Heretofore, the public solar markets have largely been a story of Germany, California and what some call condescendingly "Honorary Westerners", the Japanese.

So news of IPOs coming from China and Thailand smacks of a new wave, let's call it Solar 3.0. Solar 1.0 started with President Jimmy Carter and fizzled out rather like he did on the New York Marathon. Solar 2.0 was driven by Germany and Japan with their government sponsored solar roof programmes. Solar 3.0 involves lower cost manufacturing and silicon sourcing, whilst higher tech Western companies are looking at alternatives to silicon based technologies.

According to New Energy Finance, Zhejang Yuhui Solar is planning to raise $80 m on AIM this summer. Another Chinese company - CEEG Nanjing PV-tech also plans to raise capital and last but not least, the thai transformer maker Ekarat Engineering which has a small but burgeoing solar division, making 15 MW or 100,000 modules per year.

In recent years, I've often thought that alternative energy will only really come of age when Chinese manufacturing moves into it. The signs are that this is just starting to happen. Napoleon once said "Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will rock the world".

Well, here's to the Chinese rocking the world in alternative energy.

For an overview of what's happening in the California Solar Market, take a look at this article.

California is home to quite a few listed solar companies, like Solar Integrated. So the recent legislative approval of SB1 is very important - listen to this podcast interview with Senator Murray . Solar PV - at least for now - remains very expensive which is why it is so tied up with supportive legislation and politics. So the legislative backdrop to the solar market in any country is a very key consideration.

I always wonder about the motives of those who describe President Bush as in the hands of Big Oil. If only because his legislative record vis a vis renewable energy is highly supportive. This started when he was Governor of Texas, whose renewables programme is growing at a tremendous pace - thanks in no small measure to the Renewables Portfolio Standard he signed into action in 1998.

So the news that the Solar America Initiative will have increased annual funding from $80 m to $148 m comes as no great surprise.

The Solar America Initiative (SAI) is a broad national program designed to encourage competition throughout the solar industry by lowering the cost of photovoltaic units and fostering innovation of new technologies. These are worthy aims. The more pertinent question is then not about Bush. But is this an efficient way of using public funds?

On Thursday last (14th July) Ascent Solar Tech raised about $14 million, after expenses and underwriting costs, following an initial public offering of 3 million units priced at $5.50.

The newly Nasdaq listed company (see website) is different to other solar companies in that it is developing next generation amorphous silicon on plastic substrates. The plan then is to use these to power satellites - anything man-made that orbits the earth and wants continuos cloud free solar power and radiation.

I like the 2nd generation amorphous silicon because generation 1 clearly did not live anything like up to its promise. That was the boom the never happened, the customers just didn't buy. And Solar Ascent's space angle is really intriguing . . .

Conventional silicon-based modules are very heavy and the cost per kilo, according to this article in the Economist " have remained static, at $20,000 per kilo put into orbit, for decades."

The additional point then is that this company is NOT chasing subsidies, like some of its solar brethren. It's focussing on the boom in satellite communications and to some extent, the military industrial complex.

So please excuse the pun, it is right out of the usual solar stock orbit.

It's always amazed me how there is a complete disconnect between climate and the impact of solar technology. By rights of course, Saudi Arabia ought to be the solar capital of the world, given the high solar radiation levels and consistent sunlight of its deserts. Yet it's countries like Germany and Japan that dominate the solar market.

And so to Norway, part of which is in the Artic Circle. Renewable Energy Corporation is according to this wikipedia " the world's largest producer of solar grade polysilicon, the world's largest producer of wafers for solar applications and a major producer of solar cells and modules. It is the only solar energy company to span the entire value chain, from silicon extraction to finished solar module product".

It is the world's largest solar company, market cap around EUR 4 billion - which since going public last May 9th, has drifted down a long wayfrom its launch price of 120.

Anway, I think the company could do with a name change - it's just so vague.

It closed today at 83.75.

Just yesterday, I said that Solar Integrated had taken a hammering. Now I need a new even more emphatic turn of phrase and I'm strugging . . . SIT gets nuked ?

SIT dropped today by just under 29% to 36.93.

The only good bit of news I can see is that they signed a contract with Toyota.

It doesn't get much worse than this - SIT - today dropped another 17% to 51.9p. Just 3 months ago it was worth well over 300.

This follows the resignation of the CEO Jon Slangerup yesterday.
At the same time, the group announced a programme to cut 1.6 mln usd in costs - some 10 pct of overheads - mainly through staff reductions, and reiterated its revenue guidance.

'We re-confirm our revenue guidance of growth in excess of 80 pct for 2006,' said chief financial officer John Palumbo. 'The headcount reduction will not impact customer deliverables or the company's core business activities.'

As I've argued here before, the company has had problems translating from the USA its business model of providing solar roofing membrane solutions to the European market. What is unforgiveable though is that with some of their large contracts, losses of up to 50% have been made. Why would you sign a loss-making contract?

SIT's results for FY05, released on 25 May 2006, revealed a cash balance of USD 2.2m with full-year losses of USD 17.2m.

The question is, how much further down can SIT go before or if it starts to recover?