Archive

ShareThis Page
After 3 years, program that funded Solyndra solvent | TribLIVE.com
News

After 3 years, program that funded Solyndra solvent

Tribune-Review
| Thursday, November 13, 2014 8:24 p.m

The controversial government program that funded failed solar company Solyndra — and became a lightning rod in the 2012 presidential election — is officially in the black.

According to a report by the Department of Energy, interest payments to the government from projects funded by the Loan Programs Office were $810 million as of September — higher than the $780 million in losses from loans it sustained from startups including Fisker Automotive, Abound Solar and Solyndra, which went bankrupt after receiving large government loans intended to help them bring their advanced “green” technologies to market.

The report’s findings are more of a political victory than a financial one. It took the program three years to break even after Solyndra’s failure, while during that same time the Standard & Poor’s 500 index increased 67 percent.

Still, the federal loans program is a success for taxpayers, judging by the numbers in the new report, the DOE said. After Solyndra’s 2011 collapse, the program was sharply criticized by GOP lawmakers as a waste of public money and a fountain of cronyism. The outcries mounted as others in the program failed, and the DOE issued no new loans between late 2011 and this year.

“Taxpayers are not only benefitting from some of the world’s most innovative energy projects … but these projects are making good on their loan repayments,” said Peter Davidson, executive director of the Loan Programs Office. Davidson took over the loan program in May 2013.

Under the program, the DOE issues a loan guarantee for about 50 to 70 percent of a project’s cost. The borrower secures a loan from the Treasury or a private lender. Most of the program’s loans have come from the Treasury, Davidson said.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.