Dude. You're the moron posting crap from wiki that is not corroborated by ANYTHING.
Wiki's source is the EIA, the US Energy Administration Agency.
Electricity Data Browser
Your source is ... well, you don't have one. You keep saying you have these magic reports, but those reports don't say what you claim. At least you can't show any part of them that say it.
Ivanpah is in very real danger of being shut down for non production. That's REAL. If it were going along as swimmingly as you claim they wouldn't even be considering that
No, that's a fantasy you cooked up, the "non-production" thing. The problem it has is _low_ production, which would be a completely different thing. You do understand the difference between "none" and "low", right?
(Now, contract law might talk about "non-delivery", but that's a separate thing, just meaning the full contract wasn't fulfilled.)
Do you see yet how out of touch with reality you truly are?
I'm not the one refusing to post any data to support his claims, or invoking a conspiracy theory about how wiki must be faking the data. That's you. Since your argument has no data backing it up and requires a conspiracy theory to support it, that indicates you're the delusional one.
Will your response when it is shut down to deny that and claim it is still operational? Just wondering...
Is admitting you made a mistake really that hard?
This is why it's so good to be on the rational side. We don't have cult leaders ordering us to hold the line against the infidels, so we're free to admit mistakes.
So if Ivanpah works with or without natural gas, how come its failing to meet its conract obligation?
Could California’s massive Ivanpah solar power plant be forced to go dark?
.
federally backed, $2.2 billion solar project in the California desert isn’t producing the electricity it is contractually required to deliver to PG&E Corp., which says the solar plant may be forced to shut down if it doesn’t receive a break Thursday from state regulators.