From the right


Green energy stimulus bang for buck costs 5.5 million per job.

Posted on Saturday, September 17, 2011 at 10:44 AM

RSS


Recent Posts

Archives

submit to reddit


I don't know about you but if I ever get a choice between a govt. backed green energy job or the cash equivalent, I'll take the 5.5 million cash equivalent instead.

Yes folks, the numbers are coming in and it looks like we got 3,000 "permanent green energy jobs", as a result of our 20 billion of govt. stimulus and loan guarantees we injected into this industry...and many more "investments" are on their way.

Using an archaic formula only government numbers crunchers know, this is success and offers the model for moving forward into green energy independence. My only question is how much more success can we afford?

Last week Dr. Ivar Giaever, 1973 winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, abruptly announced his resignation from the American Physical Society in disgust over its officially stated policy that "global warming is occurring. (APS) supports the theory that man's actions have inexorably led to the warming of the planet, through increased emissions of carbon dioxide.

Couple the esteemed Giavers resignation with the petition signed by over 31,000 scientists, that disputes man caused global warming. When you stack the "Climategate email scandal" on top of all of this, you start to get the feeling that when Al gore says the science is settled...it really isn't.
http://www.petitionproject.org/

Since man caused global warming is one of the lynch pins used as the impetus to propel us into "green energy", perhaps we should slow down with "investing" our treasure into this unproven and unprofitable industry. If it is going to work, let private industry move forward with it to see if it it becomes commercially viable, if possible. Why pump billions into unproven, commercially unviable business models?

In the meantime it seems scandals are brewing in the "green energy" field as the Solyndra company just went belly up taking over 1/2 billion of our money with it. Solyndra is not the only green company to fail after receiving tax payer assistance and it looks like other Solyndras are out there.

Seems to many, that if industries have to be propped up with subsidies, tax breaks, special deals and tilting the playing field in order to exist...something is wrong. Why should the public be financing and taking the risks?

Dr. Charles Krauthammer says the green energy industry is a fantasy, fueled by "lemming socialism" and "crony capitalism" The biggest losers? American taxpayers

It seems the attitude in Washington these days: With a stroke of a pen and unlimited amounts of other peoples money, the laws of physics and economics can be overcome.

There are billions of dollars of Solyndra" type stimulus in Obamas proposed "jobs" bill: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/rep-paul-ryan-on-solyndra-there-are-billions-of-more-of-this-exact-kind-of-spending-in-the-stimulus-video/

But China is eager to compete with our subsidized "green industry", happily manufacturing the solar panels and other components of "green" much cheaper than we do by using their coal fired power plants. China then sells these "green industry components to us at a huge profit. But under the Obama administration, Americas coal power is being heavily punished, driving many power plants out of business and making it virtually impossible to build new ones.

Interestingly America is known as the Saudi Arabia of coal reserves and we are not exploiting these resources. I wonder if you took a fraction of the billions poured in to "green energy and directed it to the science of cleaning up/refining coal, if we couldn't achieve total energy independence and clean air much sooner?

For other points of view visit Carroll Standard: www.carrollstandard.com









8 comments

Page 1 of 1 pages
jamthecat: You are trying in your best way to find moral relativism...is that the best you can do? If Haliburton is foul why is Obama still doing business with them? Check your facts.
So let me see if I've got this right -- it's okay for no-bid-contract firms like Haliburton and KBR to be unable to account for tens of billions of dollars while handing out sub-standard services, but let a green company lose $500 million in an attempt to better the planet, and that's cause for contempt. And the right wing wonders why it's considered to be such a pile of hypocrisy and double-dealing...at best.
The green energy scam is one to set up a system which allows energy credits to be rationed. Guess who has first dibs on the credits? Oligarchs who own vast tracks of land and forests which they will designate as perpetually devoted to green energy. Therefore they will obtain the credits which they will then sell to power plants. Who benefits? The Oligarchs who are Gore's buddies. Same old rule: follow the money.
I have my suspicions about articles like this when Oil companies and natural Gas companies are posting record profits and seeking ways to expand. Transcontinental pipelines? Fracking? New Drilling? They haven't finished cleaning up the mess that destroyed ecosystems in the Gulf or Alaska yet. Why would we trust them? They are only trying to sway public opinion. Same old same old.
Well said, ceceann. Many unscrupulous people are getting rich at our expense!
Especially when our president gives half billion to his political cronies so they can then go -BANKRUPT1
Leave it up to the Dimocrats and their leader Odumer to keep pouring our green dollars down the "green jobs" rat hole.
Follow the money--Al Gore is laughing all the way to the bank. He may not have invented the internet or been the model for "Love Story" but he deserves the credit for creating this boondoggle called "global warming" (oh, excuse me, "climate change") and is the main beneficiary.
Page 1 of 1 pages




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail