Comments on: 1.4% http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/ Clean Tech News & Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. & More. Tue, 30 Dec 2014 04:12:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1 By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105041 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:25:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105041 I totally agree.

And I wonder the same..

I think only clear, strong direct action at this point…

]]> By: Edwrad Kerr http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105039 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 14:21:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105039 Zach:
Another great post. It points out a serious problem and explains why the U.S. will not be a global leader in the race to a renewable/sustainable energy future. Failure, as we all know, cannot be an option. It is, however, heartbreaking to see us slide into a second tier position when it comes to jobs, investment and new ideas in the “Green Energy” revolution. Though some are trying, our “leaders” are not leading but have become “obstructionists” serving the vested interests (coal and oil) that funded their election campaigns. They like to point at Solyndra as an example of why they continue to support “dirty energy”. What frauds they are. They will use the “debt crisis” to paralyze this nation and in the process hurt the entire world. I don’t know what it is going to take for them to get serious about representing the interests of all Americans and not just wealthy corporations.
Ed

]]> By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105017 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:02:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105017 lol. my initial sentence was even confusing to me after going back to it :D

]]> By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105014 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:53:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105014 hmm, i’ll try to clarify up there. thanks for the note :D

]]> By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105012 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:41:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105012 Okay, your phrasing threw me off. I read it as saying,

“percentage of DOE loan guarantees … that was for Solyndra. [1.4%]
Percentage of [DOE] loan guarantees that was for solar [projects]? 3.3%”

You meant,

“[Solyndra’s p]ercentage of loan guarantees [] for solar? 3.3%”

]]> By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105010 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:50:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105010 yep.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cleantechnica.com/2011/09/27/1-4/#comment-105009 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:35:00 +0000 http://cleantechnica.com/?p=30917#comment-105009 “Percentage of loan guarantees that was for solar? 3.3%”

Whoa. That’s the percentage of solar loan guarantees that was for Solyndra.

]]>