Overexposed: a study on forced labour in Solar Panel Manufacturing (by Brand)

Screwdriva

Incase anyone wondered about the ethics (or lack thereof) in their Solar Panels, this study by Sheffield Hallam University has proved genuinely eye opening for me. A must read for the Ethically conscious among us. 

Screwdriva

Even more shocking are the (slimy) responses by Chinese panel brand representatives to the study, published here by the faculty. Among the responses are thinly veiled legal threats. 

Screwdriva

The professor who (with others) wrote the initial report, has finally spoken out about Chinese intimidation, harassment and interference in a British Academia. 

I have personally been involved in spreading information about this case with several prominent journalists, and am very pleased to see the mainstream news outlets cover this

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq50j5vwny6o

debitcardmayhem

@Screwdriva The link to the study is broken , here it is https://shura.shu.ac.uk/34917/1/Crawford%20Murphy%20et%20al%20%20Over-Exposed%20November%202023.pdf

JKenH

China can do no wrong in the eyes of many RE enthusiasts. If the use of slave labour doesn’t concern them, I wonder if this will? No, probably not, as long as the panels are cheap.

Maybe it is time to take off the blinkers - China isn’t producing cheap solar panels for the good of the world - think about it.

Edit: I toned down my comments so as not to get suspended again.

QrizB

Screwdriva said:

The professor who (with others) wrote the initial report, has finally spoken out about Chinese intimidation, harassment and interference in a British Academia. 

I see from the report that one of the Hong Kong clothing suppliers that Sheffield Hallam have previously investigated is suing for defamation:

Complicating things for Sheffield Hallam had been a report by its Forced Labour Lab published December 2023 into clothing supply chains connected to Xinjiang.

Smart Shirts Ltd, a Hong Kong supplier of garments with customers in the UK, brought a claim for libel, alleging it had been defamed as its name was included.

A preliminary ruling at the High Court in London in December 2024 found that report had been "defamatory".

A full trial in that case is yet to take place at which Sheffield Hallam will be able to put forward its defence to the company's claim, but the university was told by its insurers that "any defamation, libel or slander" claims linked to its entire Social and Economic Research Institute were no longer covered.

We'll have to see how the court case turns out.

JKenH said:

China can do no wrong in the eyes of many RE enthusiasts. If the use of slave labour doesn’t concern them, I wonder if this will? No, probably not, as long as the panels are cheap.

That's a very misleading claim, though. They're comparing manufacture with 100% coal to 100% renewables. There's hardly anywhere in the world where you could build a plant today and run on 100% renewables, unless you build the renewable generation too as part of your plant. All power grids are dirty, but some are dirtier than others.

The Fraunhofer Institute compared EU-manufacture to CN-manufacture and found the difference to be much smaller, about 10%:

https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/photovoltaics-report.html page 36.

Even with Chinese-made panels installed in Belgium (a similar latitude / climate to the southern UK) they calculate energy payback in 1.24 years.

JKenH

QrizB said:

Screwdriva said:

The professor who (with others) wrote the initial report, has finally spoken out about Chinese intimidation, harassment and interference in a British Academia. 

I see from the report that one of the Hong Kong clothing suppliers that Sheffield Hallam have previously investigated is suing for defamation:

Complicating things for Sheffield Hallam had been a report by its Forced Labour Lab published December 2023 into clothing supply chains connected to Xinjiang.

Smart Shirts Ltd, a Hong Kong supplier of garments with customers in the UK, brought a claim for libel, alleging it had been defamed as its name was included.

A preliminary ruling at the High Court in London in December 2024 found that report had been "defamatory".

A full trial in that case is yet to take place at which Sheffield Hallam will be able to put forward its defence to the company's claim, but the university was told by its insurers that "any defamation, libel or slander" claims linked to its entire Social and Economic Research Institute were no longer covered.

We'll have to see how the court case turns out.

JKenH said:

China can do no wrong in the eyes of many RE enthusiasts. If the use of slave labour doesn’t concern them, I wonder if this will? No, probably not, as long as the panels are cheap.

That's a very misleading claim, though. They're comparing manufacture with 100% coal to 100% renewables. There's hardly anywhere in the world where you could build a plant today and run on 100% renewables, unless you build the renewable generation too as part of your plant. All power grids are dirty, but some are dirtier than others.

The Fraunhofer Institute compared EU-manufacture to CN-manufacture and found the difference to be much smaller, about 10%:

https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/photovoltaics-report.html page 36.

Even with Chinese-made panels installed in Belgium (a similar latitude / climate to the southern UK) they calculate energy payback in 1.24 years.

Is that energy payback or CO2 payback you are comparing? I can see why the energy content of a European made panel might be similar to one made in China but the CO2 emitted in manufacture would be much higher. 

You mention Belgium. The carbon intensity of the Belgian Grid is 158g/kWh.  https://lowcarbonpower.org/region/Belgium  A 100% coal powered grid as in the Uyghur region in China which is the subject of the report is estimated at 1016 g/kWh. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353549276_Research_on_carbon_emission_of_coal-fired_power_in_China   (I couldn’t see in the Fraunhofer report what CO2 figure was assumed for China but is it possible they took an average figure for China and not specifically for the Uyghur region? One other point to bear in mind that with a coal fired grid the intensity remains the same throughout the day whereas with a grid that has a high proportion of solar (e.g. California) the grid CO2 intensity tends to be lower during the working day when manufacturing is taking place.

Assuming average CO2 grid intensity* a Chinese made panel might  be expected to have 6.5 times the CO2 content of a panel made in Belgium or 8 times the content of one made in the UK where our average grid intensity is 125g/kWh. 

Edit: *clarification -  by average CO2 grid intensity I mean yearly Belgian or UK average,( i.e. not average CO2 during working hours) compared to coal fired generation in China.

Screwdriva

QrizB said:

I see from the report that one of the Hong Kong clothing suppliers that Sheffield Hallam have previously investigated is suing for defamation:

Threatening libel/ defamation is a common tactic used against any institution who surfaces material against the CCP's tentacles. The University team published corporate responses to the initial study, which should highlight this further. 

Magnitio

JKenH said:

A 100% coal powered grid as in the Uyghur region in China which is the subject of the report is estimated at 1016 g/kWh. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353549276_Research_on_carbon_emission_of_coal-fired_power_in_China   

You are quoting a report from 2017. I'm sure you won't be suprised to hear that things have moved on a bit since then. Here's some up-to-date data from this region:

"In 2024, more than 30 percent, or 39.2 billion kWh, came from renewable energy, helping reduce standard coal consumption by 11.86 million tonnes and cut carbon dioxide emissions by 32.02 million tonnes.

The region also leads in new-type energy storage, with installed capacity exceeding 10 million kilowatts"

China's emissions are now estimated to be below 500g/kWh, so half the figure you quote.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/china-cuts-electricity-emissions-record-lows-2025-2025-07-16/

JKenH

Magnitio said:

JKenH said:

A 100% coal powered grid as in the Uyghur region in China which is the subject of the report is estimated at 1016 g/kWh. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353549276_Research_on_carbon_emission_of_coal-fired_power_in_China   

You are quoting a report from 2017. I'm sure you won't be suprised to hear that things have moved on a bit since then. Here's some up-to-date data from this region:

"In 2024, more than 30 percent, or 39.2 billion kWh, came from renewable energy, helping reduce standard coal consumption by 11.86 million tonnes and cut carbon dioxide emissions by 32.02 million tonnes.

The region also leads in new-type energy storage, with installed capacity exceeding 10 million kilowatts"

China's emissions are now estimated to be below 500g/kWh, so half the figure you quote.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/china-cuts-electricity-emissions-record-lows-2025-2025-07-16/

The link you provided refers to China as a whole. The figure of 100% coal generation I quoted came from the July/November 2023 report from Sheffield Hallam not a 2017 report. The 1016 g/kWh figure I quoted was from a 2017 report but that simply was a figure for the CO2 emissions from coal generated electricity and was not time sensitive. 

Edit: I am genuinely surprised at the pushback against criticism of China’s manufacture of solar panels using forced labour and fossil fuels. Do you really approve of what’s going on in Uyghur?

JKenH

Another article on the same issue.

Solar companies linked to forced labour continue to grow steadily in popularity despite government actions

The allegations of forced labour in the supply chains of these solar companies have led to significant consequences. The U.S. government has taken action to block more than 1,000 shipments of solar energy components from China's Xinjiang region over concerns about slave labour. Despite these concerns and efforts, the solar industry continues to grow, and the popularity of these key brands remains strong. 

https://www.greenmatch.co.uk/blog/solar-companies-linked-to-forced-labour