U.S. Sen. Dean Heller is using the closure of a solar power manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas to hit Democratic rival Shelley Berkley, who supports subsidies for clean energy projects.
The Amonix plant closed just 14 months after it opened, and after receiving $6 million in federal tax credits and a $15.6 million federal energy grant. Berkley, along with Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval and U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, praised the plant when it opened as a step forward for Nevada and clean energy production.
But a spokeswoman for Heller’s campaign said the plant’s closure represents the failure of stimulus programs in Nevada.
“Congresswoman Berkley, when you voted for the trillion dollar stimulus, you promised it would create 34,000 jobs in Nevada. Nevada lost jobs. Congresswoman Berkley, you pushed $6 million in funding to a company that has created zero long-term jobs for Nevada. Congresswoman, it’s time. It’s time for you to admit the stimulus — and your policies — aren’t working,” said Chandler Smith, Heller for Senate spokeswoman.
(It was not immediately clear if Heller shares those views. Recently, he demurred when asked about an ad run by his campaign, referring reporters to the campaign as if it was somehow operating as an independent, third-party entity.)
For her part, a Berkley spokeswoman denounced Heller for piling on the loss of jobs suffered by Amonix workers for political gain.
“Shame on Senator Dean Heller,” said Xochitl Hinojosa, Berkley for Senate communications director. “While Shelley Berkley and Republican Governor Brian Sandoval are working to make Nevada the clean energy jobs capital of America, Senator Heller is cheering the fact that hundreds of Nevadans have just lost their jobs because he thinks it will help his political campaign. However, Heller’s rooting for failure should come as no surprise to Nevada’s middle-class given his track record protecting tax breaks for corporations that ship American jobs overseas and defending China’s unfair trade policies that are cheating Nevada workers out of thousands of good paying jobs. It’s time for Heller to put Nevada first by joining Shelley Berkley and Republican Governor Sandoval to find solutions that put people back to work. Those who are unemployed deserve more from their Senator.”
The bottom line is that renewable energy — still far more expensive than fossil fuel-generated energy — is an emerging industry, and there will be plenty of failures before it’s firmly established in the market. And the idea behind Heller’s point — that subsidies in an uncertain industry carry a risk of wasting taxpayer dollars — is something that nobody should discount. Eventually, however, renewable energy will be a viable competitor to fossil fuels, and government subsidies will have paved the way. On that front, the closure of a plant such as Amonix is certainly a setback.
UPDATE: Reid, who also praised Amonix when it opened, released a statement of his own today.
“Last year, Amonix CEO Brian Robertson was tragically killed in a plane crash and unfortunately the company was unable to recover from this difficult time. Some people will be tempted to use today’s unfortunate news for political gain. But I am hopeful that the bipartisan support for this project and the public-private partnership that helped make this and many other projects possible will not be degraded by dirty energy supporters for their own profit or political gain. The clean energy sector is too important to Nevada’s future and I hope that those that publicly acknowledge this will continue to strengthen the bipartisan support for renewable energy programs and incentives that exists in Nevada.”
Solar and wind are both lots older than 50 years and though they are both getting stronger, neither are anywhere near ready for large production plants and the Apex power plant is up and running while Eldorado is still being constructed. Solar is useful in small scale applications and should be invested in for research but not on the scale the feds are trying to force.
Actually we should be building far more natural gas plants. Fracking is far safer now they are building bore hole walls strong enough to not fail like the earlier ones that were based on bore hole wall designs used in fracking drinking water wells. That process uses household vinegar and is actually quite old. Now bore hole leaks are no longer an issue we don’t see anymore methane wells. This should make libs happy, the protections developed over the last 50 years worked and that industry cleaned itself up fast, in fact it was only just a few years. The issue now is the waste water from the process and this is being resolved almost as quickly. Natural gas is far cleaner than coal, far safer than nukes and is in huge supply.
Bloom Energy is growing fast now with another major announcement of another large user going totally off grid. These Bloom boxes use natural gas primarily but can use any biofuel to produce electricity. I see one in the future for my house power. And it will take up about the same amount of space as my air conditioner and will probably cost about the same to install. Currently a grid tie solar system after all the subsidies costs 20 grand with a life expectancy of 20 years. No good ROI in that. Big reason we don’t see lower electric bills from gas prices is the unbelievably high cost of the mandated green energy. Darn good thing gas is so low cause if it wasn’t our power bills would be almost double what they are now.
T. Boone Pickens is correct about natural gas but was wrong about wind. Natural gas is the next step and we do not have anywhere near enough money to force the jump to solar.
Is this about federal subsidies for power? If so, it should also be addressed that Big Oil in our country gets $4 billion a year in federal subsidies. Every year. Year after year. (just like corporate farms do). And remember, those oil companies are making billions in profits. So why are the Republicans still insisting that Big Oil still still get $4 billion each and every year?
Wind, solar, nuclear and hydro should not be belittled for making major contributions to generating energy in this country. Or the fact we purchase large amounts of hydro energy from Canada. I worked for the Bonneville Power Administration; a federal agency that was under the Department of Energy. I was in charge of the routing of power in the Northwest and the Western Grid. Hydro, wind, solar and nuclear, (and some coal) were considered base loads. Only coal and oil were used as needed because of expense and air pollution.
The expansion of all forms of electrical power must be, and are being, considered. And Global Warming and smog considerations of coal oil and gas are in the mix, as it should be. Our government knows that global warming is fact (even Bush’s scientists admit it). Yet every single Republican in congress refused to admit global warming is real. (This should be no surprise and they’re backed by Big Oil).
As to fracking; this is still a hazardless operation. New York and Pennsylvania and stopped drilling. Vice President Dick Cheney held secret Power meetings in his office; and to this day, refuses to release who was there, or the minutes of those meetings. But it’s known that he gave special approval to gas companies to use poisonous liquids while fracking, in violations of EPA standards. And also gave approval that the gas companies did not have to reveal what those poisonous liquids are. The documentary called Gasland (www.gaslandthemovie.com) documents underground drinking water being poisoned and even shows people being able to light their drinking water coming out of their facets. Gas companies have settled a number of cases; but only under the condition that the amounts they played out are kept secret.
Spam filter does not like links at all, suffice to say Fracking is continuing in both New York and Pensylvania. See yesterday’s Examiner. See the Village Voice a couple days ago, inspectors can’t keep up in the Empire state. Pennsylvania slowed drilling due to drought conditions. (Fracking uses lots of water…)
Furthermore frackling is being used to revive dry water wells and increase water yield in low output water wells.
Fracking is not unsafe, its 95% politics misleading people into thinking it is. Cutting corners on the process is unsafe, libs should be happy oversight created over the last 50 years has worked. We don’t need to add anymore oversight.
Solar and wind do not provide anywhere near enough power for the demands of this country.
The next step is Natural Gas, its the only real choice.
The failure of Amonix is political fodder, just like its opening.
Concrete lining for fracking wells will often burst from the fracking shock, allowing the poisonous chemicals to leak into aquifers. When they replaced concrete with steal lining, the chemicals can leak up the sides of the pipe to the aquifers, where it couldn’t when concrete was used.
Fracking remains dangerous, as previous adjudicated court cases have proven. As to the ‘oversight,’ we ‘libs are excited about,’ you now understand why virtually all the Republican presidential candidates (backed by Big Oil) have stated they would do away with, “obstructionist” regulations, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Also to increase the mercury in our air, water and natural revivers and streams, from coal and oil).
Neither winds, nor hydro, nor solar, nor nuclear, nor oil, nor gas, nor coal, can “provide anywhere near enough power for the demands of this country.” It takes it all.
Bore hole wall failures are old news in todays fracking environment.
Be happy, those incidences have been resolved and fracking is being used to revive dry water wells today.
The protections generated over the last 50 years worked, no more are needed and no need to remove them since they worked.
Fracking is safe today thanks to the existing regulations, no more are needed.
Natural Gas is the next step and the future.
So Harry Says “Some people will be tempted to use today’s unfortunate news for political gain.” Then proceeds to make a political statement about it. Calling out “dirty energy” and making statements about clean energy being too important to Nevada’s future and so on. No matter the individual belief, Harry just used this to make political gain or at the least in defense of same.
Tonight I watched the bit on ch8 and, Steve, you basically repeat what you write in the paper and on this blog. I have to ask why no mention of Reid’s comment on TV? Could it be Reid was making his own political hay out of Amonix failure? You say you report with your own bias in mind on another post. I say OK but should you not at the least be complete as to all the people commenting on these things in all your coverage?
The short answer, Steve, is no. The longer answer is this: If you’d ever worked in TV, you’d know that you have a very short window of time to tell a story, a window that can close even as the broadcast is underway. For example, there was supposed to be time for a question for me at the end of tonight’s segment that you mention above; it got cut due to time constraints elsewhere in the broadcast. So there’s not enough time in every show to tell the whole of every story. (Believe me, it’s frustrating for me, too.)
But to address your point: Harry Reid made laudatory statements, political statements, when the plant opened, so it’s hypocritical for him to now call for Heller to ratchet down his rhetoric. What’s good for the goose is still good for the gander. But my point in tonight’s show (and, brace yourself, tomorrow’s column) is that the political rhetoric is shortsighted compared to the larger questions of do we do this and how do we do it and what role does government have in it. I hope that came through on TV, and in print tomorrow.
Perhaps that would make a good separate opinion piece, how the hounds devour the spoils no matter what their loyalties are or were.
Here is a thought, cap and trade is off the table due to the world economy. But solar and wind continue to grow, along with natural gas. My thoughts on gas are clear, its the lions share that will carry the USA for the next 100 years or so.
Governments roll? Its to NOT increase the costs of energy. Instead it should always be the priority to decrease this cost as it is the backbone of our economy. Investments, on the other hand, should be equal to all our competitors around the world. I know subsidies are the only way to level this playing field but cap and trade would only have slanted it in favor of all our competition, in a very big way.
Point is its happening, the playing field is leveling, the investments are being made by more and more private outfits and as this continues things will get better. Jerry made a point about Iowa, check it out via a search on your favorite engine. Iowa wind is a going concern and will be employing some 6000 to 7000 people. As they grow this could mean even more workers. But I would not want to be a turbine tech, yuk. Maybe the money compensates. Mike made a point that Solar will not employ many people at all. I wish Harry would stop this bunk about all those jobs because most of them are very temporary.
Look at OPEC with their pumping limits everyone ignores. That same thing was bound to happen with cap and trade. Very bad idea, increasing costs on purpose.
And as far as your columns, you have a very nasty rock in your shoe. But I am the best rock with whom you will ever correspond.
You column today also conveniently bypasses Harry’s attempt at political gain, you are certainly loyal to your brand.
Harry Reid didn’t level a false political charge at an opponent, did he? That’s what my column was about. I probably should respond to your insulting suggestion that I protect Harry Reid by providing you with a list of links in which I have criticized him — for legitimate offenses, BTW — but it would very likely not change your mind.
What Harry said in his release was he hoped no one would make attempts at political gain. Then he went on to make political gain. That is what I said and what I repeat here.
If that insults you, Steve, you need to think about getting some thick skin because its not aimed at you, its aimed at Harry. The only portion I call you out on is missing the slanted message Harry dumped on you and others. Don’t try to excuse it as that’s Harry, he makes gaffs. It was a press release. A proofread press release.
I say you should call him out for that. That’s why I say what I do and someone has to say it. If not you, then the rock in your shoe will.
Your insult — that I am “loyal to my brand,” i.e. that I will not write critically of Harry Reid — was most certainly directed at me. If you did not intend that, you should be more careful in your presentation. (But I think we both realize you did.) I found it insulting not because I have a thin skin, but because it’s simply untrue. I understand that you’re telling me how you think I should do my job; please understand that I’ll do it the way I think it should be done, and if that’s incongruent with how you think I should do it, that will be a matter upon which we’ll agree to disagree.
That was a war cry Steve! You say your self that you are liberal. If I remember correctly a Gun loving Liberal in fact.
Yes that part of my post is true as I re stated just today. Harry made his release and it was very hypocritical. You may not see it, but I do. Every time I read it.
You do not have to agree but you need to recognize I am being very civil even as I am very pointed in my opinions.
You like Harry, you have made many notes of it. Your criticisms of his gaffs have always been apologetic in nature. That’s natural, you like his policies even as his gaffs have made you cringe.
I simply point out you did not see his press release in any way wrong, but it very much is. What makes it worse, it was checked and approved before it was released. At the very least, as I also stated above, it was defending his position on green energy from a political perspective while in the same statement he said it should not be used to make political gain. You don’t see that? I do. I say Harry is a hypocrite in this statement and you are avoiding it with gusto. Loyal to your brand Steve. That’s not a bad thing. Its only the truth.
Tell you how to do your job? Nope, criticizing your words. Just like I criticize 2312 by Kim Stanley Robinson or applaud Ernest Cline for Ready Player One. How you gonna know if I cannot be decent about the feedback?
Among the many potential misconceptions is that a “liberal” would “like” Harry Reid, who is a moderate. (Also, please provide a link to the “many notes” I have made about liking Reid.)
I did not write about his remark because that was not what my column was about. Dean Heller’s campaign levied a charge at his political opponent that was not true. I wrote about that. Harry Reid did not level a charge against a political opponent that was not true. Therefore, I did not write about him. I cannot put it more plainly than that.
Now, you would prefer that I write about something else. I get that. People often try to change the subject when they don’t like what I’m writing about on a particular day. But I don’t give in to that. You can start a blog and talk about whatever you’d like. Here, for good or ill, I pick the topics. And today’s was precisely what I said.
Finally, I think you may overestimate the value of your feedback to me, but by all means, keep it coming. As you know, I’ve never been one to abridge anybody’s remarks on this blog or elsewhere.
And you get kudos for being open and public. Some would not be as available. Now I know you read all these comments, from everyone even if you don’t respond.
Harry is not a moderate, not at all. In fact he too is a gun loving liberal. You miss his target shooting at the range those months ago?
Well, your article was about truth as you say. Truth is the basis, the whole truth should be the story. Harry leveled a blanket charge against “Some people”. To me that means more than one person. Picking nits? I don’t believe I am doing that. In fact Harry comes under his own group description of “Some people” in my opinion.
For a link I simply place the words “Harry Reid” in your blog search field. Have fun, you wrote all of those and I have read almost all of them.
You are fond of saying I don’t have to read or respond. You have the same choice on my comments. For you to make the statement that I overvalue the feedback I make here… well your responses show me what value you place on my comments. In fact I believe you place a large value on all your commentators, even the hater-tots. At least I do not name call or intentionally insult.
BTW read Ready Player One. Its a very good Sci Fi story, I know you like the genre, your a Trekkie. I had to force myself to put that book down or I would have read it in one night.