烧光155亿，超级独角兽要破产了

Core Viewpoint - The bankruptcy of Pine Gate, a leading solar developer in the U.S., signifies a severe downturn in the solar industry, marking a potential end to the renewable energy boom that began in 2022 [4][5][19]. Group 1: Company Overview - Pine Gate, founded in 2016, was a vertically integrated solar developer, handling the entire process from development to operation [8][9]. - The company underwent a significant restructuring in 2021, shifting to a lighter asset model focused on financing and development, which increased its capital appeal [9][10]. Group 2: Financing and Growth - Between 2022 and 2025, Pine Gate raised over $2.18 billion (approximately 15.5 billion RMB) in public financing, becoming the top solar company in terms of venture capital in 2024 [10][11]. - The company had a total project financing and capital investment of $10 billion (approximately 71 billion RMB) by August 2025, operating over 2 GW of solar projects and developing over 30 GW across more than 30 states [11][12]. Group 3: Market Challenges and Bankruptcy - The introduction of the OBBBA Act in July 2024 significantly reduced subsidies for the solar industry and increased tariffs on photovoltaic products, undermining Pine Gate's business model [13][14]. - Following the policy changes, the financing for solar companies in the U.S. dropped by 39% in 2025, leading to severe cash flow issues for Pine Gate, which had already been struggling due to rising interest rates [16][18]. - Pine Gate officially filed for bankruptcy on November 6, 2024, with debts totaling $4.4 billion (approximately 31.2 billion RMB) and only $850,000 in cash remaining [18][19]. Group 4: Industry Impact - The bankruptcy of Pine Gate is part of a broader trend, with dozens of solar companies in the U.S. declaring bankruptcy since 2025, indicating a systemic failure in the solar market [20][21]. - The rapid transition from a booming market to a crisis reflects a collective failure of over-leveraged business models reliant on cheap capital and policy support, leading to significant losses for top investors [21][22].