Another green co. kaput, well not dead yet....

[Trajan]

at least thats what the poor oaf said in Search for the holy Grail....



Stimulus-Backed Solar Company Lays Off 70 Percent of Workforce

President Obama used a weekly address in July 2010 to tout his stimulus package’s support for the solar industry. One of the companies he mentioned specifically, Abound Solar, just announced that it will lay off 70 percent of its workforce.

Abound would “create more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs,” Obama claimed, and would be integral to the administration’s quest to “create whole new industries and hundreds of thousands of new jobs in America.”

But a year and a half later, the company’s staff numbers only 120. It announced Tuesday that it would lay off 180 full time and 100 part time employees, halt solar panel production, and delay the construction of a manufacturing plant in Indiana.

more at-
Stimulus-Backed Solar Company Lays Off 70 Percent of Workforce

 

[saveliberty]

When will America see the light?

 

[Trajan]

When will America see the light?

does that qualify as a double entendre?

 

[saveliberty]

When will America see the light?

does that qualify as a double entendre?

I just need to know if it is a tax deduction.

 

[Trajan]

above my pay grade....

 

[syrenn]

How many is this down the tubes now? I've lost count.

 

[saveliberty]

Its like tilting at windmills...

 

[Mr. H.]

Well they gave it a shot and that's what counts, right?

Run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it.
Toss it in the water and see if it floats.
Push the envelope.
It's a value-added proposition.
Maximize the leverage.
Expectation management.
Actionable, strategic intent.
Step up to the plate.

 

[waltky]

U.S. solar and wind industries expand, despite bankruptcies...

U.S. solar and wind industries expand
`4 Mar.`12 - Despite last year's bankruptcies of several solar manufacturers, including government-backed Solyndra, the U.S. solar and wind industries continue to expand in the face of obstacles this year.

Newly installed solar panels produced 109% more electricity nationwide last year than in 2010, reaching a record 1,855 megawatts, as the price of these panels plummeted by more than 50%, according to a report today by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), an industry group, and GTM Research.

"The U.S. remains the innovative center of the solar industry worldwide," says Rhone Resch, SEIA's president. He says "run-of-the-mill" panels may increasingly be made overseas, but the U.S. still will make the most advanced solar components and post double-digit annual growth. He expects solar power, which now produces less than 1% of U.S. electricity, to generate 10% by 2020.

"There's no bubble" bursting in the clean-tech sector, Resch says, although he cautions that more companies likely will fail as the industries mature and cope with decreased government subsidies. Other recent reports indicate that the U.S. clean-tech sector remains strong despite Republican criticism of President Obama's half-billion-dollar loan guarantee to Solyndra and his other support for renewable energy.

Wind power increased 31% last year, says the American Wind Energy Association, and venture capital invested in clean technology grew from $3.8 billion in 2010 to $4.3 billion last year, the National Venture Capital Association says. Still, even advocates see challenges ahead. "It's not all rosy. … There have been growing pains of late," says Ron Pernick, managing director for Clean Edge, a research firm. He expects "considerable consolidation."

MORE

 

[Old Rocks]

A new and rapidly changing and improving technology. There will be many failures, and a few stellar performers that manage to stay ahead of the development curve. In the meantime, solar is increasing by a 30% to 50% a year.

 

[saveliberty]

1,855 megawatts of production in 2011?

The US comsumed 3,873 billion kilowatthours in 2010

Electricity - consumption - Country Comparison

 

[TakeAStepBack]

A new and rapidly changing and improving technology. There will be many failures, and a few stellar performers that manage to stay ahead of the development curve. In the meantime, solar is increasing by a 30% to 50% a year.

That's great. But do WE need the government to piss away our money for us on this shit, or is it best to leave it to the private sector?

We'd probably be leaps and bounds ahead of the game on this stuff if our bloated, wasteful, market manipulating government shoved off and stayed in their proper role.

 

[Dragon]

That's great. But do WE need the government to piss away our money for us on this shit, or is it best to leave it to the private sector?

Whether you believe government assistance for the industry is a good idea depends on two factors. One of those is whether you are aware that renewable energy is a growing field and the economic factors now favor it.

The other is whether or not you believe in the ideology of the free market. If you do, then facts don't matter, you believe as a matter of doctrine that the free market is perfect and therefore any government action will make things worse. (WHY anyone believes that, other than that it sounds superficially cool, escapes me, but I realize some people do.)

If you don't believe in that particular religious dogma, then helping along a vital industry like that looks like a good collective investment.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Whether you believe government assistance for the industry is a good idea depends on two factors. One of those is whether you are aware that renewable energy is a growing field and the economic factors now favor it.

\

What "economic factors"? By that do you mean the growing debt and deficit spending from pissing away money on shit like this by our govt? If not, what DO you mwean by economic factors???

The other is whether or not you believe in the ideology of the free market. If you do, then facts don't matter, you believe as a matter of doctrine that the free market is perfect and therefore any government action will make things worse. (WHY anyone believes that, other than that it sounds superficially cool, escapes me, but I realize some people do.)

There is no such thing as perfection in praxeology. But, a few bureaucrats deciding what works best for everyone has proven itself failure over and over again. And subsidizing industries only creates waste, destroys competition a d formulates the monopolies that we see around us today. It's a terrible policy.

If you don't believe in that particular religious dogma, then helping along a vital industry like that looks like a good collective investment.

Religious dogma? WTF are you babbling about.......OH, "collective investment". Now i see what you're babbling about. It's called nonsense.

When do we see a return on any of these so called investments? How much debt are we in as a "collective" again?

Someone's been drinking the das kapitol koolaid it sounds like.

 

[Dragon]

What "economic factors"?

Falling prices for solar and wind power along with rising prices for fossil fuels. What else?

There is no such thing as perfection in praxeology. But, a few bureaucrats deciding what works best for everyone has proven itself failure over and over again.

So has laissez-faire capitalism. But then, there is little point in discussing facts with a true believer, who will grasp at any excuse (such as confusing ham-handed centrally-planned systems such as the Soviet Union with ANY attempt to regulate the economy) to go on believing.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

What "economic factors"?

Falling prices for solar and wind power along with rising prices for fossil fuels. What else?

There is no such thing as perfection in praxeology. But, a few bureaucrats deciding what works best for everyone has proven itself failure over and over again.

So has laissez-faire capitalism. But then, there is little point in discussing facts with a true believer, who will grasp at any excuse (such as confusing ham-handed centrally-planned systems such as the Soviet Union with ANY attempt to regulate the economy) to go on believing.

Falling prices are artificially created by subsidizing the industry. Then there is the waste.
As saveliberty points out, these technologies are NOT going to replace fossil fuels any time soon. It's a fun pipedream though.

Rising fuel costs has more to do with speculation and geopolitical events than it does with true markets. there is not much about the world that has anything to do with capitalism at this point. Fuel prices will go down again too.


The FACTS regarding true free markets is not that they fail, it is that central planners continously hijack the system and replace it. The failure is not in the system, but in people's ability to understand (especially these days) this and not allow it to happen by those who persue central planning and will stop at nothing to get ahold of the reigns.

 

[Ernie S.]

When the technology is mature and viable, it won't need government subsidies to expand. Private investors and conventional energy companies will pour billions into a sure thing. Only government is stupid enough to invest in this month's perpetual motion machine.

 

[Dragon]

Falling prices are artificially created by subsidizing the industry.

See what I mean? Using any excuse to go on believing . . .

Subsidies for renewable energy do not account for most of the drop in prices, which are the result of technological improvements. If you actually looked into the industry and thought quantitatively, instead of seeing the mere existence of subsidies and reacting with jerking knees, you'd see that. The price would have dropped nearly as far without the subsidies; in fact, most of the subsidies take the form of tax rebates, and advertised prices are generally before-tax-credit (they toss in the "and you can save even more" as a further sales pitch).

As saveliberty points out, these technologies are NOT going to replace fossil fuels any time soon

What does "any time soon" mean, exactly? They will do so over the next fifty years. Is that "soon" enough to count? They aren't going to do so completely the day after tomorrow. Does than mean it won't be "any time soon"?

Over the next few decades, though, we will see increasing use of renewable energy and declining fossil fuel consumption, so while the "replacement" isn't going to be complete immediately, it will happen.

I am simply not going to get into a discussion with you regarding your economic religion. You are not going to be persuaded by any sort of rational or fact-based argument here anymore than a fundamentalist Christian could be persuaded to doubt the Bible, and it would be a complete waste of my time. When you feel like opening your mind a little, we can talk.

 

[Dragon]

When the technology is mature and viable, it won't need government subsidies to expand.

It doesn't NEED them now. But it will expand more quickly with them, and it's a technology we need, so the subsidies are useful.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

What does "any time soon" mean, exactly?

1,855 megawatts of production in 2011?

The US comsumed 3,873 billion kilowatthours in 2010

He expects solar power, which now produces less than 1% of U.S. electricity, to generate 10% by 2020.

10% of a growing consumption over a decade. It isn't going to replace fossil fuels in the next 50 years. Probably not even in the next 100 years. But keep pouring our money down the drain.

So, your "collective investment" payoff doesn't seem to ever come. Though a growing national debt will surely "payoff" far sooner.