Solyndra

[Gaspar]

Poop hit the fan late today!

A prominent 2008 Barack Obama fundraiser who held a key role in the Energy Department played an active part in Solyndra's $535 million loan guarantee despite conflict of interest concerns over his wife's work at a law firm that also represented the California solar company, according to internal Obama administration emails released Friday.

Steve Spinner's involvement in the Solyndra loan had been difficult to determine until the release of hundreds of emails on Friday showing the Silicon Valley energy consultant engaged while at the DOE in a range of high-level roles.

In a series of emails sent on Aug. 28, 2009, Spinner expressed repeated frustrations with the Office of Management and Budget over the holdup on the Solyndra loan.

"Any word from OMB? I have the OVP and WH breathing down my neck on this," he wrote to DOE career staffer Kelly Colyar. "Just want to make sure we get their questions. They are getting itchy to get involved if needed. I don't want that."

"We got their questions last night," Colyar replied. "We've followed up on most, but the ball is still in our court. Bill has sent me some things, but it's not exactly what i need. i've requested more."

"How — hard is this? What is he waiting for?" Spinner replied. "Will we have it by end of day? If any risk of not, let me know."

"How do OMB's questions look? What you were expecting? How long for us to respond? Just so I can be better educated, can you share with me?" Spinner added.

Spinner also was central in trying to line up Obama or Vice President Joe Biden to participate via videoconference in a September 2009 groundbreaking ceremony.

Writing on Aug. 17 to the DOE's Megan Guy, Spinner explains that the event will need to include "golden shovels, construction workers, bulldozers, ribbon cutting, tour of existing assembly line, customer testimonials."

Spinner had some role in dealing with details of the Solyndra loan. Guy wrote in an Aug. 20, 2009, email, "Quick question - do you want to put in credit score estimates for Solyndra [redacted] and [redacted], or just use flat 11.85 percent?"

Spinner outlined his concern about the possible conflict of interest in a Sept. 23, 2009, email to DOE ethics official Sue Wadel, explaining the arrangement that his wife Allison Spinner had worked out with her law firm, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.

"WSGR has programmed Allison's pay structure to take out any profit sharing that any of these companies may generate in fees re: DOE loan applications."

"I shall update you monthly as the list changes," Spinner added. "As agreed, I will recuse myself from any active participation in any of these applications (solicitations, due diligence, negotiations). Please let me know if there's anything else I should be aware of."



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65448.html#ixzz1a8Fh764T

[stageidea]

I believe the Bush Administration approved the loan.  I am not convinced that the Obama administration had that much to with it. 

[Gaspar]

I believe the Bush Administration approved the loan.  I am not convinced that the Obama administration had that much to with it. 

The Bush administration turned the loan down.  They said it was too risky.

[stageidea]

O.k. but it wasn't the Bush Administration that blocked it.  It was the DOE.

January 2009: In an effort to show it has done something to support renewable energy, the Bush Administration tries to take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee before President Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE "without prejudice" because it wasn't ready for conditional commitment.

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/09/13/317594/timeline-bush-administration-solyndra-loan-guarantee/

[Gaspar]

They already tried that defense but it didn't work.

The White House noted to ABC News that the Bush administration was the first to consider Solyndra's application and that some executives at the company have a history of donating to Republicans.

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.

Peter Lynch, a New York-based solar energy analyst, told ABC News it took only a cursory glance through Solyndra's prospectus to see there was a problem with their numbers.

"It's very difficult to perceive a company with a model that says, well, I can build something for six dollars and sell it for three dollars," Lynch said. "Those numbers don't generally work. You don't want to lose three dollars for every unit you make."

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/solyndra/2011/09/14/bush-admin-voted-against-solyndra-loan#ixzz1a8P4fMsv

[guido911]

I am now convinced that everything wrong in this country is Bush's fault.

[Townsend]

I am now convinced that everything wrong in this country is Bush's fault.

I blame him for every one of these exact same posts I see.

[guido911]

I blame him for every one of these exact same posts I see.

Will someone blame me for our problems? I feel left out.

As for Solyndra, the slow drip...drip...of new revelations makes it confusing to know what is really going on. My only thought is that we dropped $1/2B on something and got nothing to show for it. Am I right?

[Hoss]

Will someone blame me for our problems? I feel left out.

As for Solyndra, the slow drip...drip...of new revelations makes it confusing to know what is really going on. My only thought is that we dropped $1/2B on something and got nothing to show for it. Am I right?

Kinda like the war in Iraq divided by a bunch...what have we got to show for that, other than we can nation build and have many of our sons/daughters die in the process.

NOTE:  Doesn't mean I don't support the troops.  Just not the Iraq operation...

[Teatownclown]

Will someone blame me for our problems? I feel left out.

As for Solyndra, the slow drip...drip...of new revelations makes it confusing to know what is really going on. My only thought is that we dropped $1/2B on something and got nothing to show for it. Am I right?

Hardly ever....wait and we will see. Nobody knows how to sort out assets better in bankruptcy than GK....and besides, spread the citizen taxpayer loss out among us stockholder's and it's of minimal impact compared to what we spend to kill.

[guido911]

Hardly ever....wait and we will see. Nobody knows how to sort out assets better in bankruptcy than GK....and besides, spread the citizen taxpayer loss out among us stockholder's and it's of minimal impact compared to what we spend to kill.

Are you seriously comparing the Iraq war expense to Solyndra? Remember, the Iraq war was approved of by Congress. Solyndra was approved of by apparently Obama and insiders. I don't want to waste time with the video of top DEMS voting for the war.

[Hoss]

Are you seriously comparing the Iraq war expense to Solyndra? Remember, the Iraq war was approved of by Congress. Solyndra was approved of by apparently Obama and insiders. I don't want to waste time with the video of top DEMS voting for the war.

Just because it was approved of by Congress doesn't make it any less wrong...LOL.  You so funny.

Last I checked, 800 billion <> to 2 billion.  2 billion is still a lot, but you make it sound like this country has never invested in something so costly and had it fail.  I'm pointing out something that cost 400 times as much, and failed.

[guido911]

Like Solyndra, Eco-Fest goes t$ts up in California. tee hee.

It was the first New World Festival of Eco-Friendly Science and Technology and quite possibly the last.

The event near the beach in Santa Monica, which had been scheduled to run through Sunday, was shut down abruptly Saturday afternoon.

Its website had promised robots, a petting zoo, six stages of live music and more than 150 exhibits. But the gathering on Saturday looked more like a medium-sized, eco-friendly farmers market.

Howard Mauskopf, the festival's organizer, said he needed to shut down because so few people had shown up. "We're in a position where we don't have the financial ability to continue," he said, adding that he would have needed eight to 10 times the crowd that was present to make ends meet. He said he is going to try to reimburse food vendors next week.

"I don't know why people didn't come," he said.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-eco-fest-20111009,0,4226305.story

[dbacks fan]

Like Solyndra, Eco-Fest goes t$ts up in California. tee hee.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-eco-fest-20111009,0,4226305.story

My favorite comment:

Sorker at 9:16 AM October 09, 2011
"I don't know why people didn't come,"   Wow. With a petting zoo and chile and a sculptor? It's all "so relevant" to ecoscience! Not. Perhaps if the sculptor were working with scrap Solyndra panels then the crowds would have come.

[jacobi]

Why is it is so important for conservatives to revel in the failure of Solyndra?  It seems to me that the failure of any amercian company is lamentable, certainly any company that helps relieve our dependancy on petroleum.  I'm an environmentalist, for sure, but whether we like it or not, we WILL one day be forced get away from oil for supply reasons.  The fact that Obama backed something that failed is not important to me.  It may have been an unwise investment, but at least he was trying to shore up a new manifacturing sector.  What IS important to me is that the government is supporting new technologies that will take this country in a better direction than simply letting large oil concerns dictate our foreign policy.  You may not like Obama, but the fact that this company went under is NOT a good thing.