Jump to content

Another $2 Billion Green Scam By Obama.


Guest Deisel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Deisel

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/solar-company-bankrupt-despite-win-win-doe-loan/459621

November can't come soon enough. Instead of drilling, getting out of the way for Coal co. this admin has bought into Green co. which aren't able to make it in the market. Whats next? Forcing Americans to buy into it? Oh yea, thats already happening.

On other fronts Obama is trying to scare the supreme court in regards to his Healthcare mandate. Told listeners(bused into his event) that these justices were Not elected, yadi yadi yadi. As if he cared abt forcing it down our throats with out pause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

And another green energy SCAM. Boy, they just keep coming.

NV Energy windmill program generates rebates, little electricity

By Anjeanette Damon (contact)

Friday, March 30, 2012 | 2 a.m.

Reno —

Wind Turbines

turbine07_t320.jpg?0f3ddbed359eab2c0b293f3dd101a0fde643f8b3

New LED and Wind Turbine facility dedicated

A year ago, a Reno clean energy businessman warned the Public Utilities Commission that if it didn’t set a few standards for NV Energy’s wind rebate program, its customers could end up footing the bill for turbines that rarely produce electricity.

One reason behind his concern: To be eligible for rebates, customers didn’t need to prove that the wind actually blows enough to justify installing a turbine on their property.

“This could allow unscrupulous developers to sell turbines to unsuspecting customers who will not generate electricity from an installed turbine because there is no wind to power the turbine,” Clean Energy Center managing member Rich Hamilton told the PUC last May. “This problem is especially vexing because ratepayer money could be contributing to the cost of such turbines, which could give the Wind Generations program and the wind industry a black eye.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

Limbaugh posted the Green companies that have been awarded Tax payer funding BUT have all gone out of business. Billions of Not necessary or warranted expenses, fail to take market relevency. Govt cannot pick winners and losers. OIl is here, now, and many of you folks want something else. Good grief. Live Now.

"

RUSH: Solyndra, Abound Solar, Energy Conversion Devices, BrightSource, LSP Energy, Evergreen Solar, Ener1, SunPower, Beacon Power, ECOtality, A123, Uni-Solar, Azure Dynamics, and now Solar Trust. Every one of those bankrolled businesses has gone under -- and oil is the fuel of the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

Because the technology is here now, the politicians and lobbyists just make sure it doesn't find its way to the market. The scam is the people you are putting faith into and have bought into. You'll have to find that out on your own though, I guess...

Cap. I believe oil is plentiful, natural and the driving fuel source for mankind for another 100 years or more. Coal, natural gas, the same. I am not believing in anything but my own common sense and maturation as a seeker of knowledge and freedom. All politicians are encumbering. All politics take more then they need. All parties pander to some things, I just believe in the conservative party. This is really not so difficult to understand.

Ron Paul is not going to be president, nor does he represent nearly enough people to make a longer stand. He is much like Ross Perot, and I think his son, has far greater staying power then he. Ron Paul says many things I believe in, but he is Not the vassle I or many will put to water to take us to the chosen land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cap. I believe oil is plentiful, natural and the driving fuel source for mankind for another 100 years or more. Coal, natural gas, the same. I am not believing in anything but my own common sense and maturation as a seeker of knowledge and freedom. All politicians are encumbering. All politics take more then they need. All parties pander to some things, I just believe in the conservative party. This is really not so difficult to understand.

Ron Paul is not going to be president, nor does he represent nearly enough people to make a longer stand. He is much like Ross Perot, and I think his son, has far greater staying power then he. Ron Paul says many things I believe in, but he is Not the vassle I or many will put to water to take us to the chosen land.

And yet countless studies and projections show your belief to be total rubbish, but I'm sure you discount them as being driven by some sort of liberal conspiracy. I also couldn't help but notice all your stories came from Drudge... again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cap. I believe oil is plentiful, natural and the driving fuel source for mankind for another 100 years or more. Coal, natural gas, the same. I am not believing in anything but my own common sense and maturation as a seeker of knowledge and freedom. All politicians are encumbering. All politics take more then they need. All parties pander to some things, I just believe in the conservative party. This is really not so difficult to understand.

Ron Paul is not going to be president, nor does he represent nearly enough people to make a longer stand. He is much like Ross Perot, and I think his son, has far greater staying power then he. Ron Paul says many things I believe in, but he is Not the vassle I or many will put to water to take us to the chosen land.

Who cares if they are plentiful or not? If viable alternative technology is in existence that's CHEAPER than oil why stick with it? That makes no sense.

This isn't about Ron Paul. I don't care who the President is, it really doesn't matter. Yes, I get that you are a "conservative" but what you are missing is literally there is no material difference between "liberal" and "conservative", that's the part that YOU don't understand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

And yet countless studies and projections show your belief to be total rubbish, but I'm sure you discount them as being driven by some sort of liberal conspiracy. I also couldn't help but notice all your stories came from Drudge... again...

We have over a trillion barrells in play right now, including the oil shale. We actually have more recoverable oil then the Saudi's, but you keep listening to your sources and Hail Green relief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one request of the government. Stop giving away my money to either side. I don't want a % of my taxes going to oil companies so the gas is cheaper at the pump. That's making an unfair competitive advantage. I also don't want my taxes going to alternative energy providers trying to develop a competitive product.

Is it too much to ask for our government to just level the playing field in all industries? Seriously, if gas at the pump has to cost $6 a gallon without my taxes going towards it, that's fine by me. It will even out the playing field for alternatives like electric or hybrid vehicles.

Did you know that oil subsidies are about 5% of our federal income tax? In 2009 the federal income tax paid to the government was about $866 billion. Oil subsidies were estimated at $41 billion. 5% of our federal income taxes go towards lowering the price at the pump. LEAVE ME MY 5%!!!!

I think it's criminal when the government pays money to any industry to make it seem like a better product (green or black). Capitalism should be about the best product winning, not by the government funding products to make them look better. It's quite simple. If a company can develop a nuclear plant with their own investment to provide energy cheaper, they will get the competitive advantage and win. This is what promotes American innovation. Having a level playing field and letting the most innovative, best products win. The government paying down prices of any product is the enemy of innovation and the establishment of unfair competitive advantages.

Right now our government says, I'm going to give you billions to produce an alternative. The incentive is to build an alternative so you can have a portion of those billions. The incentive should be the free market, not the taxpayers money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

Who cares if they are plentiful or not? If viable alternative technology is in existence that's CHEAPER than oil why stick with it? That makes no sense.

This isn't about Ron Paul. I don't care who the President is, it really doesn't matter. Yes, I get that you are a "conservative" but what you are missing is literally there is no material difference between "liberal" and "conservative", that's the part that YOU don't understand...

Where are the viable, cheaper alternatives, ready to step in for oil, coal and gas? If they were there we would be using them. Thats the big lie Cap. They aren't there, cheaper more usable then what we have. The volumes of gas, oil, coal are simply astounding and 100 years, 5 generations of Americans and else where will use those supplies. Its time America used our own and produced for ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

You and Rush might have missed this part of the article (2nd paragraph, last sentence):

The company did not receive any taxpayer funds.

Iron, the fact is the Solar co. did NOT want the $2 billion loan cause the CEO NEW he would not beable to compete. The loan was pushed, forced onto him. The bottom line was the Obama admin is using the EPA funding programs to force solar, wind and alternatives when the resources we have here and abroad are more then ample for at least 100 years more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have over a trillion barrells in play right now, including the oil shale. We actually have more recoverable oil then the Saudi's, but you keep listening to your sources and Hail Green relief.

Iron, the fact is the Solar co. did NOT want the $2 billion loan cause the CEO NEW he would not beable to compete. The loan was pushed, forced onto him. The bottom line was the Obama admin is using the EPA funding programs to force solar, wind and alternatives when the resources we have here and abroad are more then ample for at least 100 years more.

Yeah! Why bother making a shift to other, renewable resources for energy when we can desperately hang onto oil? I mean, just look at these projections that we have enough of it to last 100 years if consumption remains the same as it is now! And look at all this shale and tar sands which are only worth extracting if oil prices are high and all that natural gas beneath bed rock that we can frack to get! Just ignore all the ecological problems it would cause and how getting those resources often poison water supplies and ruin private property! Drill baby, drill! We'll let our grandchildren deal with oil running out because I don't want to be bothered doing it myself!

ttdb05192010.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are the viable, cheaper alternatives, ready to step in for oil, coal and gas? If they were there we would be using them. Thats the big lie Cap. They aren't there, cheaper more usable then what we have. The volumes of gas, oil, coal are simply astounding and 100 years, 5 generations of Americans and else where will use those supplies. Its time America used our own and produced for ourselves.

I've already stated the name--Tom Ogle. It's DOCUMENTED that he got 200 miles on 2 gallons of gas. The big lie is that the technology is suppressed dude. $146,000,000 buys a whole lot. If you really believe that we can land a probe on Mars that can be programmed to go to different locations and send back color pictures yet somehow not develop a method of getting more than 50 MPG then I don't know what to tell you other than it's very naive...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've already stated the name--Tom Ogle. It's DOCUMENTED that he got 200 miles on 2 gallons of gas. The big lie is that the technology is suppressed dude. $146,000,000 buys a whole lot. If you really believe that we can land a probe on Mars that can be programmed to go to different locations and send back color pictures yet somehow not develop a method of getting more than 50 MPG then I don't know what to tell you other than it's very naive...

People don't realize how easy it is to manipulate a situation with money. I've said it before, I will say it again, we are a plutocracy not a democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and I will throw this out there in terms of investment... Who the **** puts their entire retirement in one stock... That is a silly way to try an retire. You invest in mutual funds or ETFs to guard yourself from loss. A mutual fund is invested in many stocks and if one starts lagging, you don't feel the shock because you are diversified.

So yeah.. If drill baby drill is your only solution you are banking your retirement on one stock... And I hope they do hydraulic fracturing by your house...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about it this way as well: Tesla motor company has electric vehicles than can go 300 miles before needing a charge. The technology is obviously there since it's being made and sold quickly. Now if other auto companies would simply follow their lead you'd see charging stations all over the country. I'd be all over one personally. 300 miles? 6 hours to get a full charge? I'm all for it. I could drive to Atlanta and back with 100 miles to spare. I could go to work, come back, charge before I go to bed. It would be awesome! Now ask yourself, why aren't the other BIG auto companies all over this? Why aren't these significantly larger companies advancing this technology? I mean seriously, do you expect me to believe that a group of California engineers can outperform these huge companies? Makes no sense. And I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how we've got the technology to land stuff on Mars but not develop the automobile engine further. Yeah, I'm going with the money factor...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about it this way as well: Tesla motor company has electric vehicles than can go 300 miles before needing a charge. The technology is obviously there since it's being made and sold quickly. Now if other auto companies would simply follow their lead you'd see charging stations all over the country. I'd be all over one personally. 300 miles? 6 hours to get a full charge? I'm all for it. I could drive to Atlanta and back with 100 miles to spare. I could go to work, come back, charge before I go to bed. It would be awesome! Now ask yourself, why aren't the other BIG auto companies all over this? Why aren't these significantly larger companies advancing this technology? I mean seriously, do you expect me to believe that a group of California engineers can outperform these huge companies? Makes no sense. And I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how we've got the technology to land stuff on Mars but not develop the automobile engine further. Yeah, I'm going with the money factor...

There's a new vehicle out that added solar panels to the roof to cover all of the internal electronics (lights, radio, etc...). The electric motor is than only used making the car move.

In the next 5 years, I want to build my dream house for me and my family. It will have solar panels on the roof to provide power to my house. I'll still get some power from the power company if the panels can't keep up with us, but I don't understand why more people are not doing this. It's not that much more expensive than a regular roof, and if you are going to live there a long time, you will cover the difference and then some with your reduced monthly power costs.

When I get old, I'll have my house paid off, I'll be retired, and I'm going to really love not having high power bills or a mortgage. So many people go broke in retirement because so much of their savings are in other people's hands. I think it's important to have those retirement funds, but it's just as important to make sure you can limit your life expenses. Power expenses will continue going up over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

There's a new vehicle out that added solar panels to the roof to cover all of the internal electronics (lights, radio, etc...). The electric motor is than only used making the car move.

In the next 5 years, I want to build my dream house for me and my family. It will have solar panels on the roof to provide power to my house. I'll still get some power from the power company if the panels can't keep up with us, but I don't understand why more people are not doing this. It's not that much more expensive than a regular roof, and if you are going to live there a long time, you will cover the difference and then some with your reduced monthly power costs.

When I get old, I'll have my house paid off, I'll be retired, and I'm going to really love not having high power bills or a mortgage. So many people go broke in retirement because so much of their savings are in other people's hands. I think it's important to have those retirement funds, but it's just as important to make sure you can limit your life expenses. Power expenses will continue going up over time.

The problem with solar panels as of today is the lack of power they can hold for periods of time. When its sunny they are energized, when not they are not. This will change with the developments in micro technology and has been in the works for 2 decades or more. Also, when you put panels on your roof, high winds, branchs, storms give them fits. They are Not real tough under stress.

I too would go solar if applicable, and I have been looking at this for a long time now. The Chinese are producing solar panels far cheaper then we can(for obvious reasons) and thats why the American companies go bankrupt. All our technology, regulation and costs here, allow the Chinese to produce and sell theirs much easier and cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with solar panels as of today is the lack of power they can hold for periods of time. When its sunny they are energized, when not they are not. This will change with the developments in micro technology and has been in the works for 2 decades or more. Also, when you put panels on your roof, high winds, branchs, storms give them fits. They are Not real tough under stress.

I too would go solar if applicable, and I have been looking at this for a long time now. The Chinese are producing solar panels far cheaper then we can(for obvious reasons) and thats why the American companies go bankrupt. All our technology, regulation and costs here, allow the Chinese to produce and sell theirs much easier and cheaper.

So no answers for the questions I asked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Deisel

So no answers for the questions I asked?

Cap, if your question is how we can land on Mars but not have better gas mileage in our cars, i'd have to ask GM or Toyota. Building engines in cars is big business. Oil and gas are big business. Your point would have to include a Fact that oil is running out, therefore we have to conserve as much as possible for future generations. We are not at that point yet. We have over 100 years left, alternatives are coming up, and the better our technology, the more oil we actually locate and can bring to market. This planet is over 4 billion years old and the thought that we have found the majority of the oil deposits is akin to saying We've mastered our planet. There are ginormous oil deposits on our planet, so I would say, we will be using oil far longer then we realize and frankly technology and efforts should be put into water and food technologies and space travel. We have far more to fear from the hungry and despots around the world, then oil shortages. Don't forget those earth killer astroids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cap, if your question is how we can land on Mars but not have better gas mileage in our cars, i'd have to ask GM or Toyota. Building engines in cars is big business. Oil and gas are big business. Your point would have to include a Fact that oil is running out, therefore we have to conserve as much as possible for future generations. We are not at that point yet. We have over 100 years left, alternatives are coming up, and the better our technology, the more oil we actually locate and can bring to market. This planet is over 4 billion years old and the thought that we have found the majority of the oil deposits is akin to saying We've mastered our planet. There are ginormous oil deposits on our planet, so I would say, we will be using oil far longer then we realize and frankly technology and efforts should be put into water and food technologies and space travel. We have far more to fear from the hungry and despots around the world, then oil shortages. Don't forget those earth killer astroids.

I asked several questions--you may go back and read them. My point would not have to include any such thing as an oil shortage. I argue for cost benefits and conservation benefits. So yeah, go back and actually read what I posted and then answer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...