Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Thursday, Sept. 13, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
A recent letter, “Solar plant won’t benefit residents,” mentions the Tonopah solar project but leaves out crucial details regarding job creation and economic impact.
SolarReserve’s Crescent Dunes project will create more than 600 jobs on-site during peak construction and 4,300 direct, indirect and induced jobs throughout the manufacturing chain. Orders have been placed for equipment and services in 20 U.S. states. Today, there are 180 workers on-site, with Nevada residents making up more than 70 percent of the construction workforce.
This investment in Nevada will generate $37 million in tax revenue in the first 10 operating years, contributing to school systems and police and fire departments. During the 30-year project life, $10 million per year will be spent on operating costs and salaries, including for 45 on-site operators.
The project has been financed, in part, under the Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program. It’s required to be paid back in full with interest, estimated to bring $300 million of additional revenue to the U.S. government.
Government support of projects like Crescent Dunes advances innovative American technologies that create jobs and provide energy diversification and energy security. This flagship project includes solar energy storage and will serve as a proof point for future projects with this technology — creating additional U.S. jobs for years to come.
This is a success story for Nevada implementing the world’s leading technology to deliver solar energy on demand to 75,000 Nevada homes under a 25-year contract with NV Energy.
The author is the CEO of SolarReserve.
The keystone pipeline will create 20,000 direct and 200,000 indirect jobs
The new nuclear plant in Georgia has 4000 direct construction employees
So what
The purpose of the solar plant is not to create jobs
The purpose of the solar plant is to supply cheap power for consumers
Solar is not cheap power
I agree with Future and disagree vehemently with the CEO author who is pushing his agenda for the sole reason of making business profits. The heck with the jobs, let's just worry about making and executing good energy policies. If we do those two things, the jobs will follow.
CarmineD
I think Kevin Smith just likes all that money flowing into his pocket.
There will be like 10-15 jobs at the plant after it is built.
Obama's economy is on FIRE!!!!!!!!!
It is just booming left and right.
Carmine,
So you have met Mr. Smith and know what his inner beliefs are then? Remarkable. Alternately, you could be making up your argument. This is much more likely.
This is good energy policy but you will never recognize this.
So, Mr. Smith, if it's such a good deal and financially viable, why do you have your hand out to the taxpayers of this country? I have no quarrel with you & your investors risking your own capital in pursuit of "green" energy and I hope you succeed. But, I am vehemently against using tax dollars to fund any private enterprise, be it car companies, solar companies, farmers, whomever. And for the lefties to say otherwise is mind-boggling. After all, according to them, capitalists are greedy 1 percenter crooks who take advantage of the other 99% and, supposedly, Smith & his investors are capitalists. So why then subsidize the very folks you demonize? Because it fits their political agenda and results in "crony" capitalism which allows pencil-pushing, bureaucratic drones to pick winner & losers.
Oh brother, not this again. It is not possible for intermittent, expensive electricity to be a job "creator"
"Carmine,
So you have met Mr. Smith and know what his inner beliefs are then? "
Mr. Schaffer:
I don't have to be a chicken to spot a rotten egg.
CarmineD
Jerry,
Grow up.
Yeah....I got an business idea.
Somebody lend my new company $500 million dollars guaranteed by the taxpayers.
I will be the CEO and draw a salary of $2.5 million a year.
I also want tax credits of around $10 to 20 million a year to cover half of my operational cost (that is on top of the write-off of said cost).
I also want to force people to buy my product.
It will replace a product that they are currently getting except my product will cost 2 to 3 times more and it will only be available when the sun is out.
Please remember one word. "Solyndra"
Mr. Smith,
What percentage of the components being used are being supplied by foreign interests or nominally US companies using offshore labor?
What percentage of those 4300 direct, indirect and induced jobs are actually here in the US? And how many of them will remain once the construction phase is complete?
Please elaborate on what constitutes indirect and induced jobs with examples and estimated numbers for the examples. (I would not be surprised if the response to this would qualify the author for a career in creative writing.)
To Carmine and Jerry Fink.
The fact is that all forms of energy in the US recieve governement subsidies. Why should renewable energy be starved in favor of dirtier technologies. The oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear industries have recieved decades and decades of subsidies amounting to hundreds (and hundreds) of billions of dollars. They still receive those subsidies today in the form of tax credits, low interest loans, tax deductions for foreign activities and other forms. Most of those subsidies for conventional energy are permanently imbedded in the tax codes. Congress tried to eliminate $2.0 billion in oil industry subsidies a few months ago and it was blocked by the house. Every nuclear plant in the US is insured by you and me (the US taxpayers) against catastrophic accidents because the utilities can't afford or justify the premiums (see Price-Anderson Act of 1957!). Natural gas fracking was developed with support from the DOE. These technologies also don't get charged for the pollution they create or the military costs (including lives) necessary to protect our interest in the Middle East. Understand where your tax dollars are going when you side with old technologies that are doing the very things you say you are against.
To "By Future"
The nuclear plant in Georgia recieved an $8.9 billion DOE loan guarantee from the US government under the same program that the solar project received less than 1/10 of that. Since when do we think we should provide help to multi-billion dollar utilities rather than entreprenuers with new technologies. Oh and I can guarnatee the power from the solar project will be cheaper than nuclear over the life of the project.
To Sgt Rock
The project can store solar energy and provide firm supply clean energy day or night (read the press releases). The project won a competitive bid with NV Energy and was awarded the contract based on winning the competition against other bidders. Today, Solar energy is cheaper than clean coal (although not really clean) and nuclear with only current low natural gas prices providing cheaper electricity, but natural gas is the most volatile fuel out there. Today's natural gas price was 10 times higher 7 or 8 years ago and will be there again if all we do is use natural gas. SolarReserve is a relatively small company, so I expect your salary estimates are 5 or 10 times too high. However, big oil company CEOs or big utility CEOs certainly make multiples of your salary estimate.
Mr. Businessman:
Here's my answer to you. Let the market determine the winners and losers in the energy industry. Not the Federal government. The Federal Government has no business in business. Period. End of the story.
CarmineD
Carmine,
Great idea. Government is involved (and has been well before Obama and crew) in all forms of energy, miltary activities, roads and transportation, auto industry, medical and medicines, aerospace and commercial airlines, education, agriculture and farming, the internet, water supply, forestry, mining and lots of others. Where would you like to start? I would like to stop subsidies for big oil first, since the top 5 US oil companies made $150 billion in profits last year and are the biggest lobbying force in Washington. Why should they continue to get subsidies?
Hey, Carmine, did you type and send your answer on a device using electricity from Hoover Dam?
Carmine writes empty slogans rather than admit the obvious.
@Businessman: Whats your take on the Solyndra fiasco. I'd like to know what you think of all of the lost taxpayer money on that lame project.
"Why should they continue to get subsidies?"
They shouldn't BUT they do employ more workers than than your green energy industry SO based on your half-baked logic here they should and probably therefore do.
CarmineD
"Hey, Carmine, did you type and send your answer on a device using electricity from Hoover Dam?"
Yes, and the last I heard Thomas A. Edison invented electricity in his laboratory at Menlo Park, NJ. Without any government money.
CarmineD
"Carmine writes empty slogans rather than admit the obvious."
The obvious is that the slogans just so happen to also be factual. That's obvious to most.
CarmineD
Businessman. Check your facts the Georgia Nuclear plant has NOT gotten a loan guarantee from DOE.
The Feds wants close to $1 billion payment from Southern Company to get just a loan guarantee - note this is not a loan. This is like taking on risk by co-signing a loan. Soutern is a $40 billion company and is not going to default.
The project is 1/3 done and has a license so looks like they will reject the government offer
Businessman,
Fantastic posts!!!!!!!!!!!! Keep it up! Thank you!
"The project can store solar energy and provide firm supply clean energy day or night "
Solar is like 2 to 4 times more expensive then fossil fuels.
Add storage cost it jumps to 5 to 6 more expensive and all it does is reduces the energy that it can deliever during the day.
"Solar energy is cheaper than clean coal (although not really clean) and nuclear with only current low natural gas prices providing cheaper electricity, but natural gas is the most volatile fuel out there. Today's natural gas price was 10 times higher 7 or 8 years ago and will be there again if all we do is use natural gas. "
solar is like 3 to 6 times more expensive than coal.
The reason why natural gas has gotten cheaper is that keep finding tons and tons and tons it every year.
Kevin P. Smith......GREAT LETTER.
YES, solar power will be a permanent power source
now and in the future.
The only thing holding us back are ignorant,
backwards, knuckle-dragging republicans.
Good luck to you.
WE'RE MOVING FORWARD!
INTO THE FUTURE!
"YES, solar power will be a permanent power source
now and in the future."
Mr. Teamster:
For once I agree with you. But with the following caveat: For China. They beat us to the punch already. Even with all our government subsidies.
CarmineD
Let's review:
He claims it will create jobs.. Red Flag
His company(s) are private aka dark pools.. Red Flag
His company(s) seeks "to help" all over the Globe.. Red Flag
His Company seeks Government money over going public.. Red Flag
His product is a centralized solution when a diversified one is what we need..Red Flag
He posts at 2am in an official capacity..Red Flag
Seems that the House has passed the no more Solyndra loan act. Will Reid and the Senate do the same? Doubt it. I see 2010 happening all over again for the Dems.
Carmine: They have nothing substansive to say, so they spew venom. They are the same folks who hate "greedy" corporations but drive vehicles built by them, shop in stores owned by them and communicate on equipment produced by them. Their lives are made easier and more comfortable because of all those "greedy" coporations - they eat better, are healthier and live longer - yet, child like, they bite the hand that feeds them. Obviously, they were born in the wrong Century. They belong in the Dark Ages - a time when ignorance was King. They are basically "Flat Earthers" who believe the Sun orbits the Earth or, more likely, around them. Some would even call them "Luddites."
Carmine:
1. You can't "invent" a force of nature.
2. Besides, what Edison invented was a system based on Direct Current, since supplanted by a system of alternating current.
3. You missed the real point, which was: had not the U.S. government not ventured on many occasions where you adamantly insist it ought never go: A. There would me no Hoover Dam, B. Only a small, inhospitable town living off repairing steam locomotives where we all now live in comfort with modern conveniences; C. No semiconductors except as unique university laboratory experiments. D. No modern circuits; and E. No internet for you to use to express your indignation at the government wasting money like that.
Still awaiting businessmans take on the Solyndra deal. Solyndra and its ilk $500 million... American taxpayers= minus $500 million.
Mr. Schaffer:
You don't have the creditabilty to ask.
CarmineD
I got the point well, Mr. Goodman. You didn't get mine. There are chores that clearly belong to the realm of government: Roads, bridges, infrastructure, military, security etc. Picking industries to invest taxpayers' money, without taxpayers' consent, is not government's role.
CarmineD
Carmine......
You say China beat us to the punch?
So we Americans are supposed to lie down and let
China get the jump on us again?
That's not what Americans do.
And solar and wind power IS part of
infrastructure.
So the government should and can step in.
Mr. Teamster:
Solar and wind power is a green energy industry business. Subsidized with taxpayers' money. Much of which has been disbursed with no measurable return for the taxpayers, just the CEO's and shareholders of the companies receiving the funds.
As I told you many many times, electric cars have been in the research and development stage since the gas car was invented in 1908 of Henry Ford. Over 100 years. How far has it gotten? 25 miles on an overnight full charge if you're lucky according to the GM Volt. Volt has a price tag of $43,000 and that doesn't count the US taxpayers' subsidies which by some accounts are just as much and more. The plant in Michigan was closed once this year and now again. This time longer to retool to make other gas GM vehicles. What's the problem? Same as it's been for 100 years. Batteries. Can't improve them to compete with gas.
One hundred years from now our relatives will still be saying the same about electric cars and their batteries. Too expensive and can't compete equally and comparably with less expensive gas powered vehicles. By then, like now the MPG ratings for gas will be vastly improved just as they have been for recent decades.
CarmineD
Carmine can't get basic facts correct but that never stops him from posting. Is anyone buying his shtick?
Just one example of how wrong his last post is:
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...