Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Solar energy will not meet our needs

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012 12:00 am | Updated: 6:27 am, Thu Nov 22, 2012.

A letter writer makes the claim that one out of two people would pick oil over solar, "Greed is the reason oil is being developed instead of solar energy," by Gary Kries. Does Mr. Kries drive a car?

Natural gas, hydroelectricity and nuclear power are the three main sources of power produced in California. To think solar could replace the three main factors of producing electricity is not sound thinking. The writer states just build a solar plant — easier said than done. Let's take, for instance, the Solyndra solar plant that folded after the federal government invested $535 million dollars to insure its operation. I, for one, would like to know where that money went — or into whose pocket.

No matter if there were many solar energy plants, the plants that make power today will continue to operate. It is most difficult to make solar power at 2 a.m. It would take all the solar power plants in California to power San Francisco, let alone Los Angeles.

Now who isn't thinking, Gary? Nothing is free, except the people who voted for Obama with the thinking that they will receive free stuff without working for it.

With that in mind, America as we know it is doomed. Our children's children will know, and I feel sorry for my great-granddaughter who will be born in a couple of months. That last sentence was for the man in Woodbridge.

Ed Walters

Lodi

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

29 comments:

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 1:50 pm on Sat, Nov 24, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr Haynes stated...Pat, you have twisted yourself into a knot...

    Pat, your factual posts clearly show Mr. Haynes to be confused and out of touch with reality. I appreciate you articulating "factual" information which clearly showed that the only thing twisted is Mr Haynes view of what he considers truth.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 10:14 am on Sat, Nov 24, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    I'm sorry mrh that you don't understand how our government works.Most liberals don't...the point about water is that you have to maintain the panels...they take work and resources to maintain..in other words they do not take care of themselves...maybe the work concept is something you don't understand. I take a shower everyday...and I pay for the water...I farm 50 acres and I pay for that water too...apparently the FACT that Solyndra and the other boon-doggles foisted on this nation by a Dem controlled Congress and its crony in the WH is okay with you...I'm sure you don't mind paying their bills with our money (I pay taxes too).

    No mrh, Bush passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005...."the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, more commonly known as the stimulus law, amended the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to create section 1705 which BO used to pay off his cronies and dupes like you. Solyndra was a fraud in 2006 and remained so until it became defunked in 2011. The money was spent by a DEMOCRATIC Congress and President...not a Republican president who did not have access to the purse strings.

    Keep trying mrh...Hey! You bought a Yugo didn't you.

    OMT: I find it interesting that you don't answer questions...typical Dem.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 9:40 am on Sat, Nov 24, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Absurd analogies regarding solar as I have ever heard. But, then that is what I would expect from a starry eyed liberal. Kumbyah !! Gotta get me some of those rose colored glasses with attachments so I can only see left.

     
  • John Lucas posted at 7:28 am on Sat, Nov 24, 2012.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    [thumbup]

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 7:49 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    Pat, you have twisted yourself into a knot. After your statements proved to be dishonest, you have worn yourself out moving the goal posts around. Now you have reduced yourself to saying Obama was President in 2006 or some stupid thing, trying to make your timeline work. Give up, it was a Republican congress and Bush that passed the law, and tried in vain to get the Solyndra loan approved before Bush termed out. Republican program. Admit it.

    Your silly talk about hating solar panels because they get dirty really is ridiculous. 60% of domestic residential water consumption, about 100,000 gallons per year per residence, is dumped on lawns and you don't mention that. You are not really concerned about water usage, are you? How many lawns are there in Lodi? 5,000 or so? How many in California? Tell me, Pat, do you ever bathe? How many weeks or months pass until you allow your clothes to be washed? Do scrape food off your plates and put them back in the cupboard? Do you ever flush your toilets after using them? But to read your disingenuous posts here, you are concerned about a gallon of water twice a year to clean some solar panels.

    Yeah, Pat, your argument is ridiculous.

     
  • John Kindseth posted at 7:06 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    John Kindseth Posts: 243

    Are there any of you that realize there is no such thing as "alternate energy". There are a lot of ideas that are called "alternate", but there is nothing that will fuel homes, cars, factories, airplanes, space shuttles, and everything else in an area the size of the united state with "alternate fuels"/?????? Back to your cannibis and twinkies.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 3:30 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    After flushing a half a BILLION taxpayer dollars down Obama's Solyndra toilet, the Nellis Solar Power project bought Chinese manufactured solar panels for the solar farm at Nellis AFB in Nevada. Harry Reid brought this about with the help of his son, Rory Reid, who just happened to be a lobbyist for Suntech Solar, a Chinese company. That's the way to support American solar manufacturers, Mr. Reid.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 2:27 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Following Mr. Haynes logic about Bush being responsible for the Solyndra fiasco, then it follows that Bush was responsible for the demise of Bin Laden.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:53 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrh: As for my silly argument about the water...it takes about one gallon of water to clean the panels during the non-rainy seasons and even more when they are cleaned of the deposits left by rain. Multiply that by the number of panels that need to be cleaned in the US alone...facts brought to an argument or debate are a symbol of credibility and knowledge...try it some time.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:50 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mr haynes: Who took over Congress in 2006??? WHO controlled the purse strings? Ahhh...the Democrats...Frank, Dodd, Reid, Pelosi...hmmm. AND of course Bush loaned them the money two+ years AFTER he left office...hmmm

    The majority of Solyndra funding was provided under Title XVII section 1705 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act [passed under BO]).

    Solyndra received a $535 million U.S. Energy Department loan guarantee before going bankrupt.Four months before...and are you okay with that???

    Major investors included George Kaiser Family Foundation, U.S. Venture Partners, CMEA Ventures, Redpoint Ventures, Virgin Green Fund, Madrone Capital Partners, RockPort Capital Partners, Argonaut Private Equity, Masdar and Artis Capital Management. ALL of them MADE money on this deal...are you okay with that??

    BOY! This was hard to find: FACT CHECK.org 10-7-11

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:48 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    cont'd...The second program was created with the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, more commonly known as the stimulus law. The recovery act amended the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to create section 1705 for “commercially available technologies,” as the Energy Department explains on page 12 of a 2009 report on stimulus funding. The stimulus provided more funding for the loan guarantee programs. The loans under the new program also came with no credit subsidy fees, making them more attractive and less expensive than those under the program signed into law by President Bush. It was under this program that Solyndra was able to get financing, although the company initially applied under the section 1703 program."

    Solyndra received a $535 million U.S. Energy Department loan guarantee before going bankrupt.Four months before...and are you okay with that???

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:48 pm on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    BOY! This was hard to find:

    “The loan guarantee program that provided financing for Solyndra (I will add: and many other garbage projects), however, does not predate Obama.

    There are two loan guarantee programs for renewable energy companies. The first was created under section 1703 of Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. It was designed to help support U.S. companies developing “a new or significantly improved technology that is NOT a commercial technology,” according to the Energy Department’s description of the program. It was a self-pay credit subsidy program, meaning the companies receiving the loan would have to pay the government a fee “equal to the present value of estimated payments the government would make in the event of a default.”

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 11:28 am on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Pat...thank you for accurately depicting the connection between The Obama administration and Solyndra... all one do is follow the money ...

    Shareholders and executives of Solyndra, a green energy company producing solar panels, fundraised for and donated to the Obama administration to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
    Tulsa billionaire George Kaiser, a key Obama backer who raised between $50,000 and $100,000 for the president’s election campaign, is one of Solyndra’s primary investors. Kaiser himself donated $53,500 to Obama’s 2008 election campaign, split between the DSCC and Obama For America. Kaiser also made several visits to the White House and appeared at some White House events next to Obama officials.
    Campaign finance records show Kaiser and Solyndra executives and board members donated $87,050 total to Obama’s election campaign.
    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/01/bankrupt-solar-company-with-fed-backing-has-cozy-ties-to-obama-admin/#ixzz2D4jhNxhB

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 10:16 am on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    Pat, the program was a signature Bush program, passed by a Republican majority congress in 2005, contrary to every erroneus claim you made. Solyndra made the final list of approved applicants for the program in 2007. Bush administration officials pushed to get the final approval through befor Bush termed out, but the time ran out. Exactly the same thing that happened with NAFTA under Bush I and Clinton.

    Now you are left with only the argument that solar panels are bad because they need occasional cleaning. Your whole argument has been pretty lame. You should have sat this one out.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:45 am on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr. Haynes "claiming" someone to being false or silly does not make it so. In fact, all one need do this look at how Mr. Haynes attempted to shift blame to the Bush administration for Solyndra from the real person that is 100% to blame (OBAMA) and one can clearly see that Mr. Haynes is simply attempting to distort and distract for an agenda that is not clear...yet.

    If Mr Haynes wants to substantiate that ABC News reported the information about the Obama administration incorrectly, then that would be a different story.

    By the way Mr Haynes, I thought it was silly for you to conclude anyone on this thread thought solar panels were evil... absurd.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 6:36 am on Fri, Nov 23, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mr haynes: Refusing to get informed? Typical Democrat. Asking questions...typical Republican. Maybe that is why they built all of those east coast nuclear power plants (that produce 19% of our energy) and why the Democrats voted for BO...from drinking all that water. Did you use to live back there?Here's a question: Is it better to insult someone's intelligence or just them personally. I prefer the former.

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 6:19 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    Pat, you are still wrong and your insults will not make you right. Everything you have said about this topic has been either false or silly.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:05 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr. Haynes state Solar does not have to replace gas, hydro or nuclear, it only has to contribute to the overall energy supply so use of non-renewables and fossil fuels can be reduced.…

    ½ right…I agree that solar does not have to replace gas, hydro or nuclear, it only is one option of many to contribute to the overall energy supply… However, we need to dramatically increase fossil fuels as well as any other available energy source so that we can become energy independent.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:01 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Mr. Haynes state Solar does not have to replace gas, hydro or nuclear, it only has to contribute to the overall energy supply so use of non-renewables and fossil fuels can be reduced.…

    ½ right…I agree that solar does not have to replace gas, hydro or nuclear, it only is one option of many to contribute to the overall energy supply… However, we need to dramatically increase non-renewables and fossil fuels as well as any other available energy source so that we can become energy independent.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:50 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    The results of the Congressional probe shared Tuesday with ABC News show that less than two weeks before President Bush left office, on January 9, 2009, the Energy Department's credit committee had voted against offering a loan commitment to Solyndra.

    Even after Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, analysts in the Energy Department and in the Office of Management and Budget were repeatedly questioning the wisdom of the loan. In one exchange, an Energy official wrote of "a major outstanding issue" -- namely, that Solyndra's numbers showed it would run out of cash in September 2011. There was also concern about the high-risk nature of the project. Internally, the Office of Management and Budget wrote that "the risk rating for the project sponsor [Solyndra] … seems high." Outside analysts had warned for months that the company might not be a sound investment.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:47 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Ok, lets forget the unreliable republicans, lets go to liberal ABC News...

    ABC News: Under Bush administration, credit committee "made a unanimous decision not to offer a loan commitment to Solyndra." [ABC News, 9/13/11]

    Tthe FBI raided Solyndra's offices, seeking undisclosed evidence of impropriety. We also learned that Obama Energy Department representatives sat in on numerous Solyndra board meetings in the months leading up to the company's failure. They knew it was coming.

    Newly uncovered emails show the White House closely monitored the Energy Department's deliberations over a $535 million government loan to Solyndra, the politically-connected solar energy firm that recently went bankrupt and is now the subject of a criminal investigation.
    The company's solar panel factory was heralded as a centerpiece of the president's green energy plan -- billed as a way to jump start a promising new industry. And internal emails uncovered by investigators for the House Energy and Commerce Committee that were shared exclusively with ABC News show the Obama administration was keenly monitoring the progress of the loan, even as analysts were voicing serious concerns about the risk involved. "This deal is NOT ready for prime time," one White House budget analyst wrote in a March 10, 2009 email, nine days before the administration formally announced the loan.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:31 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    I'm sorry Mr Haynes...Solyndra received their funding and state tax breaks under the BO administration. The EPA 2005 does NOT provide for solar energy specifically...read the bill. It was far from it and closer to nuclear, drilling, tidal wave, geothermal, biofuels, metering, safe water and daylight savings. Like msb you need to do some research before you throw rocks. BTW it does take energy to pump water, as well as fuel for the pumps and vehicles. To clean 270 acres of panels is a daily chore in order to make them efficient...unlike your writings.

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 1:36 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    Pat, you are wrong. The Energy Department's loan guarantee program was part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, passed with bi-partisan support in a Republican controlled congress and was signed by President Bush.

    And thanks for the after turkey belly laugh of the day... that solar panels are evil because they must be washed with (GASP!) WATER! LOL LOL That may be the silliest argument ever made.

     
  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:03 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Walters...solar energy is a joke...there are as many and more toxins (CdTe a toxic substance) and contaminants used in the making of the panels...including many non-biodegradeable products...than any other form of energy. Along with that the panels are NOT viable for 20 years and their half-life comes much sooner as their usefulness is rated on the sun-saturation at the equator not around here. There are also many toxins produced by the panels that must be disposed of as hazardous waste...like: cadnium, a carcinogen, lead, a potent neurotoxin, mercury and chromium. One other thing...the panels must be cleaned...with another valuable commodity...water...to do so requires energy of some sort and some believe can be very costly to farming.

    Aside from that information I always find people like msb standing on the "right" side of an issue...with no knowledge or information to support her blather. To her it is okay for the Solyndra's and A123's of the world to rob the Taxpayers but if anyone else make a buck off their job they are greedy and should have to give it to the government.

    Mr Haynes...it is always easy to blame someone else...I will remind you that the Solyndra BS started with the Democratic Congress...the money keepers. Whatever Mr Bush might have asked for ONLY the Congress could fund. I suggest you check the rocks you are chucking beforehand...hyperbole or facts...you choose.

     
  • Robert Chapman posted at 12:21 pm on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Yet another liberal blaming Bush. When will liberals own their own mess?

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 11:58 am on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    It time for Bush fans/Republicans/conservatives stand up and own their Solyndra situation. During a recent conversation with a conservative coworker, he refused to believe the Solyndra loans were made under provisions created by the Bush administration, but the facts are irrefutable.

    And I wonder what is on Ed's mind when he expresses concern or sorrow for his descendants' future. If his goals were achieved, what sort of polluted, used-up cinder will they inherit? He grieves because others are seeking ways to preserve resources? If his concern were genuine, he should work to reduce consumption and destruction of our only habitat; when this one has been ruined, we do not have an alternative nor a lifeboat to get there.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 8:53 am on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Excellent!

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 8:17 am on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Wow...this is really hilarious.

    "Solyndra Solar Plant?"

    No "solar power at 2AM?"

    It's highly embarassing - someone in the Walters family should confiscate Ed's typewriter... or maybe his fountain pen...or chisle. Does the LNS accept letters carved on stone tablets?

     
  • Dan Haynes posted at 7:17 am on Thu, Nov 22, 2012.

    Dan Haynes Posts: 9

    Solar does not have to replace gas, hydro or nuclear, it only has to contribute to the overall energy supply so use of non-renewables and fossil fuels can be reduced. In Europe, many countries are now generating more than half their energy needs using renewable sources, while here at home, we burn fossil fuels at an embarrassing rate. If Ed wants to feel sorry for his future great granddaughter, it should be for the deplorable state his generation has left her planet. Her generation, and the thousands of generations who will follow her, will have their work cut out for them.

     

Recent Comments

Posted 10 hours ago by Mike Adams.

Posted 10 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Evolutionism is a hypothesis, n…

Evolution is a long-time process. Very, very long time. It isn't changing your hair color or learning to speak a different language. Eve…

More...

Posted 14 hours ago by Rick Houdack.

article: Letter: Surprised by water bill

The reservoirs are drained while all the water released from them is keeping the rivers lapping at the tops of the levees in the delta.

More...

Posted 14 hours ago by Brian Dockter.

article: Letter: Evolutionism is a hypothesis, n…

Mr. Fields, Has the thought ever crossed your mind that creationism and evolutionism walk hand in hand? It's rather quite simple. As thi…

More...

Posted 16 hours ago by Pete Wick.

article: Changes to law mean Lodi restaurant pat…

Enough with the attention to dogs! The Lodi Snooze is guilty of it and it only encourages dog owners to get their way. Can't dog people lea…

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists