68% of the largest firms have climate change as a central priority.

I was at an AIChE (American Institute of Chemical Engineers) convention last year and climate change / carbon control was a huge part of the seminar docket. It would appear a good percentage of the industry expects regulation to be forthcoming eventually and is being reasonably proactive about it IMHO.

Now, the executives of these companies no doubt think differently...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/14/solyndra-loan-probed_n_961978.html

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's eagerness to deliver economic stimulus may have influenced a federal review of a loan to a now bankrupt solar panel manufacturer, a move that may have left taxpayers on the hook for a $528 million debt, House Republicans said Wednesday.

The panel examining the loan disclosed e-mails that appear to show senior staff at the White House Office of Management and Budget chafing about having to conduct "rushed approvals" of federal loan guarantees designed to help jumpstart the nation's renewable energy industry.

GOP lawmakers said the White House had scheduled a groundbreaking for Solyndra Inc. even before the Department of Energy had submitted its final paperwork on the terms of the loan to the OMB.

"We would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews and have the approval set the date for the announcement rather than the other way around," said one of the emails from an unnamed OMB aide to the office of Vice President Joe Biden.

Solyndra was cited by President Barack Obama as an example of how the economic stimulus bill would increase employment through investments in renewable energy. But it couldn't compete with foreign manufacturers of solar panels in the U.S. and the European market dried up. It has filed for bankruptcy, laying off 1,100 workers. Shortly after the filing, FBI officials raided the company's headquarters in Fremont, Calif. The company said the FBI was seeking records on the loans.

Republican lawmakers on the House Energy and Commerce Committee's investigations panel are questioning why there was a rush to approve the loan and whether the entire loan guarantee program is warranted.

 

link

The former chief financial officer for an organization devoted to promoting green energy admitted Tuesday he succumbed to the allure of another green — cash money.

Cameron J. Potter pleaded guilty Tuesday before U.S. District Judge Thomas Phillips to bilking the Department of Energy of more than $400,000 intended for legitimate use by the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy to promote renewable energy sources, typically dubbed "green energy."

Potter, 31, was employed as the chief financial officer for SACE when, in 2006, he concocted a scheme to siphon off money awarded the advocacy group by the DOE for his own personal gain, Assistant U.S. Attorney Frank Dale told Phillips.

"He created false invoices and submitted those invoices to SACE for payment," Dale said.

Stephen Smith, the alliance's executive director, said today that he and senior managers uncovered the scam more than two years ago, fired Potter and notified federal authorities.

According to a plea agreement brokered between Dale and defense attorney Donald A. Bosch, Potter admitted to a scam that spanned three years. He pleaded guilty to wire fraud and money laundering as part of the plea.

Dale said Potter set up accounts through PayPal, an online banking service, which bore names similar to businesses SACE typically used to carry out various consulting services. He then crafted invoices for work never performed and paid them through the SACE's American Express account.

"Potter then electronically transferred the stolen funds from his PayPal accounts to his own bank account," Dale said.

Dale listed in the plea agreement a 2007 purchase by Potter using the purloined money of a 1998 Lexus as evidence of the money laundering count.

As part of Tuesday's plea, Potter agreed to give up any money left in both his personal bank accounts and retirement accounts that were funded with his ill-gotten gain.

Bosch told Phillips that Potter is a "permanent resident of Australia" and may face deportation as a result of his conviction in the embezzlement case. Dale said it's not clear yet whether Potter was a legal resident of the United States during the embezzlement scheme.

SACE is a constant critic of the Tennessee Valley Authority and its coal-fired generation of electric energy.

Potter remains free on bond pending sentencing in January.

 

I'm not a doubter, but you may be giving big business too much credit.

I'm not so sure management of these big companies believe so much in climate change as they believe their customers believe in it.

It seems like everyone is coming out with “green this” and “green that”—perhaps I’m a bit too cynical, but I think most of these companies just don’t want to be thought of as part of the problem, and so their initiatives are designed more to appease the buying public than to actually make a difference.

 

Solyndra will be to green jobs what the bridge to nowhere was to earmarks. You'd think the green jobs sham would have died when Van Jones' political career died, but it lived on, thanks to the media's influence. You'd also think that Spain's green jobs failure would have served as a warning to the US, but alas, it was not heeded. Obama's honeymoon is ending -- and people will continue to turn on him. The level of deception that he will get away with (and the media covering for him) going forward will be dramatically reduced. People are starting to realize that the emperor has no clothes. His coalition is not sustainable.

 

Everything you believe is wrong.

 

1. Coal and oil (gasoline) are the major contributors of carbon dioxide.
2. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas
3. Nuclear energy is the only capable substitution for coal and gasoline

If you are not pro-nuclear therefore you obviously want to reap the consequences of a slightly flooded Earth or an ice-capped England.

 

I think it is a mixed bag. I used to work for an energy company whose strategy regarding green energy was "to have a green face" -- promote a green product to be able to better sell dirty power.

But that's just the retail side. On generation, you don't spend millions on a green energy plant just for looks; it has to make economic sense. You have players that still want to build coal plants because they can be sure to make money with them right now. But, I think there is also an expectation that a dirty plant is a financial hazard because later regulations might require expensive retrofitting or early retirement. When you build that in to your financial analysis, cleaner energies can come up a bit in the standings.

So, I don't think it's only window-dressing to satisfy the public (though that can change behavior too, especially with the vertically-integrated utilities that generate and sell), but also regulation and the threat of regulation that will change the behavior of some players.

And the bias would be that the larger companies do this. There is a higher expectation that the company will be around for a long time to see more regulation. And, you can run smaller competitors out of business if they can't adapt to renewables as easily as you can, or pony up the start-up capital to play the game.

 

I do not know how old most of you are however in the 70's they were predicting the next ice age coming. Then it started to get warmer so people started talking about global warming. The truth is that the climate constantly goes on and down. Their are cycles of colder temps and warmer temps. Some of these cycles last longer than others. The idea that man can cause temperature swings is ridiculous. While there are a lot of scientist that were award billions of dollars in grants to "prove" global warming there are many that say it is not true. Look at the all the lies have been perpetrated to prove this theory when it doesn't exist. The truth is this is really an anti business agenda. Any business that has signed on board with this crazy notion is trying to gain political favor since saying that global warming exist when it doesn't is "politically correct".

 

Does this mean you are ignoring the fact that Solyndra's failure at this time and place was predicted by the people holding the purse strings of our Nation? Given that, I suppose you think they should have pushed ahead as they did anyway?

 

You seem to have looked into the issue very little. The idea that man can cause temperature swings is actually proven fact. The fact that scientists changed from a new ice age when it was shown that it wasn't the case only proves that scientists are swayed by results.

You are very wrong that there are "a lot" of scientists who say man made global isn't true. Almost no scientists say that. In fact less than 3% say that.

Please look more closely at the facts surrounding global warming.

 

Check this out

-LINK-

 

Also check this out.

LINK

 

Thank you for pointing out your rationale as to your reasoning. I respect your willingness to engage in debate.

I will point out that while the public is less likely to believe in global warming now, the scientists are more likely

 

Obviously, this is just more proof that the government needs to stop butting into people's lives, as we can always rely on the free market god to keep us safe.