Eric Holder’s Justice Department will be sure to get right onto this, eh?!
More details here.
17 Replies to “Solyndra Throwing Away U.S. Taxpayer Dollars”
There is nothing quite so worthless as tons of precisely-made parts which were purpose-built to be used in a machine that does not work. The glass is probably worth more as “cullet” (scrap glass) than it is in the form of tubes spec’ed to be made into cylindrical solar “panels”.
Think of having an entire warehouse full of Yugo crankshafts. Perhaps a couple of pallets could be sold to grateful Yugo owners; the rest are worth precisely their weight in scrap iron.
Probably the only issue here is that the proper paperwork is not in place to permit this salvaging. But such salvage is really the best way to dispose of the unwanted glass components.
“Solyndra paid at least $2 million for the specialized glass, CBS 5 reported.
The German company manufacturer is owned almost $8 million but said they had no idea they were being destroyed.
Court documents reveal the company received permission from the bankruptcy trustee to abandon the high grade glass, because the cost of storage exceeds the value.
A spokesman for Heritage Global Partners, the company in charge of selling the ruined company’s assets, claimed to have searched ‘exhaustively’ for buyers. ”
Ummmmm 2mil less than storage??? What where they going to store them in? 6 foot thick,gold lined boxes? Doesn’t pass the BS test.
Since they weren’t paid for, did anyone think of giving them back. Sheer stupidity? Sue the bleeping receiver for incompetence.
Germany is having its own fun with solar.
That’s what happens when foolish choices are made. Those same solar arrays would be turning a tidy profit anywhere around the Mediterranean. The problem is less with the technology and more with poor implementation. That’s nothing we haven’t seen before. The Danes are having the same problem with wind power. http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/43348
Suzuki must have had a real impact on McGuinty. Either that or no one pays attention to what a disaster green energy is in the rest of the world. The fact that it needs massive subsidisation should have been a clue.
I think Obama’s fingerprints were on the Parts, Van Jones demanded his EU folks be paid
Peterj, well said. Anything that requires subsidies to survive is not worth keeping alive.
When you look at the rates green energy is subsidised at , and considering the financial situation in the USA, one wonders where the logic went.
2010 U.S. Power Consumption
(million bbl. oil equivalent)
Subsidy Cost per Energy Equivalent Barrel of Oil Consumed
Coal 3,439 $0.39
Oil and gas 10,012 $0.28
Nuclear 1,394 $1.79
Biomass / biofuels 381 $20.37
Geothermal 35 $7.80
Hydro 414 $0.52
Solar 18 $63.00
Wind 153 $32.59
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Democrats build pipelines of glass?
So, another liberal fantasy ends up in the scrap heap.
This is different, how ?
The bail out is all about timing. At what point in the “Death Spiral” was the money injected?
PeterJ, do you have a link for those numbers? I’d like to see the full report they came from.
N60, there’s even more to the Denmark story than found in the Free Press article. First, Denmark has greatly reduced its feed-in tariff, which is a large part of the reason why there’s no new land-based turbines.
Second, the decline of 0.1 per cent in emissios is almost entirely due to the economic downturn and not to wind displacement. Denmark’s coal-fired stations are producing just as much electricity as they were 20 years ago. What adding wind does is increase the load fluctuations on the coal-fired stations, as they have to do more frequent and more rapid load following. This shortens the life of the plants.
Destroying inventory? Or destroying evidence?
Eric Holder? Wasn’t he a character in a Tom of Finland drawing?
The glass may be worth more as scrap than as inact cylinders, but shouldn’t the decision to turn it into glass scrap be made by the bankruptcy trustee?
There is nothing quite so worthless as tons of precisely-made parts which were purpose-built to be used in a machine that does not work. The glass is probably worth more as “cullet” (scrap glass) than it is in the form of tubes spec’ed to be made into cylindrical solar “panels”.
Think of having an entire warehouse full of Yugo crankshafts. Perhaps a couple of pallets could be sold to grateful Yugo owners; the rest are worth precisely their weight in scrap iron.
Probably the only issue here is that the proper paperwork is not in place to permit this salvaging. But such salvage is really the best way to dispose of the unwanted glass components.
“Solyndra paid at least $2 million for the specialized glass, CBS 5 reported.
The German company manufacturer is owned almost $8 million but said they had no idea they were being destroyed.
Court documents reveal the company received permission from the bankruptcy trustee to abandon the high grade glass, because the cost of storage exceeds the value.
A spokesman for Heritage Global Partners, the company in charge of selling the ruined company’s assets, claimed to have searched ‘exhaustively’ for buyers. ”
Ummmmm 2mil less than storage??? What where they going to store them in? 6 foot thick,gold lined boxes? Doesn’t pass the BS test.
Germany is having its own fun with solar.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,809439,00.html
Since they weren’t paid for, did anyone think of giving them back. Sheer stupidity? Sue the bleeping receiver for incompetence.
Germany is having its own fun with solar.
That’s what happens when foolish choices are made. Those same solar arrays would be turning a tidy profit anywhere around the Mediterranean. The problem is less with the technology and more with poor implementation. That’s nothing we haven’t seen before. The Danes are having the same problem with wind power.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/43348
Suzuki must have had a real impact on McGuinty. Either that or no one pays attention to what a disaster green energy is in the rest of the world. The fact that it needs massive subsidisation should have been a clue.
I think Obama’s fingerprints were on the Parts, Van Jones demanded his EU folks be paid
Peterj, well said. Anything that requires subsidies to survive is not worth keeping alive.
When you look at the rates green energy is subsidised at , and considering the financial situation in the USA, one wonders where the logic went.
2010 U.S. Power Consumption
(million bbl. oil equivalent)
Subsidy Cost per Energy Equivalent Barrel of Oil Consumed
Coal 3,439 $0.39
Oil and gas 10,012 $0.28
Nuclear 1,394 $1.79
Biomass / biofuels 381 $20.37
Geothermal 35 $7.80
Hydro 414 $0.52
Solar 18 $63.00
Wind 153 $32.59
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Democrats build pipelines of glass?
So, another liberal fantasy ends up in the scrap heap.
This is different, how ?
Solar is so last year to be wasting tax dollars on…the latest black hole to pour money into is turning garbage into ethanol:
http://www.agweb.com/article/trash-to-ethanol_project_secures_funding_LN/
The bail out is all about timing. At what point in the “Death Spiral” was the money injected?
PeterJ, do you have a link for those numbers? I’d like to see the full report they came from.
N60, there’s even more to the Denmark story than found in the Free Press article. First, Denmark has greatly reduced its feed-in tariff, which is a large part of the reason why there’s no new land-based turbines.
Second, the decline of 0.1 per cent in emissios is almost entirely due to the economic downturn and not to wind displacement. Denmark’s coal-fired stations are producing just as much electricity as they were 20 years ago. What adding wind does is increase the load fluctuations on the coal-fired stations, as they have to do more frequent and more rapid load following. This shortens the life of the plants.
@ cgh
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01/04/the-real-costs-of-alternative-energy/
or go to EIA and dig.Same info ,just spread all over.
Destroying inventory? Or destroying evidence?
Eric Holder? Wasn’t he a character in a Tom of Finland drawing?
The glass may be worth more as scrap than as inact cylinders, but shouldn’t the decision to turn it into glass scrap be made by the bankruptcy trustee?