Global PV outlook clouded by policy shifts and China export risks

From pv magazine Global

Few topics generate as much debate in the sector as the near-term direction of the photovoltaic market, the energy transition, and the path toward achieving climate goals – particularly amid conflicting political signals. Yet everyone agrees that change is inevitable. It remains unclear whether these changes will accelerate or hinder the rapid expansion of renewable energy, a topic explored in more detail later in this article.

Module prices across technology classes are showing slight rises and declines, with no clear long-term trend. Price fluctuations largely reflect current demand dynamics: the small-installation sector is shrinking, leading to declining sales of all-black modules. EPC companies and manufacturers are increasingly focusing on medium- and large-scale photovoltaic projects, where high-efficiency modules are gaining traction, though price competition remains intense.

Looking ahead to the coming months and especially next year, demand is expected to cool further amid uncertainty over future energy policies and a more challenging market environment as previously viable business models and investment opportunities disappear. Ordinarily, this would suggest a continued decline in prices. However, this trend is counterbalanced by the Chinese government’s decision to eliminate export tax benefits for all manufacturers, which would raise export prices by nine percentage points if fully passed on by producers.

Chinese module manufacturers are likely to reflect this cost increase in pricing, as European market prices have long reached their upper limits. Long-term supply contracts already account for the anticipated cost hike. For now, the timing of this impact remains uncertain, though its inevitability is clear. Asian inverter and storage system manufacturers will also be affected, though cost pressures in this segment are not yet critical. Many may absorb the increase or have already built it into pricing, as no public contractual obligations to pass on costs are known.

Public and political attitudes toward climate change remain complex. While most citizens support the energy transition and stronger climate protection, debates about costs are regaining prominence. In response, some governments are reverting to fossil-nuclear strategies that appear illogical and short-sighted, driven more by vested interests than scientific rationale. Even expert recommendations are sometimes disregarded in favor of pre-determined plans – illustrated most recently by the actions of Germany’s Federal Minister for Economics and Energy, Katherina Reiche (CDU).

Some political leaders go further, advocating the abandonment of climate protection measures and even restricting research and information – an approach increasingly associated with US policy trends. While the European Union continues to confront climate change actively, certain German policy announcements raise concerns about a potential shift in priorities. Economic recovery and growth opportunities are often cited as justification for supporting the monopolistic structures of the traditional energy industry – a strategy that seems both retrograde and counterproductive.

The rapid growth of the renewable energy sector has exposed imbalances: conventional energy infrastructure has not evolved at the same pace, and essential adjustments – such as grid expansion and smart meter deployment – have been delayed, whether through oversight or deliberate neglect.

Companies that have adapted to a dynamic, decentralized energy market risk being sidelined, effectively “thrown off their high horse.” The debate over capacity markets, for instance, appears redundant: the cost-effective model should already prevail. Instead, such measures disproportionately benefit conventional energy providers, while decentralized producers with variable outputs face structural disadvantages. Viable technologies and approaches already exist to enable a cost-effective transition without relying on gas-fired power plants or excessively expensive grid upgrades.

Meanwhile, the guaranteed feed-in tariff is likely to be reduced or eliminated, particularly for small rooftop PV installations in Germany. Setting a reasonable threshold – for example, 30 kW – would protect larger installations that require financing, ensuring continued market stability.

Promises of reduced bureaucracy remain largely rhetorical, while decentralization and dynamic energy models are often dismissed as overly complex and costly. Responsibility appears to be shifting back to major energy companies, who are expected to revive older strategies with minimal adaptation.

There is also concern that funds from the Climate Protection and Transformation Fund could be redirected to support gas-fired generation combined with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Studies indicate that this approach is far from environmentally sustainable: injecting CO₂ into depleted oil or gas fields can release significant methane – worse for the climate – and prolong fossil fuel extraction. Using renewable energy subsidies to finance these methods benefits traditional energy interests at the expense of the photovoltaic and wind sectors. Presenting such practices as climate protection is not only misleading but potentially disastrous for the sector.

Price summary by technology as of Oct. 12, 2025, including changes from the previous month:

About the author: Martin Schachinger has studied electrical engineering and has been active in the field of photovoltaics and renewable energy for almost 30 years. In 2004, he set up the pvXchange.com online trading platform. The company stocks standard components for new installations and solar modules and inverters that are no longer being produced.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those held by pv magazine.

This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.