roughly 800-MW project, but is now on track for 410 MW, with construction slated for late 2027 and planned operations in 2030.
“Earlier descriptions of a larger project reflected a broader long-term vision for the site, but as development has progressed, BrightNight has focused on the configuration that best aligns with current interconnection, permitting, site, and customer considerations,” a BrightNight spokesperson said by email. “We remain very enthusiastic about Starfire and its importance as a major redevelopment project on former coal mining land in Eastern Kentucky.”
Repurposing old mining sites for solar power has an obvious appeal. As opposition breaks out in rural areas over using prime farmland for solar — concerns stoked by Trump administration officials, including U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins — brownfield projects allow developers to sidestep those conversations and put sullied land to use. Doing so has typically proved more complicated and expensive than placing solar panels on flat or uncontaminated fields.
The 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law and 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act provided incentives to make it easier to finance clean energy installations on mine lands, while a $500 million Department of Energy program allocated funding for projects on current or former mines.
But last year, the Trump administration and Congress added more hurdles by phasing out tax credits for solar and wind energy, effectively ending the tax bonus for brownfield developments. And the administration scrapped at least one DOE mine-land award, for Mineral Basin Solar Power, as part of its sweeping cancellation of $7.6 billion in clean energy grants in the 16 states that voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.
“The federal policy landscape for developing clean energy on mines has changed, but the opportunity hasn’t,” said Jessica Wilkinson, the North America renewable energy team lead for The Nature Conservancy, a global nonprofit.
“In many parts of the country, wind and solar are the cheapest forms of energy and are succeeding on economics alone,” she added. “And if building on mine lands, brownfields, and landfills has fewer community conflicts, they may be seen as very enticing.”

The nonprofit and its partners plan to develop 25 solar and battery storage projects on former mine lands that The Nature Conservancy manages in the Cumberland Forest, which spans parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. The first project, the 10-MW Wildcats Solar in Virginia, is expected to break ground this fall and could start delivering power to the grid next year.
Wilkinson noted that despite the federal pullback, states have continued to show support for what her group calls “mining the sun” projects. For example, Ohio and Colorado passed laws to incentivize renewable energy development on former industrial sites. And a handful of federal programs continue providing financial support for cleaning up coal mining areas — a crucial step for enabling future solar development.
“Communities still want to see these lands become economic engines again,” Wilkinson said.
Panamint, for its part, said it was able to secure clean energy incentives for Big Rooter Power before Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on July 4, 2025, repealing large swaths of the Inflation Reduction Act.
“We ordered long-lead time equipment such as transformers and circuit breakers well before last summer’s OBBBA, so we were largely insulated from those impacts,” Totth said.
She noted that Panamint is partnering with U.S. firms First Solar and Nextpower (formerly Nextracker) to procure domestically made solar modules and racks. Big Rooter is also located in an “energy community” — the Department of Energy’s term for brownfield sites and areas affected by coal plant and mine closures. For those reasons, the company says it will receive a federal investment tax credit worth 50% of total project costs.
Yet as Panamint begins installing millions of solar panels in Texas, it has no plans to wind down production at the neighboring Twin Oaks coal plant.
“Twin Oaks is an economically competitive unit that provides low-cost reliability to Texas ratepayers, and we see no reason for an early retirement,” Totth said. She added that the company is also investigating both expanding the Calvert mine area and building a terminal facility to rail in coal for continued operations.
As Totth sees it, the new solar array will produce enough carbon-free power to “negate” the coal plant’s emissions profile on an annual basis.
It’s an example of the all-of-the-above approach to energy in Texas. Despite the massive amounts of solar, storage, and wind the state has built, it continues to cling to fossil fuels.
A just-issued national security ban appears to exclude existing inverters for solar and battery projects — but future models could face restrictions, experts say.
Citing national security concerns, the Trump administration has banned the import and domestic use of new power inverters made outside the United States. The move could throw sand in the gears of gigawatts’ worth of planned solar, wind, and battery installations — projects that make up the vast majority of new electricity being built in the country.
On Tuesday, the Federal Communications Commission announced it had updated its “Covered List” to include “connected power inverters produced in foreign countries.” The list includes equipment and services considered to pose a threat to national security, meaning that these inverters “are generally prohibited from receiving FCC authorization to be imported, marketed, or sold in the U.S.,” the agency stated.
However, the ban currently applies only to future new models of inverters, not those already available in the market or being installed today — a distinction that could limit the immediate impact on the clean energy industry.
The FCC stated that its action was prompted by a “White House-convened Executive Branch interagency body with appropriate national security expertise,” which determined that foreign-made inverters, “regardless of the nationality of origin, “‘pose unacceptable risks to the national security of the United States or the safety and security of United States persons.’”
Inverters — devices that convert direct current electricity into alternating current suitable for transmission over power grids — are an irreplaceable component of utility-scale solar, battery, and wind power projects, home solar and battery systems, electric vehicles chargers, heat pumps, and other electricity systems.
The vast majority of inverters in use today are connected to communications networks, which puts them under FCC regulatory purview. And most inverters used in large-scale solar projects are built outside the U.S. — many of them in China, which has been the primary target of national security concerns.
The FCC’s new restrictions do come with that important caveat, though: They only “apply to new device models.” That qualification appears to exclude foreign inverter models that have previously won FCC approval.
The FCC also specified that the new restriction “does not impact a consumer’s continued use of devices they previously acquired,” or “prevent retailers from continuing to sell, import, or market relevant models approved previously through the FCC’s equipment authorization process.”
Those two statements have tempered some of the more drastic interpretations of the potential impact of the FCC’s announcement among energy industry market participants.
“In our world, investors are currently seeing this as kind of a non-event” due to this interpretation, John Miller, a managing director and energy transition policy analyst at investment bank TD Cowen, told Canary Media in a Wednesday morning email. “If either of those conditions were to change, this becomes a much bigger issue.”
This point was echoed by Julien Dumoulin-Smith, head of equity research for power, utilities, and clean energy at investment firm Jefferies, in a Wednesday morning statement. “[T]his has a minimal impact today. There seems latitude to continue to purchase existing inverter models on the market,” he wrote.
On the other hand, Dumoulin-Smith pointed out that any Trump administration steps to restrict new models of foreign-made inverters could create a “long, gradual shift in market share.”
Threats of the Trump administration targeting foreign inverters were first reported in late June by Reuters, which cited unnamed sources stating that a ban on Chinese-made inverters was in the works.
Last year, Reuters reported that technology experts investigating Chinese inverters had discovered communications devices that could be a security risk, citing anonymous sources. Later in 2025, Republicans in the House of Representatives wrote a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick asking him to use the Commerce Department’s authority to “block future imports of Chinese equipment used in critical infrastructure nationwide.”
Chinese companies such as Sungrow and Chint Power Systems provide the majority of inverters for utility-scale clean energy and battery projects in the U.S., while U.S.-based Enphase Energy and Israel-based SolarEdge provide the majority of inverters for residential rooftop solar systems.
The FCC’s update targets any new inverters not made in the U.S., including those that U.S.-based companies produce in other countries. That could encompass inverters from other major providers to the solar market, such as Germany-based SMA Solar Technology and Austria-based Fronius International, as tracked by clean energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie.
If the FCC’s ban were to be expanded to include inverters currently being manufactured and sold for use in the U.S., the impact could be drastic. The U.S. built 50 gigawatts of new wind, solar, and battery capacity in 2025, more than any year prior, making up roughly 92% of new generating capacity. And the U.S. Energy Information Administration forecasts these trends will continue in 2026, with solar set to provide 51% of the new utility-scale electricity capacity, batteries 28%, and wind 14%.
In the immediate future, projects likely won’t have to abandon the inverters they’ve already purchased or plan to install, said Joe Shangraw, a solar research analyst at Wood Mackenzie. But he also cautioned that, as with any other industry, “eventually, currently approved products will become obsolete.”
That means inverter manufacturers will ultimately have to bring new products to market and submit them for FCC approval, at which time they’ll have to contend with the agency’s new rules. At that point, any inverters made outside the U.S. will be barred from sale and use unless they undergo a distinct conditional approval or waiver process, he said.
Shangraw also noted that the need to bring new products to the market could be accelerated if the federal government sets new requirements on cybersecurity, grid functionality, or other inverter capabilities.
“If that would require a significant hardware or software update, that would be something where you’d have to request some permissive change from the FCC, or ask for a totally new FCC ID” designating a new model of device for the agency’s review, he said. “So it’s certainly relevant and impactful — probably not in the next couple of months but in the next year or so.”
This growing uncertainty over the federal government’s classification of foreign-made inverters could increase industry interest in securing domestic inverter supplies, he said. On that front, “the storage space looks a lot healthier,” with companies such as U.S.-based EPC Power and Tesla operating significant domestic manufacturing capacity, and others such as Spain-based Power Electronics scaling up U.S. manufacturing.
Residential solar inverters are “in a good place,” Shangraw said, with SolarEdge, Enphase, and Tesla providing about 80% of the U.S. market needs. But the domestic manufacturing capacity for solar inverters for utility-, commercial-, and industrial-scale projects is less clear, he said, given that Chinese inverter makers hold about 60% of U.S. market share in that sector.
Large-scale solar developers could hope to earn waivers from the FCC on foreign-made inverters from non-Chinese companies such as SMA and Power Electronics, he noted. They could also anticipate expanded domestic manufacturing from U.S.-based Nextpower, which is acquiring the inverter and power conversion business of Spain-based Zigor and its U.S. subsidiary Apex Power; or from GE Vernova, which has opened an inverter factory in Pittsburgh and could expand capacity there, he said.
“The main thing is, we don’t know how impactful this is until we learn a bit more about the timeline for when these actual changes to the requirements” for existing inverters might occur that would “force companies to release new products,” he said. “I’d say if this was a hard deadline, and if there were no new imports allowed, we’d be in trouble.”