Failed energy projects cross U.S. party lines

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 6:17 p.m.

    The only real truth to be gleened here is:

    The government should not be backing any business with public money.

    Less government spending = less government problems.

  • FDRfan safety dictates, ID
    Oct. 15, 2011 12:06 p.m.

    Thanks Truthseeker.
    What do you think went wrong? Enjoy reading your comments.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 15, 2011 10:42 a.m.

    Solyndra raised $1 Billion in private capital.
    Second largest investor in Solyndra, the Walton family, was a major donor to Republicans.
    Bush Administration advanced 16 projects, including Solyndra, out of 143 submissions.
    While Bush was still Pres., the credit committee requested more information in certain areas and set a timeline for completing Solyndra review as March 2009.
    The same Credit Committee of career civil servants recommended approval.

    WSJ Ranked Solyndra As The Top U.S. Clean Tech Company in 2010.
    WSJ Also Ranked Solyndra in top five Next Big venture-backed companies.
    MITs Technology Review chose Solyndra as one of the worlds 50 most innovative companies.

    As Baron Scarpia pointed out there will be successes and failures. Leaving that aside, lessons can be learned from failures and changes made moving forward.

  • nnn redmond, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 9:19 a.m.

    I wonder if Fixed News will report this story ..

  • Well Read SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 8:47 a.m.

    It's the economy Stupid! Both projects mentioned were good sound ideas. Both in a better economy might have done real well. Don't blame the backers. realize it IS the economy stupid! We as a nation and as political parties need to quit putting a political spin on everything good or bad that happens. In these cases it is the economy!!

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 8:16 a.m.

    This story is a political hatchet job with sinister implications but actually comparing apples and windmills.

    One has to be suspicious of articles from the McNewspaper, USA Today, and this seems to be a thinly veiled attempt to defend Obama using the "but everyone does it" excuse.

    However, if anyone bothers to read the full story, it clearly shows that Hatch was not plotting or pressuring for this outfit to get more loans. The one loan they did get was via a "blind" review and they met the criteria (which one could argue were flawed, but not corrupt). And, they were refused additional loans.

    Finally, there were no shenanigans where secret provisions were adopted so that private investor interests would take precedence over taxpayer interests in case of bankruptcy-- or fiddled with when the company was on the verge of failure.

    This bit of "journalism" confirms all the bad comments about media bias and their alliance with Obama.

    The actual story should be "Get government out of the venture capital business!"

  • The Judge Kaysville, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 8:01 a.m.

    Only a USA TODAY reporter would tie what happened with Raser's $33 million grant to Solyndra, a $535 million boondoggle that was FORCED THROUGH by the current administration. The government gives billions in grants to a variety of projects. There is a process to get those grants. The Solyndra thing is a scandal because admin officials bypassed the process to get the cash. The Solyndra project was turned down for funding. Obama's cronies back doored the funding anyway. That's the scandal.

  • FDRfan safety dictates, ID
    Oct. 15, 2011 7:42 a.m.

    Harakal said Hatch's support for Raser's geothermal project unlike the Obama administration's backing of Solyndra never included a push for using taxpayer dollars to build the plant.

    So what is the point of the article? What % of the risk was born by private investors in each of the projects? Is it the government's role to fund a company from the ground up?

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 7:06 a.m.

    Hence, the rise of independent, free market, constitutionally driven ideas, and citizens that don't believe in manipulating, stealing, or wasting taxpayer money. This is unlike the patronistic, power hungry, socialistic driven politicians, and anti-American, anti-capitalistic, socialistic citizens who advocate ideas that don't live in reality. However, by delegating the power to steal to someone else, the socialists arrive at failed projects such as this, all at the expense of law abiding citizens who then ask, "Where in the constitution do they acquire the power to steal money from my pocket for any of this?" I agree, both major political parties are knee deep in this garbage.

  • MyChildrensKeeper Taylorsville, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 6:44 a.m.

    They might be able to get some green energy ideas to work if congress takes control of the spending. You can't just dump half a trillion dollars in to someones lap without any accountability or oversight. It called creating and industry of buildings and companies and they never ever turn on a light bulb.

    Why does congress and Obama have this perception that business is not out to screw the government and tax payers? They should know its the object of business to make the board of directors and owners rich, especially when they have never invested any of their own money in a business. If a new industry is needed, start small and build on an idea, don't put billions in to an idea then tell some one to create it.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Oct. 15, 2011 6:11 a.m.

    I was wondering how long it would take for Hatch's ties with Raser to reach Utah's news headlines.

    Solyndra and Raser are indeed unfortunate situations. Sadly, as in any nascent industry -- from computers to cell phones to Internet companies -- there will be failed start-ups along the way. It's a fact of entrepreneurship and new innovative industries.

    What's frustrating, however, is that some politicians are using Solyndra (and now Raser) to essentially demand that we stick with oil/fossil fuel and nuclear power dependency -- and to keep subsidies flowing to fossil fuels and nukes.

    And yet, over the past two years, we've seen the folly of that thinking -- from the Gulf oil spill that has devistated tourism and fishing around the Gulf (people still refuse to eat fish from the Mexican Gulf) and Japan's nuclear fall-out where the nation is offering free air travel to Japan to encourage people to come. The Wall Street Journal, just this week, reported on nuclear radiation "hotspots" in Japan, and real estate and farms surrounding the nuclear meltdown zones will be off-limits for human habitation, quite literally, for the rest of human kind's existence.

    Oil spills and nuclear fallouts aren't economical.