• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Global Economy Bursting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
California doubles down on solar power, as critics question cost, job results

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...r-power-as-critics-question-cost-job-results/

The promise of clean and cheap solar energy is getting a second look in California, where utilities are required to get a third of their power from renewable power by 2020. But after millions in tax breaks and handouts, the industry's honeymoon is over with some counties and ratepayers, as the expected jobs, savings and revenue have not materialized.

"We're going to be carrying the burden of having these types of facilities for decades to come, and because of the incentives that have been provided by federal and state government, there's virtually nothing left for the county government or the local people to get benefit back after the small number of construction jobs are gone."

Unlike Riverside's 500 megawatt natural gas-fired facility, which pays $6 million a year in property taxes, a solar plant being built a few miles away will pay next to nothing, just $96,000.

The industry admits it only takes a handful of people to run a solar plant and many panels are produced overseas.

Solar also promised to be a cheap source of power, fueled by the sun. What the industry didn't say is the technology only converts a fraction of the sun's energy, and the intermittent nature of sunshine does not produce the power promised.

And Stanford economist Frank Wolak, a California energy expert, said solar could boost consumer energy bills up to 50 percent, a finding similar to the state Public Utilities Commission. Solar power from two recently approved plants range from $100 to $200 per megawatt hour, at least 8 times higher than the $16 consumers pay for natural gas.

Answering critics at a solar ribbon-cutting earlier this year, Gov. Jerry Brown laid down the gauntlet, affirming his commitment to solar energy and saying he would "crush" opponents of solar.
 
California Oil, Gas Producer to Pay Fine In First Greenhouse Gas Enforcement Action

http://www.bna.com/california-oil-gas-n17179871352/

Vintage Production California will obtain the necessary permits and pay the penalties to resolve the Clean Air Act violations. This is the first time EPA has resolved an enforcement action related to greenhouse gas permitting requirements, EPA spokesman Michael Ardito told BNA Dec. 10.

New facilities that emit 100,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide-equivalent and existing facilities that increase their emissions by 75,000 tons per year of carbon dioxide-equivalent are required to obtain prevention of significant deterioration and Clean Air Act Title V operating permits as part of EPA's tailoring rule. The tailoring rule limits greenhouse gas permitting requirements to only the largest stationary sources of emissions (128 DER A-5, 7/5/12).
 
I have to agree with Marion that these technologies seemingly require subsidy.

I am not so concerned about the government investing in "winners". It is the losers they invest in that hurts us all and at taxpayer expense. It's the moral hazard thing. You roll double or nothing and if you win you cash in, and if you lose, the taxpayer picks up the pieces... As for the "high rate of success" the rate is fairly low and the beneficiaries more often than not are the .

Plowing money into a losing technology is a disaster and sucks investment away from those technologies that would be truly competitive otherwise.
.

Every businessman and entrepreneur knows that success isn't guaranteed (and it should not be - It seems you expect this guarantee) and that when you start a company or venture it is an investment with risks; and even if things go well, normally there will be a negative balance sheet until the business get off the ground, if it gets off the ground. Every successful business person fails and succeeds throughout their life. It is really how it works, and you know it. Those who don't fail, don't succeed.

Even when the government's track success rate is much higher than should be expected in the private markets, investments in fledgling companies is just unacceptable for some. Somehow, to lose to any degree, no matter how small, is not entrepreneurial or consistent with good business practices.

This really isn't about our political parties, they are just a tool, its about what particular constituencies with great power wants and how they are using those tools.

It used to be patriotic to support our government, but since these certain constituencies are global, they no longer have a vested interest or patriotism for the US. They live in the Cayman Islands, at least, that is where they leave their wallet, so they are only playing one country against another for their profit. I'm not going to be their tool.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/25/marc-thiessen-distorts-success-rate-of-clean-en/186692

T
 
Sounds like California is making another bad bet. In my opinion solar is good for the future but the problem is it's too expensive and not bringing in the results to justify the price tag. Where was the research showing that if you extrapolate a project out from a sample size it will be "X" effective? These companies got huge and are now showing nothing for huge investments.
 
As Small Auto Businesses Flee California, Their Takeover Prospects Increase

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mergerm...california-their-takeover-prospects-increase/

Pollock, whose small family owned company manufactures auto parts for race cars, moved the company’s headquarters from Riverside, California to Eagle, Idaho last October, after years of butting heads with local regulators. He is now raising money through a private investor for a 200-acre industrial facility in Idaho that, upon its expected completion in 18 to 24 months, will provide business space to between 30 and 50 automotive manufacturers. Some of these manufacturers will also be involved with machining parts used in aviation and firearms building, said Pollock.

He projected that small to mid-sized companies that are fortunate enough to operate light, easy-to-transport equipment, and considering a sale in the near future will see their values go up considerably once they relocate, as they will no longer be burdened by punishing state taxes and environmental laws. Modern Driveline, for example, which makes transmissions parts for high-performance cars, relocated from central California to Caldwell, Idaho in 2006, after finding it could not afford California’s tax rates.

Small companies seem to be exiting California at the fastest clip, as they have a lighter load of assets than, say, foundries with heavy machinery. Pollock said that he recently heard from the Caldwell Economic Development Council that about 18 small California manufacturers are about to make the same move, and he anticipated that they will see their business valuations go up considerably.
 
Well, when all the businesses in California leaves I suppose they will have to take away the tax breaks for actors.

Lemme see you won't be able to deduct for dancing classes, exercise classes, taxi expenses, demo reels, your subscription to "Backstage"... Gee, you thought only Big Oil and Farmers got special treatment. It's called "Qualified Performing Artist" deductions IRS publication 529.
 
Not to mention an allowance for generation of additional rolls of finished film. Even since almost all films are digitally delivered today, and these additional copies of film were never actually printed. This is why, on the balance sheet, films never generate a paper profit even when generating hundreds of millions of actual profit. Actors found that out after never seeing a dime when negotiations at first included a part of the profits of the film. Now negotiations are based on the gross income, not net income.
 
I love how this forum goes from California taxes to how movies such as "Return of the Jedi" don't make a profit! At some point California is going to have get creative because these alternative energy projects are mostly busts. Then again if they instituted a consumption tax, Hollywood will fill the coffers.
 
A few years ago, the country became aware of a “bubble” building in higher education, as it had in housing.

Excessive demand – based largely on easy credit, government subsidies and the overselling of a college education – caused academia to expand unsustainably.

Then came the economic downturn. With underemployed graduates and dropouts increasingly unable to repay loans, state legislatures cutting appropriations, and innovative competition making inroads, the bubble appeared ready to burst, or at least deflate.

That could mean – so the theory goes – devastation for traditional academia: declining enrollments, with some colleges forced to close, perhaps; a shift in emphasis from academic to vocational courses; more online education; an end to faculty tenure, and other drastic changes.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspi...igher-ed-bubble-obama-will-keep-reflating-it/
 
That could mean – so the theory goes – devastation for traditional academia: declining enrollments, with some colleges forced to close, perhaps; a shift in emphasis from academic to vocational courses; more online education; an end to faculty tenure, and other drastic changes.

That's just plain wrong.
No one should have to reap what they sow.
Unfair, wrong, and un-Democratic. (Capital D is deliberate)
.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top