• Comment (6)

Solyndra Bankruptcy Raises Questions About Federal Loan Guarantees

September 14, 2011 RSS Feed Print

High risk was essentially the nature of the ill-fated Solyndra investment from its conception, but it's really only now—after what could potentially amount to a scandal for either the bankrupt solar company, the Obama administration, or both—that the risks taken by the Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program are coming to the forefront.

Solyndra, a solar manufacturing company based in Fremont, Calif. that specializes in producing a new type of cylindrical solar photovoltaic panels, was the Obama administration's clean-energy poster child back in September 2009 when it finalized a loan guarantee deal with the Energy Department. Early this month, however, after receiving $527 million in federal funds over two years, the company filed for bankruptcy.

[Read about how Obama abandoned clean energy in his recent jobs speech.]

With the half billion in taxpayer dollars loaned to Solyndra mostly likely lost for good, Americans now have to ask themselves whether the loan guarantee program is worth the gamble, and whether they should trust the administration with managing the risks involved.

Democrats have been quick to point out that it was the Republican Bush administration that set the loan guarantee program in motion and first began to process Solyndra's application; it was the Obama administration, however, that ultimately moved forward on Solyndra's loan guarantee with money set aside by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the 2009 stimulus. According to the Energy Department, more than two years of due diligence were completed before the loan guarantees were first offered conditionally in March 2009, and then finally closed later that year. At the time, Solyndra's new rolled-tube technology seemed like it had potential. Though it was more expensive to deploy than other more traditional solar panels already in the market, it didn't have to account for the price of polysilicon—which was fairly high at the time—and it was also much cheaper and easier for consumers to install.

However, after the deal was signed, the global solar market changed unexpectedly, significantly changing Solyndra's business prospects. A large influx of Chinese state loans to domestic silicon producers and a decline in demand in the European market drove down the price of polysilicon and it continues to fall—as much as 42 percent just since the beginning of 2011, according to the DOE. Though this benefited consumers, Solyndra lost its competitive advantage with other solar manufacturers around the world, something that even a new facility built with the money backed by the loan guarantees couldn't overcome.

According to the head of the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office, Jonathan Silver, who testified before members of Congress Wednesday, these changes came as a surprise. After all, the department wasn't the only one to bet on Solyndra. Private investors also dumped hundreds of millions of dollars into Solyndra's new manufacturing facility, and the company had been hyped by other credible sources, like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Technology Review and the Wall Street Journal. "Silicon just went way, way down and it became less of a compelling technology because of the price of silicon just changing completely," said Kate Gordon, vice president for energy policy at the Democratic-leaning Center for American Progress. "That's the piece that nobody could have really predicted, neither the DOE or all the private investors who put their money in this project."

Also, compared with other DOE loan guarantee projects, the very nature of Solyndra's project might have made it a greater risk for taxpayers. Unlike the majority of the solar projects in the department's portfolio, which are built for solar power generation, Solyndra was building a facility to manufacture solar panels, a commodity susceptible to global competition and market swings. According to Damien LaVera, spokesman for the Energy Department, the solar generation projects are "good for the taxpayer because they tend to carry less risk" than the manufacturing projects, due to power purchasing agreements that generally guarantee revenue after a project is completed. And indeed, such solar projects are thriving due to the cheaper price of photovoltaics worldwide. In contrast to the bust of Solyndra, the U.S. solar industry as a whole is on track to double its solar capacity in 2011 from 2010 to almost 2,000 megawatts, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association.

Tags:
Barack Obama,
energy,
Obama administration,
Department of Energy,
solar energy

Reader Comments Read all comments (6)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

How did products in competition with Solyndra become so cheap? Commodifying silicon represents some actions on the part of people in a position to do so. That means there is a history buried in events that no one is reporting. Who shot Solyndra and why?

What market manipulation changed the cost landscape? Are markets for competing solar panels free or are they stuctured to result in a faked-up control to deliberately destroy competition? Was Solyndra dump-chumped into bankruptcy?

When government guaranteed loans are negotiated, who accepts responsibility for identifying collateral seizable if unfair competition is discovered? Who accepts responsibility for investigating market corruption?

We know every four to eight years a transfer of power in Washington is predictable. What continuity exists built into the system that is especially vigilent during the high risk period?

In other words, what has Congress done to ensure government attempts to counteract severe commecial morbidity are safeguarded regardless of the Party in power? Who looks out for us?

No one can doubt that President Bush and his administration, along with his Party, embraced an active, massive financial support of banks to counteract the serious economic event that started during his Presidency. TARP is still remembered, even though the reportage on the money flow - start to finish - is thin.

The Constitution gives the Legislative Branch the task of ensuring the health of national commerce. The Executive Branch cannot pass laws, regardless of how dangerously ill the national economy becomes. It was the failure of the Articles of Confederation to resolve disputes on commerce issues that drove the writing of the Constitution.

The Legislative Branch has the responsibility to ensure national commercial health and financial solvency of federal activities. Unfortunately how that health and solvency is to be protected, ensured and sustained is not a shared belief.

The citizens can't intervene effectively when economic catastrophe strikes. The speed of bankruptcy and recession, once triggered, gains momentum fast but still within a system that is horrified by bad news going public. Sounding the alarm actually can reduce the quantity and quality of helpful options to businesses that see the problems but can't devise a warning that works for them and us. They must choose "them".

The effective ability of citizens - the "governed" - to confer consent or dissent on government actions is officisally limited to the vote - a poor tool that occurs too seldom to be useful. What value emails, voice mails, letters, calls, community discussions or any other citizen behaviors we might wish to use to guide Congress may have is miniscule.

We are at a crossroads and in the crosshairs. No one with a brain can believe we even have the talent in Congress to fulfill the Constitutional tasks ahead. Ideology cannot replace intelligence.

Wealth plays at government. The rest of us buy the tickets.

C M Baker of OH 1:30PM June 01, 2012

What this article fails to mention is that loan guarantees do not involve the transfer of taxpayer money until a private investor is actually successful at collecting from the government. This was a loan guarantee, not a loan. NO MONEY HAS EVER GONE TO SOLYNDRA -- or to any private investors. Until the bankruptcy court actually rules on a claim to collect against the government, all of this discussion is just noise. A biased bunch of noise by the media.

Sick_of_the_whining of CA 6:29PM March 31, 2012

I wonder how many upper management, and CEO are walking away millionaires

pisdoff of WA 11:53AM September 15, 2011

Photo Galleries

History of U.S. Bombings, Failed Attempts

A look at some of the worst bombings in the U.S. and infamous failed attempts.

advertisement

Latest Videos