Are Any of the Green Energy Projects Backed by the Obama Administration Solvent?

|

Another Obama energy folly

Solyndra, Ener1, Beacon Power, Solar Trust, and and and and now, Nevada Geothermal Power. The Hill is reporting:

Another energy firm backed by the Obama administration appears to be headed toward collapse.

This time it's a Nevada geothermal company that benefited from a $98.5 million federal loan guarantee that's in the spotlight.

Auditors for Nevada Geothermal Power have doubts about whether the company can stay afloat, the Washington Times reported Thursday, citing an internal audit of the firm.

The company has racked up $98 million in net losses in the past several years, cannot produce enough cash from current operations after debt-service payments and carries significant debt, the audit said.

Nevada Geothermal Power will hold its annual shareholders meeting on July 24, which will touch on the structure of the firm's debt regarding the Blue Mountain geothermal power project in Humboldt County, Nev.

That 49.5-megawatt project is what secured the federal loan guarantee in 2010 for the company. The federal government backs 80 percent of the loan.

Some readers inclined to schadenfreude might be interested in a nice round up by my colleague Tim Cavanaugh of failed Obama administration green energy boondoggles.

NEXT: Ron Paul: From Ending the Federal Reserve to Ending Government Interference with the Internet

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Criticizing Obama’s green-energy initiatives is racist!”

    /any random leftist

    1. Yes, they hate green people. Though I suppose its more politically correct to call them “vegetable-Americans”.

      1. “Soylent-Americans”

        “To Serve Man”

  2. But they meant well.

  3. You can’t pay off political cronies without wasting a few billion dollars, now, can you?

  4. “Solyndra, Ener1, Beacon Power, Solar Trust, and and and and now”

    The squirrels claim another victim.

  5. Lifeguard who was fired for saving a drowning man:

    “I wasn’t following orders”

    http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_n…..-back?lite

    1. Zero-tolerance, adult-world style.

      1. The company CEO surprisingly came out early in the press and said it was not appropriate to fire the guy, and offered him his job back. The ex-lifeguard told them to kick rocks.

    2. He should have been fired. The company was there to patrol a different area of the beach. Here is another example: What happens why my paid-for fire department chooses to go off on an altruistic mission to save some guy’s house, and my house burns down because they aren’t available? The lifeguard company was paid to patrol X; the kid went outside of X. Now what would the company’s liability have been if someone drowned in X while the kid was outside of X?

      1. He should NOT necessarily have been fired. Sorry about that.

        1. Thanks for the clarification. I was already looking askance at your post, when I saw your correction.

      2. Except that no one in X was drowning at the time. If someone is dying, saying “no I can’t save them it violates my contract” is a very poor excuse.

        1. Eh….

          From my total bastard ancap world view, I can kind of see their point.

          Say I hire a security guard for my factory. I don’t want him investigating the noises of breaking in from the factory across the road. I want him watching my factory, because that’s what I paid him for.

          I don’t think it’s unreasonable to demand that an employee do his job for the people he’s paid to do it for, while he’s being paid to do it.

          1. I don’t want him investigating the noises of breaking in from the factory across the road.

            What about noises of breaking in from the other side of the factory?

            Because that’s closer to what this was. All one beach, you know.

        2. Do you think it only takes just a minute to save a drowning guy? You could be away from your post for an hour or two, what with waiting for ambulance, etc. His responsibility is X, not somewhere outside of X.

  6. It’s amazing the point we’ve gotten to: the President of the United States and his administration can lose billions of dollars in questionable loans and nothing happens. Nothing.

    1. He gets praised for it, Epi. That’s not “nothing”.

      1. Bill Maher: “At least he’s trying something. We punish failure too much in this country.”

        Obviously Bill, that is the furthest thing from the truth.

        1. Sudden|7.5.12 @ 7:43PM|#
          “Bill Maher: “At least he’s trying something. We punish failure too much in this country.””

          Nope. Maher still has a job.

    2. It’s not lost. They didn’t burn a bunch of hundred dollar bills. It’s just been dispensed into the economy in a different way than you’d like.

      What gives you the right to decide how money gets spent, anyway.

      1. Might as well have burned the bills, mustard. Fat lot of fuckin’ good it did.

        1. Plus, what gives *you* the right to decide how money gets spent?

          1. It’s a terrible sockpuppet, about as terrible as Nando. Ignore it.

            1. I want to drive it from the village.

        2. If they burned them they wouldn’t exist. But just because the way the money was distributed may not have been the best doesn’t change the fact that someone is buying food for their family with that money. If they burned it, those people would have to go hungry.

          1. Again… what gives *you* the right to decide how the money was spent?

          2. mustard|7.5.12 @ 8:17PM|#
            “If they burned them they wouldn’t exist. But just because the way the money was distributed may not have been the best doesn’t change the fact that someone is buying food for their family with that money. If they burned it, those people would have to go hungry.”

            What an ignoramus!
            Ever hear of the broken-window fallacy?

            1. Is everyone here so irony-challenged? Troll-deaf? Snark-blind?

              1. The motherfucker just won’t stay away, Robert. Just like shrike and Tony and Nando, they keep coming back.

                For no good [drink!] reason, either.

                1. For a very good reason:

                  They get fed.

          3. If they burned them they wouldn’t exist.

            We are currently borrowing trillions as well as paying billions on interest payments on money we already borrowed, and government overspending when the the government owes over 100% of GDP hurts the economy by up to 2% of GDP growth…

            Yes it would have been better if the money never existed.

            1. You’ll make Little Paulie Krugnuts cry with talk like that, joshua.

            2. Burning them is better than borrowing it.

              By borrowing money that is then wasted on a failed project, you now have to come up with what you borrowed, plus interest, in the future.

              Effectively, you’re burning the money twice.

              First, when you waste it. Second, when you have to pay it back. If I borrow $100 to buy a crap piece of equipment that doesn’t work, I’m $100 poorer. Then, when I pay the loan back with interest (call it 10% total interest), I’m another $110 poorer.

      2. And yet another version of the Broken Window Fallacy is loosed upon an unsuspecting world.

    3. What do you expect? These are the same guys who paid people to destroy perfectly good cars.

      1. These are the same guys who paid people to destroy perfectly good cars… for the children.

        FIFY’d so our resident leftists won’t have to say it.

        1. Speaking of resident leftists… shrike’s back.

    4. The Bushpigs pissed away $1 trillion in Iraq and nothing happened.

      Iraq = 2000 Solyndras.

      And 4500 US soldiers died in that hellhole too.

      I know – DON’T MENTION BUSH! NOT FAIR!

      1. Still blaming absolutely nothing on any Democrat, shrike?

        Barack has his cock lodged firmly in your crevices. No question.

        1. BTW… how did Obama vote on the Iraq war, again?

          1. He didn’t. It was Hillary who voted for the war.

            I blame LBJ for escalating the Vietnam war. It was worse than Iraq with 58,000 dead US soldiers for nothing.

            1. So… Obama COULD have voted against it, but…

              1. …and you’re STILL going to vote for him… even though he *could* have voted against going to Iraq… and he’s a Democrat… but YOU are a Barry Goldwater fan…

                Shit, there aren’t enough flow-chart skills to sort that out.

                1. Obama didn’t join the Senate until Jan 2005, dumbass.

                  The Authorization to USE Force in Iraq was long past.

                  1. Wow… you really ARE an Obama cocksucker, aren’t you?

                    1. Well, looky here:

                      http://www.boston.com/news/nat…..q_funding/

                      THAT, is what I meant. I can read calendars, dipshit.

      2. Another reminder, shrike, in case you ignored the last one:

        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

        Quick fact: Criticizing Obama =/= racist.

        1. No, you went Glenn Beck with your Black Theology shit. I had never discussed race before then.

          Go ahead and fail with this Jeremiah Wright bullshit again. It is all you idiots have.

          Try to stick to real issues, will you?

          1. It’s a disgusting, racist theology, as much as any white-separatist church is.

            Fail: I have listened to approximately five minutes of Beck, and couldn’t stand him. Haven’t gone back for more.

            Keep sucking Obama cock, though. It suits you, Supposed Goldwater Fan.

            1. BTW… *if* you claim to “hate all religions”… as you have… why are you defending Obama’s former church?

            2. Your fixation on cock is unhealthy.

              1. Given your name… I wouldn’t be throwing stones.

                BTW, you CAN read dictionary entries… right?

                http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

                Or are you just going to ignore it like Tony does?

                Fucking cowards throw that word around like it means what the fuck they want it to mean. Fuck ’em.

                1. Way to avoid the questions, BTW.

                  1. Yeah, that’s what I thought… run and hide, you fucking pussy.

                    1. Fuck you. I don’t care if you are racist or not.

                      No one is defending Black Theology, idiot. Its not a campaign issue except with Beck-type paranoid freaks.

                    2. I give a shit about the belief systems of those who want to rule us, shrike. I would no more want a Mormon running things than I would a rabid Christian, and Obama hung out with one of those for many, many years.

                      If you “don’t care”, why did you MISuse the word “racist”, then?

                      And why are you defending Obama’s religion, IF you hate ALL religions?

                    3. Then again, you’re a fucking liar, so it’s kind of pointless to argue with you.

                    4. And I still don’t listen to Beck, though it’s obvious you listen to twats like Bill Press and Ed Schultz, Mister So-Called Barry Goldwater Fan.

                    5. I am not defending his religion, asswipe. Christianity is no favorite of mine.

                      Only Islam is worse.

                    6. The fuck you aren’t defending it.

                      It’s HIS, therefore you’re upset I brought it up.

                      It’s still a mystery why you, a supposed Goldwater worshiper, defend anything concerning Obama – much less vote for him.

                    7. BTW, I found out about his disgusting, racist religious background by researching it via internet searches, not listening to Glenn Fucking Beck.

                      BTW, what did Thom Hartmann say today?

              2. Your fixation on cock is unhealthy.

                Your screen name suggests a strong desire to be nestled inside Sarah Palin’s rectum. And your website link suggests a correlation between your intimate desires and George Soros. Please explain.

                1. Actually, I think he wants Sarah to peg him with a strap-on.

      3. Palin’s Buttplug|7.5.12 @ 8:44PM|#
        ‘Obama pissed away $1 trillion in Iraq and nothing happened.’

        FIFY, dipshit.

        1. He can’t figure it out, Sevo. He and Tony claim to be so goddamned smart, but apparently colleges can’t teach critical thinking skills to leftist students.

          1. They do learn to play a mean ass drum though.

      4. So the solution to Bush’s adventure is to throw $1 trillion down the “green energy” rathole?

      5. I know – DON’T MENTION BUSH! NOT FAIR!

        Christ, you’re tiresome.

        1. He never blames Obama, you’ll notice.

  7. You guys realize that at the end of this series of debacles, the excuse will be, “See? Private power generation isn’t like other markets… it requires government support!”

    1. Actually, you can insert anything in place of “private power generation” and leftists will always lap it up.

      1. Education
        Energy
        Banking
        oil
        Car manufacturing
        Medical care

        Health insurance

        1. And that’s just the short list.

  8. It’s really hard for some people to understand how central planning could be such a failure–even when Barack Obama does it?

    Incidentally, we should be keeping an eye on Obama’s really big bet on central planning–his investment in GM.

    It’s really hard for some people to understand how a corporation owned and run by the UAW and the U.S. government could be such a failure–even when Barack Obama does it?

    And we let this guy screw with our healthcare system.

  9. The typically feeble Romney campaign should be hammering Obama on this, but . . .

    1. It’s almost like he’s playin’ a prevent defense.

      It’s a make no mistakes kinda campaign.

      Take no chances. Make no mistakes.

      He runs the risk of being so vanilla that no one will take time out on their way home from work to stop by the booth and vote for him. …unless they’re mad as hell at Obama.

      Maybe that’s not such a bad strategy. How many people out there are genuinely afraid of Romney?

      1. To take the football analogy to it’s logical conclusion: he’s playing a prevent defense in a tight game against the Raiders.

        It’s the Raiders, so they’re already set up to fail on their own accord and he figures they’ll just shoot themselves in the foot. But you never know with them. Plus, the fanbase is passionate and will do whatever it takes to win, even if half of them are behind bars.

        /Chiefs fan rant.

        1. I still think the Chiefs suck for letting Rich Gannon go to the Raiders.

          /grudge

          1. True. It was almost like some sort of poetic justice for us stealing Marcus Allen from them.

            But damn, I remember 1995 like it was yesterday. That playoff game at home against Jim Harbaugh’s Colts. Had Gannon been the QB that day, we would’ve won and likely gone on to play in the SB. That still stings worse than the Elvis Grbac’s Fake Sexiest Athlete Alive Cover.

            1. Grbac was the Joe Biden of the KC Chiefs.

      2. The only thing a prevent defense prevents is winning. I watched Mickey Andrews do it often enough in the ’00s at FSU.

        1. No, they produce a lot of interceptions.

  10. I thought is was fairly common knowledge that anyone who needs a co-signer doesn’t merit a co-signer.

    1. Not necessarily.

      But if someone needs a cosigner and can’t get anyone else in the world to cosign–except for the government?

      That’s a pretty good sign that the government shouldn’t rush in where angel investors fear to tread.

      1. Bye bye student loans, hello higher education gap.

        1. Hey, everyone! Retarded leftist commenter “mustard” has returned!

        2. Do you imagine that if it weren’t for government cosigning on student loans, that universities wouldn’t compete more on price?

          Regardless, you’re absolutely right that there are tons of people who shouldn’t go to college but do anyway–and they only go becasue the government is cosigning on their loan.

          Those are the people who end up either dropping out of college or with ridiculous amounts of debt–or a ridiculous amount of debt for a liberal arts degree!

          So, that’s a good point you made there. If no one in the world is willing to give you a student loan unless the U.S. government cosigns? That’s a really good sign that you should limit yourself to a college education you can afford.

        3. mustard|7.5.12 @ 8:03PM|#
          “Bye bye student loans, hello higher education gap.”

          Can you say ‘false dichotomy’, bozo? I’ll bet you can.

          1. No, I think he’s got a point. People entering majors likely to return a substantial salary will be more likely to receive student loans than those requesting funds for a major likely to land them behind a register at a bookstore. Is this a bad thing?

            1. matth|7.6.12 @ 12:05AM|#
              “People entering majors likely to return a substantial salary will be more likely to receive student loans than those requesting funds for a major likely to land them behind a register at a bookstore.”

              Any proof for your claim?

              1. Is proof necessary? I mean, the hypothesis does stand to reason. Someone taking a major with a fairly high expected salary and fairly narrow distribution of possible returns is going to be a lot better credit risk than one with a high probability of not being able to pay you back.

  11. The fuck? They ran a business based on fucking GEOTHERMAL and it failed? How does geofuckingthermal fail?

    1. People like that can fuck up a bowel movement.

      1. Moral: Let your partner use the toilet 1st.

        1. I see what you did, there.

    2. It’s probably pretty capital intensive. Like drilling an oil well the trying to recoup costs with water being pumped out.

      1. +1

        Drilling to the center of the earth is ridiculously expensive.

        1. The ultimate broken-windows style application of Keynesianism!

        2. “Drilling to the center of the earth is ridiculously expensive.”

          60 million dollars in 2003 money

          1. That would be… about four trillion in Obama money.

    3. They forgot to hire any engineers.

    4. sage|7.5.12 @ 8:36PM|#
      “How does geofuckingthermal fail?”

      I’d say Obama is the one who can famously ‘screw up a free lunch’.
      Short that in which Obama’s decided to invest your money; you might break even.

    5. How does geofuckingthermal fail?

      By being way more expensive than other baseline power?

  12. Somebody should probably mention, just for the f of it, that the biggest reason why so many solar companies here in the US are hurting is because the price for solar panels has plummeted.

    It used to be that the thin film stuff made sense because although it wasn’t as effective, it cost half as much as the regular panels. Over the past year, the price of regular panels has plummeted far below thin film–making the purpose of relatively inefficient thin film a mystery.

    We shouldn’t lose site of the fact that solar panels are selling like mad–’cause they’re so cheap and effective! In that sense, the solar industry has been wildly successful.

    Which goes to show how tricky it is to predict the future.

    Obama may have been right about the future being bright for the solar industry world wide–but that doesn’t mean he can pick the winners and losers. You can lose your shirt in a bull market, and, even when you’re right, you’re often right for the wrong reasons.

    1. Which is why Obama has started using the brilliant tactic of imposing import tariffs on Chinese made solar panels. We can’t have cheap solar panels fucking up America’s green energy market. Those things are supposed to produce jobs in America.

  13. Very cool indeed dude Wow.

    http://www.Privacy-Peeps.tk

  14. “Are Any of the Green Energy Projects Backed by the Obama Administration Solvent?”

    The entire premise of the question is wrong. The insolvency of any Obama Administration program is a feature, not a bug.

    1. It’s actually neither feature nor bug, Len… it’s built-in failure, engineered straight into the mix.

      1. Like British electronics!

        1. Or French cars.

          I drove a Peugeot once… from the front of the used-car lot, to the back. It died on the way there.

          1. Mr. FIFY|7.5.12 @ 10:48PM|#
            “Or French cars.
            I drove a Peugeot once… from the front of the used-car lot, to the back. It died on the way there.”

            Hey, good thing it wasn’t a Fiat! You’d have had a longer walk.

            1. The Fiats I’ve driven in my lifetime, were more reliable than French cars.

              Now, a Russian-made car… well, I’ve never had the pleasure of getting into one, but I’ve heard they were shit as well.

              Oh, and I almost got a hundred miles out of a Yugo!

              1. Now, a Russian-made car… well, I’ve never had the pleasure of getting into one, but I’ve heard they were shit as well.

                My father’s 1972 Zhiguli (LADA 1.2L) served him for two decades… and after his death, my mom managed to sell it for some money.

                Hasten to add that it was maintained quite well — by mechanics who worked for a govt.-owned garage and did the maintenance for under-the-table payments from my dad.

      2. Indeed. Straight into the mix.

        What I meant to say was, it seems like to the Obama Administration, insolvency is more of a feature, than a bug.

        IOW, what’s noble about a program that makes money? You know, shared sacrifice,* investing in the future, blah blah blah.

        *The Obama Administration does not share in any “shared sacrifice” schemes.

  15. I didn’t parse the title right until the 3rd reading. I kept thinking “the Obama Administration Solvent” was a snarky reference to some stock excuse they had.

    1. It could also be a stain remover.

      1. That will be the election.

        1. A Team Red stain is still a stain. Lose/lose, really.

    2. Are Any of the Green Energy Projects Backed by the Obama Administration Solvent?

      The irony is that there are campaign contributions coming out of these companies right into Obama’s election campaign.

      So yes there is one solvent organization…The committee to reelect Obama.

  16. Well, we should be thanking Obama for proving beyond any reasonable doubt that ‘green energy’ is at best a pipe dream, at worst a scam.

    1. I think it will eventually be the superior option, as supplies of fossil fuels become strained and what exists becomes more cost-intensive to extract.

  17. Well, it’s all to the good.

    If it had worked the plant would have just sat there churning out energy and employing hardly anyone doing it. This way, they will have to drill more thermal vents, which means more jobs are produced.

  18. A company called Envia seems to have had some success with a research grant.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/yo…..cle-costs/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.