Bah. political hucksterism at its worst. You should see through this negativism for what it is, Stewart. There is no "floundering". This facility opens on time, and the next one will too. What is the real objection here?
Nonsense, as to economics. The bottom line is favorable for California. Maybe there are too many rainy days in Georgia, or too many fowl Texans, to make a go there - but we already know that good solutions for one spot are not workable everywhere, especially when payola is involved. Who would have guessed the positive impact of solar in Germany, of all places? The dirty-coal-backed anti-solar lobby is suddenly wanting to protect what ? . desert birds? . give me a break. How many birds die flying into the toxic exhaust of a coal or natural gas plant? Answer - many more per megawatt than solar. Evolution at work. The local bird population will learn to avoid the towers. Anyway, this solar facility is in one of the driest deserts in the USA. There is little water in the desert. Birds need water. Get it? The problem is de minimis. Hundreds of birds die crashing into tall building every day, but we do not stop building tall buildings because of lost bird habitat. These criticisms stink like a Faux News hatchet job. Never mind the facts, money speaks the truth to Rupert in a way that only money can. Jones From: ChemE Stewart $2.2B Boondoggle http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/obama-backed-israeli-solar- project-flounders-california http://www.thewire.com/national/2014/02/nevadas-massive-solar-plant-death-ra y-birds/358244/ Even Jed's robots can't save it, if they existed :) I agree on the nuclear.
