• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boehner Demands $2 Billion for Ohio Plant After Solyndra

winston53660

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
29,262
Reaction score
10,126
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
House Speaker John Boehner attacked the Obama administration for financing failed solar-panel maker Solyndra LLC, saying government shouldn’t pick winners and losers. That hasn’t stopped him from demanding that the U.S. make a winner of a nuclear-fuel plant in Ohio, his home state.
Boehner is backing a $2 billion Energy Department loan guarantee sought by USEC Inc. (USU) for its American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, Ohio, aimed at enriching uranium for commercial nuclear reactors.
“When it comes to emerging energy technologies, the Republicans don’t want to pick winners and losers -- unless it’s nuclear power,” Ellen Vancko, nuclear energy and climate-change project manager in the Washington office of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in an interview.
The collapse of Solyndra, which filed for bankruptcy protection last month, two years after receiving a $535 million federal loan guarantee, isn’t a reason to withhold financing from USEC, Boehner said in a Sept. 30 posting on his website. He cited a promise by Obama in his 2008 presidential campaign to aid the company.
“In the midst of the Solyndra controversy that has raised serious questions about the Obama administration’s oversight of taxpayer dollars, hundreds of Southern Ohio workers stand to lose their jobs if the Obama administration reneges on the president’s promise to support an energy project in the small town of Piketon, Ohio,” Boehner wrote. “I urge the administration to not betray the citizens of Ohio.”
USEC’s political action committee has given $10,000 to committees supporting Boehner since 2010, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission.

Boehner Demands $2 Billion for Ohio Plant After Solyndra - Bloomberg
 
Good, we should be building more nuke plants.
 
Good, we should be building more nuke plants.
At least nuclear power is a proven efficient producer of electricity, unlike all these "green" technologies that have yet to cost less than current methods even with their government funded offsets! Even the article makes this clear ...
Unlike Solyndra, which failed in the face of cheaper solar panels from China, USEC has almost $3 billion in future sales under contract to utilities, and the company holds about 25 percent of the $8 billion global market for uranium enrichment, Jacobson said.
“There’s a pretty dramatic difference between us and Solyndra,” he said
 
Last edited:
At least nuclear power is a proven efficient producer of electricity, unlike all these "green" technologies that have yet to cost less than current methods even with their government funded offsets! Even the article makes this clear ...

The article only seems to make clear the solar panels from china are cheaper than those made in the us...
 
The article only seems to make clear the solar panels from china are cheaper than those made in the us...
I know one thing for sure, clearly you did not understand the economic stability of nuclear power vs the experimental instability of emerging technology...
 
Nuclear technology is proven and we know it will work but the only way we can afford this is to take it from somewhere else.
 
While I do not know the specifics of the venture Boehner is supporting, I do know the article linked in the OP contained this comment ...........


The Energy Department gave Areva SA of Paris conditional approval in May 2010 for a $2 billion loan guarantee to build a centrifuge plant in Idaho Falls, Idaho, that will use existing technology. The plant may begin enriching uranium by 2015, Areva spokesman Jarret Adams said in a phone interview.

Solyndra’s failure should have no bearing on USEC’s pursuit of a federal guarantee, Jacobson, the company spokesman, said.

Unlike Solyndra, which failed in the face of cheaper solar panels from China, USEC has almost $3 billion in future sales under contract to utilities, and the company holds about 25 percent of the $8 billion global market for uranium enrichment, Jacobson said.

“There’s a pretty dramatic difference between us and Solyndra,” he said.
 
While I do not know the specifics of the venture Boehner is supporting, I do know the article linked in the OP contained this comment ...........

I don't understand........if they have this money under contract and banks and investment houses are sitting on all of this money, why is this money not raised privately?
 
I don't understand........if they have this money under contract and banks and investment houses are sitting on all of this money, why is this money not raised privately?
Maybe after all the bailouts under this administration its easier to cut out the middle man (aka banks)...
 
Maybe after all the bailouts under this administration its easier to cut out the middle man (aka banks)...

Sure it is. You only have to write a check as opposed to actually proving your sustainability.
 
I don't understand........if they have this money under contract and banks and investment houses are sitting on all of this money, why is this money not raised privately?

In this instance the potential liabilities from producing uranium may be more than any lender would agree to get involved in. If there was an accident in this experimental process the lawyers would go after the deep pockets of the lenders. On the other hand it may be crony capitalism......both parties are guilty as charged.
 
In this instance the potential liabilities from producing uranium may be more than any lender would agree to get involved in. If there was an accident in this experimental process the lawyers would go after the deep pockets of the lenders. On the other hand it may be crony capitalism......both parties are guilty as charged.

It's easy for someone in Boehners position then. Pass a bill not that gives them $2 billion we do not have but that shields creditors from the lawyers.
 
Sure it is. You only have to write a check as opposed to actually proving your sustainability.
I am glad you also understand that nuclear energy is sustainable whereas experimental technology is not economically sustainable but maybe in the future.
 
In this instance the potential liabilities from producing uranium may be more than any lender would agree to get involved in. If there was an accident in this experimental process the lawyers would go after the deep pockets of the lenders. On the other hand it may be crony capitalism......both parties are guilty as charged.
After almost 70 years of producing uranium, I believe we can safely remove the "experimental" label here, especially since Iran is doing it as well, don't you think ?
 
I am glad you also understand that nuclear energy is sustainable whereas experimental technology is not economically sustainable but maybe in the future.

I understand that Solyndra argued that they were sustainable. I'm good with nuclear energy. I'm saying it's moved beyond government funding.
 
It's easy for someone in Boehners position then. Pass a bill not that gives them $2 billion we do not have but that shields creditors from the lawyers.

Or make the nuclear power plant in a blue state that would favor it.
 
It's easy for someone in Boehners position then. Pass a bill not that gives them $2 billion we do not have but that shields creditors from the lawyers.

Tort reform is not something BO or any democrat would support. Heck, many establishment republicans would also push back as well.
 
After almost 70 years of producing uranium, I believe we can safely remove the "experimental" label here, especially since Iran is doing it as well, don't you think ?

I used that word after reading this part of th article....
The American Centrifuge Plant, owned by Bethesda, Maryland- based USEC, has been a demonstration project since August 2007,

I assumed, maybe incorrectly, the word "demonstration" implied there was something different about this project.
 
Tort reform is not something BO or any democrat would support. Heck, many establishment republicans would also push back as well.

I'd say that depends on what the tort reform consists of. If it transfers power away from the public and gives business more power in lawsuits, yes I would be against it. If it only punishes obvious frivolous law suits then I think most people would be for it.
 
If Boehner really wants to push nuclear energy, then I think a better method for him to do so would be to spend federal money to upgrade the nuclear power plants that we already have built. Such as those in Vermont, which I hear is causing quite a political stink in that state.

But then that would mean granting federal money to the state represented in the Senate by Bernie Sanders, who is an avowed democratic socialist.
 
I'd say that depends on what the tort reform consists of. If it transfers power away from the public and gives business more power in lawsuits, yes I would be against it. If it only punishes obvious frivolous law suits then I think most people would be for it.

What would be happening here is one and the same. Nobody is going to sue the government over something like this.
 
But but but, why would a GOPer want government subsidies for the private sector? Aint that socialism!?!?!

I say he should get his 2 billion.. after he agrees to raise the taxes on the uber rich and banks.
 
But but but, why would a GOPer want government subsidies for the private sector? Aint that socialism!?!?!

I say he should get his 2 billion.. after he agrees to raise the taxes on the uber rich and banks.

I don't disagree. If he wants the money he must raise it somehow.
 
Back
Top Bottom