Obama Has Done More for Clean Energy Than You ThinkWhat's interesting in our discussion here is the fact that we got 2 controversies where we disagree on what's happening but we can agree on policy."It's going to get uglier." U.S. oil patch heads to the insolvency zone
The first is whether solar is viable; you say it is and I say it isn't but we should both agree (for opposite reasons) that public policy makers should end solar tax financed subsidies. The other controversy is whether the U.S. petroleum industry outlook is rebound or collapse. If you seriously believe your view that the sector's about to tank then many of my collegues in the financial markets would love to sell you short contracts that would pay you handsomely if you're right. Pse let me know when you've thought it through.
One last thought, if you decide that solar is not worth risking your own money, then I'd beg you to consider how I feel about the previous president taking my money by force and wasting it on solar scams like Solyndra LLC when Obama-backed green energy failures leave taxpayers with $2.2 billion tab, audit finds
The biggest challenge the loan program faced may not have been public criticism of failed deals like Solyndra, Fisker Automotive and Beacon Power or technology letdowns such as the Ivanpah solar-thermal power plant producing less electricity than expected. Rather, the biggest challenge came from within the Obama administration itself, particularly the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which stood athwart greater ambition. For example, one deal, dubbed SolarStrong, would have loaned $344 million to put solar panels on housing on military bases across the country. But OMB axed the deal because budget rules require it to assume that the Department of Defense might not have the appropriations to repay the loan in future decades. "At which point, all you can do is go home and have a scotch," Silver recalls.
"Military appropriations are not considered permanent appropriations," explains Peter Davidson, who oversaw the LPO from 2013 to June of this year. "It's the environment we have to work in, we try and do what we can."
In the end, the LPO's successes helped kill off some of its own portfolio of projects. Building utility-scale solar photovoltaic plants like Agua Caliente and Antelope Valley helped render obsolete solar thermal power plants like Ivanpah and Solana as silicon technology improved dramatically and costs dropped whereas the price of steel and glass remained relatively high. Large photovoltaic installations also helped make solar panels so cheap that it drove companies like Solyndra—whose business model relied on PV remaining expensive—into bankruptcy. "We were simply financing the best deals available," Silver says, noting that the program could not independently seek out good projects. "The single thing that bound all these applications together was not their size or technology or geography or financing structure. The single thing that bound them together is that they applied."
That also means the loan program may have taken too little risk. The program has made a profit of nearly $1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date. At least $5 billion more is expected over the next few decades as loans are paid back. That compares with $780 million in losses to date, the bulk of which is accounted for by the $535 million loaned to Solyndra. And more money could be made if the program were to ever sell its group of loans rather than managing them for the next few decades.
I think that I put more trust in the assessment of the Scientific American than a newspaper.
That also means the loan program may have taken too little risk. The program has made a profit of nearly $1 billion in interest payments to the U.S Treasury to date.
I'd like to see the backup for this "profit".