The fact that our entire government is crazy should surprise no one. The "Greens" are now in control of several departments, including the Department of Energy. Dr. Chu, who is the head of that agency, lacks any business acumen and together with his Democrat friends reaches decisions that are disastrous for America. The fact that socialists overtook the green movement in the '60s is also common knowledge and is characterized by Germany, where an alliance between Die Bunten (the Gays), Die Gruenen (the Greens), Buentniss 90 (Association 90), the DDR communist party green branch, and the SPD Sozialistische Partei Deutschland (German Socialist Party) formed a union which has been governing Germany for some decades.
So it is fair to say that the green movement is also the socialist movement. Once this is understood many things become clear. Among these is the fact that socialism does not sell but environmentalism does. There are several sectors of the economy where the Greens have become a paramount instrument of intended change. As has been demonstrated, these are all losing propositions for the country, for science and for individual citizens.
The automotive industry has long been criticized by the Greens for CO2 (greenhouse gases) production and for environmental harm. The fact that CO2 does no harm to the environment and is in fact the gas converted by plants in the process of converting CO2 into Oxygen, called photosynthesis – a process by which chlorophyll converts light energy (protons) into electrical energy splitting water molecules, thereby producing oxygen – all seems to have escaped environmental scientists. Regardless, the fact that most environmentalists have no foundational understanding of business or science will become very clear by the time you finish this article.
The primary impetus of the Obama administration relating to the automotive industry demonstrates that people within this administration have no foundational understanding of manufacturing processes or functions, lack any and all understanding of markets and are scientific neophytes relating to the automotive industry as well as the environment. They have invested over one billion dollars starting up their principal corporations for the production of electrically powered cars. The fact that present battery technology is unable to meet the requirements and demands necessitated by buyers' expectations is not part of the Obama energy equation.
Two specific examples come to mind. Top Gear, a very popular BBC program, initiated a test relating to hybrid electric cars. They took a Toyota Prius (the Prius in manufacture and assembly produces more environmental pollution than it saves over its anticipated lifespan) and placed it on a racetrack, filled its tank with gasoline and placed a twin turbocharged V8 Jaguar behind it. The Toyota had to go around the track at full speed while the Jaguar had to follow it. The end result was that the Toyota got 17.6 MPG and the Jaguar got 19.67 MPG. On another test a Tesla (sports car) was run at full speed around the same track; it overheated after 15 minutes and had to be turned off; on a second attempt, after 15 hours of recharging the batteries it ran out of power after 42 miles.
Present Obama administration investments in the electric car business are as follows: Fisker is a California company that was granted a Department of Energy loan of $529 million (one-half billion plus), they plan to build cars in Finland and the two-seater car retail cost is $96,985. Sales are unreported but I have never seen one. Tesla, another California producer (they don't call it the Land of Fruits and Nuts for nothing), obtained an Obamaloan for $465 million, their car costs $109,000.00 and they have sold 120 cars since start-up in 2009. Last but far from least is the Chevrolet Volt, produced by Government Motors, which is about 50/50 owned by the United Auto Workers and the government. So the taxpayers, in fact, financed the entire project. The Volt costs $40,000 as a basic unit, and since start-up GM has produced 1,536 cars. The only remaining issue is would you invest in one of these loser mistakes?
Lest you suffer the delusion that automobiles are the only losing proposition of this administration, let me enlighten you. You may be cognizant of Solyndra, but you actually have no idea how bad this all is. The mainstream has reported on almost nothing except that the taxpayers are on the hook for one-half billion dollars, $535 million to be exact. The loss of 1,100 jobs in this case is incidental. There is enough payola in the Solyndra affair to fill Sing Sing, that spa on the Hudson. $10,000 to the University of Chicago Medical Center, $53,500 to the president's election campaign 2008. The Medical Center was where Michelle, Barry, David and Valerie were employed. Solyndra was the company that gave the California Democrats a $7,500 present and in which the Democratic Committee of California had shares. Why do you suppose that just days before declaring bankruptcy Solyndra was able to re-negotiate their loan guarantee and chucked the taxpayers under the bus?
From this administration's beginning, there have been 13 solar based loans. Every single one of them has been a loser and the two just made will also go belly up sooner than you think. Notable September losers have been Evergreen Solar with a loss of $5.3 million and SpectraWatt with $500,000. In fact, of the 13 outstanding solar power energy loan guarantees none, to our knowledge, is today operational. Information on losses has been removed from public records.
We are sorry to report that many lobbyists will take it on the chin in 2012 as McAllister &Quinn, McBee Strategic and the Rice Hadley Group (Condoleezza's business) lost their Solyndra account. Total administration solar loan guarantees now exceed $6.5 billion. Not one has been repaid, shown a profit or produced reasonable sales in comparison to the invested monies.
The latest loan guarantee was to Sun Power (SPWR-NASDAQ) for $646 million to produce solar panels in Mexico. To accomplish that they opened a production plant in Mexicali, Mexico. Loans for cars to be made in Finland and now loans to make solar panels in Mexico ... "Pass the Jobs Bill Now"! Wait – Sun Power has a capitalization of $800 million and a debt of $820 million. So we are in the process of loaning a bankrupt company $646 million that on the day of the loan reduced the value of the government loan to $626 million. Furthermore, the debt load of Sun Power just exploded to $1 billion 466 million and assets of $800 million, or a net loss balance of $666 million. Let me guess – you would immediately invest in this mistake? Didn't think so!
The very next issue is Tonopah Solar that was part of the Dr. Chu-issued $1.383 billion loan guarantees made on the last day of September. Oh, I almost forgot. The Sun Power loans are reported to create jobs at a cost of $23 million per job. "Pass the Jobs Bill Now"! The Tonopah loan is for $737 million and according to their Internet site will create 50 new jobs – simply outstanding! That is better than the others, at only $1,474,000 per job created. Please. Please, someone, send Dr. Chu a calculator! Just by the way, Tonopah Solar is a subsidiary of another subsidiary and is to build this plant on technology licensed from a third source. No plant like this has ever been built so you can understand why the private sector is leery of financing it.
That brings us to ethanol, the single biggest rip-off of the green energy fiasco. Ethanol is about 30% less effective as a fuel than gasoline. Consequently, the miles per gallon of fuel consumed by your automobile is greater than if you used only gasoline. The principal fuel-agent is corn, one of the largest food commodities used by animals and people. The increased use of corn in ethanol production has had a dramatic effect on the price of food over the last ten years. The production of ethanol is subsidized by your taxes in every single step of the production cycle. Farmers get seed, fuel, transport irrigation and fertilizer subsides and federal crop insurance. Distillers get subsidies, as do transporters. The actual cost of ethanol without all the subsidies from Washington would be over double the retail amount of gasoline. So whereas gasoline is taxed by excise taxes, sales taxes, state taxes, etc. to the tune of about 35% of the cost and when property taxes and other taxes are included produces a total tax burden of over 50%, ethanol, when all the subsidies are compiled, costs 85% more then that. Environmentally, when the distillation process is integrated into the equation ethanol is a greater polluter than gasoline when used in cars.
Bird swatters or wind turbines are massive losers in energy production. The dramatic effects of this process can best be gauged in Spain, which has gone all out in wind energy. Spain is at the cusp of financial collapse primarily due to their massive expansion of wind power energy production and the highest energy costs in Europe. In England there are entire wind farms that are shut down. In Hawaii they are dismantling scores of turbines. In northwestern England I have driven through wind farms covering miles without one single unit working.
One American company offers a new type of wind turbine to be mounted on a residential roof. They claim 1,500 watts when there is at least a 10 mph wind. There is no storage capacity. This unit will run your vacuum cleaner and two light bulbs if conditions are perfect. None of these so-called renewable systems, solar, wind, or ethanol, is commercially viable. It is time, especially in this economic depression, for the uneducated in science environmentalists to pull their heads out of their butts and face reality.
The very last issue is the claim that we are running out of fossil fuels. Poppycock. America has the world's largest supply of anthracite coal, the largest supply of natural gas and the largest supply of oil. Combined with Canada and Alaska, we have enough fossil fuel energy to last for the coming 600 years based on a continual population growth and consumption growth.