 |
03-18-2016, 03:28 PM
|
#2
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Riverside, Il.
Posts: 16,109
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by delayjf
|
Your thread title is "Solyndra II: Solar Plant shutting down in CA. Which was lead one to believe the plant has ceased to produce energy and is in process of shutting down. The fact is the plant produced 170% more energy in 2015 than in 2014.
The headline in the story you linked said "Obama backed solar plant could be shut down for not producing enough energy." But they never provide any quote from any California official.
It was always expected that it would take a few years for the plant to reach optimum production.
surprise! Surprise! What you and Daily Caller did was to pick one company which was having a bit of trouble and try to portray that company as typical of a failing industry. Why didn't you pick Solar City which had 157 employees in 2012; 280 employees in 2013 and 10,000 employees today.
__________________
"When you come at the King, You'd best not miss." Omar Little
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 04:13 PM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,658
|
All is not bad, from the multi-millions given to help Solyndra, $1.5 million made it back from the CEO to help 0bama get re-elected
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 05:01 PM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 17,095
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mostpost
What you and Daily Caller did was to pick one company which was having a bit of trouble and try to portray that company as typical of a failing industry. Why didn't you pick Solar City which had 157 employees in 2012; 280 employees in 2013 and 10,000 employees today.
|
Right. There is a long-term viable business plan. 
Quote:
California-based SolarCity’s website proclaims, “Every three minutes, someone switches to SolarCity.”
But behind the solar-energy provider’s allure of celebrity owner Elon Musk (of PayPal, Space X and Tesla Motors) and lightning-speed growth – its construction of a $750-million improbably-named “gigafactory” in New York – is a company trying desperately just to break even. And to catch a break. Disappearing federal grants and tax breaks to green-energy producers – key to SolarCity’s business model – helped push the company into the red last year. Two federal investigations into SolarCity’s business practices could wreak even more financial havoc if stiff financial penalties are imposed.
“TheStreet Ratings team rates SolarCity Corp (stock) as a Sell with a ratings score of D+,” wrote the Wall Street analyst bible TheStreet. “The company’s weaknesses can be seen in multiple areas, such as its generally high debt management risk, disappointing return on equity, weak operating cash flow, poor profit margins and generally disappointing historical performance in the stock itself.”
Nick Loris of the Heritage Foundation think tank told Watchdog that SolarCity’s tenuous business model is beholden to the whims of the economy.
“When your business model is built on taxpayer money, it doesn’t bode well when that money goes away,” Loris said.
|
http://watchdog.org/225430/solarcity/
__________________
A man's got to know his limitations. -- Dirty Harry
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 05:09 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,174
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mostpost
Your thread title is "Solyndra II: Solar Plant shutting down in CA. Which was lead one to believe the plant has ceased to produce energy and is in process of shutting down. The fact is the plant produced 170% more energy in 2015 than in 2014.
The headline in the story you linked said "Obama backed solar plant could be shut down for not producing enough energy." But they never provide any quote from any California official.
It was always expected that it would take a few years for the plant to reach optimum production.
surprise! Surprise! What you and Daily Caller did was to pick one company which was having a bit of trouble and try to portray that company as typical of a failing industry. Why didn't you pick Solar City which had 157 employees in 2012; 280 employees in 2013 and 10,000 employees today.
|
Classic case of emotional projection Mostie. You know the saying, when you don't have the facts behind you, pound the table.
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 05:46 PM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk VA
Posts: 6,246
|
An update to the article at the bottom of the page reads:
Quote:
|
Update: California regulators announced Thursday that Ivanpah would have until the end of July to produce more power or face shut down.
|
Quote:
|
The fact is the plant produced 170% more energy in 2015 than in 2014.
|
According to the article
Quote:
|
"The plant only generated 45 percent of expected power in 2014 and only 68 percent in 2015, according to government data."
|
Where do you get that production increased of 170% in 2015?
according to the article, this power plant is the biggest of its kind and also uses natural gas to produce power. "And it does all this at a cost of $200 per megawatt hour — nearly six times the cost of electricity from natural gas-fired power plants." This facility was financed with 1.6 billion dollars of Loan guarantees by the Dept. of Energy.
SolarCity is a public corporation that builds solar systems for homes and business and is standing on its own two feet (after reading Clockers thread, maybe not so much - their stock is down around 50% off it's 52 week high.) and I wish them well - believe it or not I'm rooting for solar power and I support the goal of US energy independence . The Ivanpah facility on the other hand was financed with Government money which looks like it is heading down the tubes at a loss to the US of 1.6 billion.
Last edited by delayjf; 03-18-2016 at 05:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 06:11 PM
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,658
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Clocker
|
The long term business plan includes hundreds and millions in subsidies from the government for continued research and development. They are so close now, just another few more years.
I bet some climate researchers could also get a few million seeing how the solar panels increase temperatures of the local area and its contribution to global warming...
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 07:06 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 10,174
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davew
The long term business plan includes hundreds and millions in subsidies from the government for continued research and development. They are so close now, just another few more years.
I bet some climate researchers could also get a few million seeing how the solar panels increase temperatures of the local area and its contribution to global warming...
|
Good God man. Don't give the climate guys any more funding ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
03-18-2016, 08:32 PM
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: North Riverside, Il.
Posts: 16,109
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by delayjf
Where do you get that production increased of 170% in 2015?
|
http://breakingenergy.com/2015/06/17...p-170-in-2015/
In the first quarter of this year (2015), Ivanpah generation was up 170 percent over the same quarter in 2014 – 108 gigawatt-hours compared to 40 GWh, according to the Energy Information Administration.
__________________
"When you come at the King, You'd best not miss." Omar Little
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
