Presidential Elections
- Thread starter eyephone
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Hillary is an extremely flawed candidate.
Why do you need to "trust" her...which politician do you trust? Trump? Cruz?
Its wasteful crap like this that drives me crazy. It is true that the road to ruin is paved with good intentions...or a bunch of pompous self-righteous do-gooders who funnel our hard earned (in this case another $1.6 BILLION) tax dollars down the rat hole. Thanks you very much!!!
Taxpayers Are Footing Bill for Solar Project That Doesn?t Work
Here?s the story so far, Ivanpah:
?Is owned by Google, NRG Energy, and Brightsource, who have a market cap in excess of $500 billion
?Received $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the Department of Energy
?Is paid four to five times as much per megawatt-hour as natural-gas powered plants
?Is paid two to three times as much per megawatt-hour as other solar power producers
?Has burned thousands of birds to death
?Has delayed loan repayments
?Is seeking over $500 million in grants to help pay off the guaranteed loans
?Burns natural gas for 4.5 hours each morning to get its mojo going
Brightsource, which is privately held, is owned by a virtual who?s who of those that don?t need subsidies from taxpayers and ratepayers.
In spite of all this, Ivanpah has fallen woefully short of its production targets. The managers? explanation for why production came up 32 percent below expected output was the weather. In addition to raising questions about planning for uncertainty, it is not all that clear how a nine percent drop in sunshine causes a 32 percent drop in production.
More bizarrely, the natural gas used to get the plant all warmed up and ready each day, would be enough to generate over one quarter of the power actually produced from the solar energy. Sorry, let?s not be haters.
The problem for Ivanpah?s customers (California power utilities) is that they planned on all those solar watt-hours to meet California?s renewable power mandates, which require that renewables produce a large and rising fraction of California?s electricity. That is why they pay so much more for Ivanpah?s output than for conventionally powered electricity.
Breaching their contracts with these California utilities threatened to shut down Ivanpah. More likely than permanently shutting Ivanpah down, would have been a change of ownership at a price that came closer to reflecting reality.
But this would have been bothersome for Ivanpah?s investors and the Department of Energy?s ridiculous Section 1703 Loan Program, so the California Public Utilities Commission saved the day (for the fat-cat owners, of course, not for actual the electricity consumers) by granting the company an extension to meet the production targets.
The best part of the ruling is the section on the cost?it?s pretty succinct.
Here it is in its entirety:
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
But, hey, Ivanpah?s plant is a shiny new technological marvel. That?s what counts, right?
http://dailysignal.com/2016/03/29/taxpayers-are-footing-bill-for-solar-project-that-doesnt-work/
Note this is an opinion piece and it can go both ways, it just depends on who is writing.
[quote author=article]
But did she commit a crime?
Washington lawyers who specialize in national security law say the answer is ?no.? While Clinton's gambit was foolish and dangerous, it wasn't an indictable offense.
[/quote]
It might not be a crime per se, but do we want a president that makes dangerous and foolish decisions? We have had plenty of these in the past (Afghanistan, Iraq and the list can go on).
It might not be a crime per se, but do we want a president that makes dangerous and foolish decisions? We have had plenty of these in the past (Afghanistan, Iraq and the list can go on).
[/quote]
It is an opinion piece but it references legal opinions.
It's almost like people are human beings...remember how Obama got attacked for being inexperienced? I much rather have HRC holding the nuclear football than any of the GOP candidates.
Plus it's never the case to cut spending to pay for something.. it's just adding on more taxes to pay for it. LOL.
It is an opinion piece but it references legal opinions.
It's almost like people are human beings...remember how Obama got attacked for being inexperienced? I much rather have HRC holding the nuclear football than any of the GOP candidates.
[/quote]
Well maybe she would keep better track of it than her boneheaded husband...but I somehow doubt it.
My military aide compatriot briefed the president would finally return his old set (of launch codes) to us. Instead president Bill Clinton looked up sheepishly and confessed ?I don?t have mine on me. I?ll track it down, guys and get it back to you.? pg56
?We were dumbfounded ? the president losing his nuclear launch codes. He is required to have the codes on him at all times. President Bill Clinton normally kept the world?s most sensitive document rubber banded to his credit cards in his pants pocket.? pg 57
?We immediately alerted the Joint Staff in the Pentagon: ?What do you mean? How could this happen? You?ve got to find it ASAP!?. They were incredulous. For days, we turned over everything in the White House. We talked to the ushers and valets, and asked them to search the president?s clothes and furniture in the residence. We asked the senior staff, specifically John Podesta and Bruce Lindsey, for help. The president finally threw up his hands and said casually ?I just can?t find it?don?t know where it is?. As far as he was concerned that was the end of the story. Podesta and Lindsey over riding concern was that the story might leak to the press. Only the military seemed remotely concerned about the national security implications of the nuclear launch codes being lost. And they were never found?
http://www.groundreport.com/the-day-former-president-clinton-lost-his-nuclear-launch-codes/
That plan is just plain stupid and shows that he doesn't understand trade.
That's just not going happen. He went to the same classes about Smoot/Hawley as the rest of us. Its a threat, like Reagan was feared by the Iranians as a nutcase so the released the hostages when he was elected...never had to fire a shot. This is no different.
No shots were fire...just weapons sold and money exchanged!
The plot thickens...
Former Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano, a key witness in the investigation into her use of a private server, struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department and apparently has been singing. An intelligence source told Fox News that he has told the FBI a range of details about how her personal email system was set up and maintained. The source described him as a ?devastating witness.?
Mr. Pagliano is a pivotal ? perhaps the pivotal ? key to Mrs. Clinton?s server and what was being done on and through it ? and by whom.
Mr. Pagliano was in charge of server(s) since the 2008 campaign. He was paid $5,000 for ?computer services? by the Clintons before he joined the State Department staff. After he started working there in May 2009, Mr. Pagliano continued to receive payments from the Clintons to maintain the server.
Mr. Pagliano can name all those who had access to the Clinton server and devices and when, and reportedly is doing so, allowing investigators to piece together an evidentiary timeline. It was emphasized to Fox News that Mrs. Clinton?s deliberate ?creation? and ?control? of the private server used for her official government business is the subject of ?intense scrutiny.?
Mr. Pagliano can also testify to the security of the server and what was told to whom about it. Again, the server has the documents, including the at least 22 top secret and above top secret ones deemed too damaging to national security to publicly release under any circumstances. That is a matter of some risk for Mrs. Clinton.
In another deeply problematic development, the FBI is focused on documents she and her aides sent rather than received, because sending them demonstrates deliberate intent much more than receiving them would. It?s been reported that over 100 highly sensitive documents originated with her.
If there are major classified emails that were sent by Mrs. Clinton, then one of my sources said ?there won?t be escape from prosecution?.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/monica-crowley-the-clintons-sense-a-breakdown/
Contrarian Commuter
New member
Irvinecommuter said:
Hillary is an extremely flawed candidate.
Irvinecommuter
New member
Contrarian Commuter said:Irvinecommuter said:
Hillary is an extremely flawed candidate.
Why do you need to "trust" her...which politician do you trust? Trump? Cruz?
morekaos
Well-known member
tim said:
Its wasteful crap like this that drives me crazy. It is true that the road to ruin is paved with good intentions...or a bunch of pompous self-righteous do-gooders who funnel our hard earned (in this case another $1.6 BILLION) tax dollars down the rat hole. Thanks you very much!!!
Taxpayers Are Footing Bill for Solar Project That Doesn?t Work
Here?s the story so far, Ivanpah:
?Is owned by Google, NRG Energy, and Brightsource, who have a market cap in excess of $500 billion
?Received $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the Department of Energy
?Is paid four to five times as much per megawatt-hour as natural-gas powered plants
?Is paid two to three times as much per megawatt-hour as other solar power producers
?Has burned thousands of birds to death
?Has delayed loan repayments
?Is seeking over $500 million in grants to help pay off the guaranteed loans
?Burns natural gas for 4.5 hours each morning to get its mojo going
Brightsource, which is privately held, is owned by a virtual who?s who of those that don?t need subsidies from taxpayers and ratepayers.
In spite of all this, Ivanpah has fallen woefully short of its production targets. The managers? explanation for why production came up 32 percent below expected output was the weather. In addition to raising questions about planning for uncertainty, it is not all that clear how a nine percent drop in sunshine causes a 32 percent drop in production.
More bizarrely, the natural gas used to get the plant all warmed up and ready each day, would be enough to generate over one quarter of the power actually produced from the solar energy. Sorry, let?s not be haters.
The problem for Ivanpah?s customers (California power utilities) is that they planned on all those solar watt-hours to meet California?s renewable power mandates, which require that renewables produce a large and rising fraction of California?s electricity. That is why they pay so much more for Ivanpah?s output than for conventionally powered electricity.
Breaching their contracts with these California utilities threatened to shut down Ivanpah. More likely than permanently shutting Ivanpah down, would have been a change of ownership at a price that came closer to reflecting reality.
But this would have been bothersome for Ivanpah?s investors and the Department of Energy?s ridiculous Section 1703 Loan Program, so the California Public Utilities Commission saved the day (for the fat-cat owners, of course, not for actual the electricity consumers) by granting the company an extension to meet the production targets.
The best part of the ruling is the section on the cost?it?s pretty succinct.
Here it is in its entirety:
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
But, hey, Ivanpah?s plant is a shiny new technological marvel. That?s what counts, right?
http://dailysignal.com/2016/03/29/taxpayers-are-footing-bill-for-solar-project-that-doesnt-work/
Irvinecommuter
New member
lowlyirvinerenter
New member
Irvinecommuter said:
Note this is an opinion piece and it can go both ways, it just depends on who is writing.
[quote author=article]
But did she commit a crime?
Washington lawyers who specialize in national security law say the answer is ?no.? While Clinton's gambit was foolish and dangerous, it wasn't an indictable offense.
[/quote]
It might not be a crime per se, but do we want a president that makes dangerous and foolish decisions? We have had plenty of these in the past (Afghanistan, Iraq and the list can go on).
Irvinecommuter
New member
HomeOwner Irvine said:
It might not be a crime per se, but do we want a president that makes dangerous and foolish decisions? We have had plenty of these in the past (Afghanistan, Iraq and the list can go on).
[/quote]
It is an opinion piece but it references legal opinions.
It's almost like people are human beings...remember how Obama got attacked for being inexperienced? I much rather have HRC holding the nuclear football than any of the GOP candidates.
J
jmoney74
Guest
morekaos said:
Plus it's never the case to cut spending to pay for something.. it's just adding on more taxes to pay for it. LOL.
morekaos
Well-known member
Irvinecommuter said:
It is an opinion piece but it references legal opinions.
It's almost like people are human beings...remember how Obama got attacked for being inexperienced? I much rather have HRC holding the nuclear football than any of the GOP candidates.
[/quote]
Well maybe she would keep better track of it than her boneheaded husband...but I somehow doubt it.
My military aide compatriot briefed the president would finally return his old set (of launch codes) to us. Instead president Bill Clinton looked up sheepishly and confessed ?I don?t have mine on me. I?ll track it down, guys and get it back to you.? pg56
?We were dumbfounded ? the president losing his nuclear launch codes. He is required to have the codes on him at all times. President Bill Clinton normally kept the world?s most sensitive document rubber banded to his credit cards in his pants pocket.? pg 57
?We immediately alerted the Joint Staff in the Pentagon: ?What do you mean? How could this happen? You?ve got to find it ASAP!?. They were incredulous. For days, we turned over everything in the White House. We talked to the ushers and valets, and asked them to search the president?s clothes and furniture in the residence. We asked the senior staff, specifically John Podesta and Bruce Lindsey, for help. The president finally threw up his hands and said casually ?I just can?t find it?don?t know where it is?. As far as he was concerned that was the end of the story. Podesta and Lindsey over riding concern was that the story might leak to the press. Only the military seemed remotely concerned about the national security implications of the nuclear launch codes being lost. And they were never found?
http://www.groundreport.com/the-day-former-president-clinton-lost-his-nuclear-launch-codes/
lowlyirvinerenter
New member
eyephone said:
That plan is just plain stupid and shows that he doesn't understand trade.
morekaos
Well-known member
HomeOwner Irvine said:
That's just not going happen. He went to the same classes about Smoot/Hawley as the rest of us. Its a threat, like Reagan was feared by the Iranians as a nutcase so the released the hostages when he was elected...never had to fire a shot. This is no different.
The Motor Court Company
Well-known member
why arguing about Trump here. we are in Cali. only thing we can influence is Dem primary. Bernie or lady Clinton
Irvinecommuter
New member
peppy said:
No shots were fire...just weapons sold and money exchanged!
morekaos
Well-known member
tim said:
The plot thickens...
Former Hillary Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano, a key witness in the investigation into her use of a private server, struck an immunity deal with the Justice Department and apparently has been singing. An intelligence source told Fox News that he has told the FBI a range of details about how her personal email system was set up and maintained. The source described him as a ?devastating witness.?
Mr. Pagliano is a pivotal ? perhaps the pivotal ? key to Mrs. Clinton?s server and what was being done on and through it ? and by whom.
Mr. Pagliano was in charge of server(s) since the 2008 campaign. He was paid $5,000 for ?computer services? by the Clintons before he joined the State Department staff. After he started working there in May 2009, Mr. Pagliano continued to receive payments from the Clintons to maintain the server.
Mr. Pagliano can name all those who had access to the Clinton server and devices and when, and reportedly is doing so, allowing investigators to piece together an evidentiary timeline. It was emphasized to Fox News that Mrs. Clinton?s deliberate ?creation? and ?control? of the private server used for her official government business is the subject of ?intense scrutiny.?
Mr. Pagliano can also testify to the security of the server and what was told to whom about it. Again, the server has the documents, including the at least 22 top secret and above top secret ones deemed too damaging to national security to publicly release under any circumstances. That is a matter of some risk for Mrs. Clinton.
In another deeply problematic development, the FBI is focused on documents she and her aides sent rather than received, because sending them demonstrates deliberate intent much more than receiving them would. It?s been reported that over 100 highly sensitive documents originated with her.
If there are major classified emails that were sent by Mrs. Clinton, then one of my sources said ?there won?t be escape from prosecution?.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/monica-crowley-the-clintons-sense-a-breakdown/