This whole "green economy" farce is just a feel good love fest of enviro friendly platitudes.

Economies have to be based on real cashflow and yes, profits. Profits that pay for real jobs (not pretend Bio-Tech future jobs in the SoWhat district), provided by real companies. Profits that come NOT from subsidies that vanish with the stroke of a politicians ala BETC, but from sound economic principles. Somewhere in the mix has to be happy customers paying with their own (not OPM) hard earned money.

I have not seen any sound economic principles in any of the "green economy" discussions. Maybe I'm not stupid enough to understand it all.

Harry, you're spoiling all the enviro's fun with a dose of reality. Hate posts to follow shortly.

Solexant and Solopower are just a few examples from this area demonstrating how just declaring your hope to do something Green can bring in over 85% of the dollars proposed in a business plan, all generated by tax subsidies. It is almost like the old-time hucksters selling tonic water that will cure about anything riding into town with their horse and buggies.

We need balance with how most businesses have to succeed; raise capital by selling ideas in a free market and not through a mayor, council, or governor where likely they have very little business experience-just decades of working in government.

Harry said, "Maybe I'm not stupid enough to understand it all."

Wrong Harry, you are not stoned enough.

You will need to do some weed and narrow your scope if you want to see the world as does the Gang Green.

Residents of Wilsonville were harshly criticized when Solopower decided to pass and move on. Many were deemed troublemakers for demanding a city wide vote before handing over millions in subsidies. Proponets of Solopower claimed these "out of touch citizens" stopped all progress and hope, and certainly cost the city 500 future jobs.

We will see.

I sure have no complaints about any of this:
===
Economies have to be based on real cashflow and yes, profits. Profits that pay for real jobs (not pretend Bio-Tech future jobs in the SoWhat district), provided by real companies. Profits that come NOT from subsidies that vanish with the stroke of a politicians ala BETC, but from sound economic principles. Somewhere in the mix has to be happy customers paying with their own (not OPM) hard earned money.
===

And wish more people understood things as well as Harry.

However, what is so often assumed by people who look at the crimes and idiocies being peddled in the name of "Green" (agrofuels, overpaying for solar, not accounting for fossil fuel inputs to so-called green outputs, to name but a few) is that we have an alternative to doing this, and doing it right, meaning with a hard-nosed green eyeshade approach with no rosy scenario hand waving.

The bottom line is that we've become a fabulously rich country because we took it from people who were sitting over stupendous reserves of so much concentrated sunlight that accumulated for millions and millions of years. Downside is that 1) we built an entire economic and physical infrastructure on the assumption that the energy wealth would always be there for us, and we'd essentially always be sellers into that market, not buyers, and 2) that there are no significant externalities to taking all that concentrated solar energy, which is stored in carbon, undoing the storage that took millions of years in about 20-30 decades.

We have a narrow window in which, if we are wise, we can invest a ton of our wealth in figuring out how to provide a decent life for everyone at a lot lower energy intensity. I fear that window is closing fast, and the Limboob-Beck-Bachmann-Palintard masses will have none of it, so were not going to do anything intelligent. Instead, We'll squander money on immoral biodiesel schemes and gargantuan highway nonsense alike, and keep pretending that tearing the tops off mountains and maintaining "cheap" electric power is how nature works.

There is a ton to criticize in the green movement, particularly in Portland, where so many couldn't calculate the net energy yield of a " green" energy project ... If there WAS any net energy produced ... If their lives depended on it. Although, to be fair, they share this trait with the Pave it, Drill it, Burn it now Palintard masses.

But the future doesn't care why we failed to act sensibly, nature will simply continue to do what she always has, which is wipe out species that don't figure out how not to despoil or deplete their own resource base and keep their breeding strategy in tune with the energy available to support them.

We're failing the test, just like every one hit wonder in pop music who thinks that you should acquire a drug habit, Lear jet, and massive beach house just as soon as you sign that first record deal.

Does anyone want to dispute the fact that 80% of the pols that vote for this green garbage are incapable of reading a profit/loss statement? Much less voting for any of this nonsense before a cost analysis was ever done? Or to see if these "green" hucksters actually had a written business plan and cost projections?

The irony is that Oregon used to have a green economy - namely forestry. It was killed by the same idiots who are spending your money on tax breaks to all of these clean-energy scam artists.

"This whole "green economy" farce is just a feel good love fest of enviro friendly platitudes."

I wouldn't say a farce as mucha s unrealistic expectations. Most of the solar panel jobs are the high paid creative jobs like an Intel has. On Solexant, they're either shopping for a better deal or got some issues convincing investors.

Either way, fascinating that Greshahm and the state have this much money - But nothing for schools.

Remember that the next time they ask for a bond.

Dave A., what makes you think that 80% of the voters in this state have the first clue of how to read a financial state or even know the different between capital expenses and operating expenses and why they might matter or know what goes into a COGS calculation?

That should have read "how to read a financial statement"

It's amazing what we're willing to sacrifice to perpetuate support of the internal combustion engine. Turning food into fuel while people starve, diverting electricity and driving up rates, making little attempt to use it more efficiently. All in the name of "green."

The other thing that has disgusted me for years is the way cities and States feel they must move quickly on one project or another because the window of opportunity for Federal matching funds may pass before they can commit themselves or grab the brass ring. It's the same siren song Tom Peterson used to sing when he'd say, "If you don't come see me today, I can't save you any money!"

Sorry, George, we are only buying so much foreign gas because we have chosen not to harvest our own. Oil is everywhere and amazingly, despite the high chances of Big Government/Big Environment-sponsored shut-downs, the US still leads the world in developing clean new technologies to go find it and get it. If we abolished all the nervous nelly restrictions on looking for and processing oil, and used these new technologies (and those yet to come) to go get it, gas would be $0.50 a gallon again.

John, when you get that 200 mpg carburetor that runs on water going too, let us know. You can whap to fantasies of boundless oil deposits until you get blisters, but the people who actually do this for a living (such as my roommate from college, who has stayed in the energy business his entire career) don't share your optimism.

I would love to see an audit of these companies tracing how much of the gvt. loans slosh back into the pockets of the "equity" investors, instead of funding inventory, property, plant and equipment. But no worries, if the Oregon loan fails, parking meter revenues make it up. So go by streetcar if you must but park first.

It's the same siren song Tom Peterson used to sing when he'd say, "If you don't come see me today, I can't save you any money!"

No, that was Scott Thomason (remember him?). Tom used to say "Free is a very good price" (among other bon mots).

I wonder if there's a collector's market for his "Hey Wake-up, Wake up to a Happy Day!" talking alarm clock.

I'd go 35$ easy.

Ouch. Not even close:

http://cgi.ebay.com/BX-VINTAGE-TOM-PETERSON-WAKE-UP-ALARM-CLOCK-MIB-/370513847373