Slashdot Mirror
Feds Unwrap $15M For Corporate Energy Reduction
As hard as it is to imagine, coondoggie writes with news that the federal government just unveiled a new energy bill that will offer $15 million in assistance to retailers who help to build and adopt energy-efficient technologies. "The US Department of Energy (DOE) announced the first phase of $15 million awards to retailers Best Buy, JCPenney, John Deere, Macy's, SuperValu, Target, Toyota, and Whole Foods Market. Commercial Real Estate Firms such as CB Richard Ellis, Forest City Enterprises as well as the financials groups also saw some of the money. Along with the money the companies will have access to the DOE's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to design, build, tune and operate at least one new prototype building and to retrofit an existing building project."
Imagine if they received $699 billion more.
...should harness the smug of their customers.
Well we reserve that kind of money for folks who fail upwards..
"Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
WHY do we need incentives to do the "right" thing?
Why are we beholden to evil, unless someone pays us to not be?
{sarcasm} I guess I'm just too stupid or naive to understand {/sarcasm}
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Cos I thought they only talked in billions and trillions. Y'know 700 billion here, a trillion there.
Deleted
Meanwhile, Congress is going to keep trying to give $700B to the financial sector.
That coondoggie writes?
Or that Feds have some more industrial welfare?
Fifteen million dollars is trivial.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
As hard as it is to imagine, coondoggie writes with news that the federal government just unveiled a new energy bill that will offer $15 million in assistance to retailers who help to build and adopt energy-efficient technologies.
That is hard to imagine. coondoggie writes with news?!? Who writes anything anymore? Why couldn't he type it?
The simple solution is to let the sun in. 1) Install more sky lights. 2) install sensors to dim lights as needed
Next solar HOT water systems for heating/cooling of their buildings.
This is 30 year old technology with a 6-8 year payback.
Where is my check?
Start billing employees for leaving their computers on overnight when there is no business reason. It's one thing to leave it in sleep mode, but where I've worked, a lot of workstations are left turned on overnight, eating up a decent bit of electricity.
After the first offense, I would start docking one or two dollars per offense from the next pay check. Hit them in their pocket, and employees will stop leaving their computers on when they don't need to be on.
No no of course not!
Here we are, with the country in deep financial crisis, with $700 billion on the line, and the DOE is looking to give away money to try to build the market for energy efficiency????
I say we forget about this "free money" grant and find a way to prop up Wall Street firms with $700,015,000,000.
After all, $15 million is a decent yacht for someone who'd otherwise go without.
And tell me, would you rather have new light bulbs or a $15 million yacht?
Case closed.
and the criminals-in-congress are preparing their exit to Paraguay.
Remember: Vote For Flight Safety - Vote AGAINST John "I was a P.O.W." McCain.
This is offtopic but screw it, it needs saying. I'm sick of anonymous asshate like the parent poster defending the sociopaths who caused the necessity to save the country.
That money didn't just go away. It went to extremely rich people.
You're not going to solve the problem by rewarding the people who caused the problem in the first place. We need some serious banking regulation in this country, starting with a cap on interest rates at some multiple of the prime. Outlawing golden parachutes.
The government isn't going to bail me out, but you want it to bail out the people who have the means to bail themselves out? Smartassed comments are needed a whole lot more than bailing out uber-rich sociopaths. Ever hear of Will Rogers?
"No bonus" boxes checked.
Free Martian Whores!
Anonymous Coward to the rescue! After I finish flaming someone with my helpful comments!
I am so disgusted right now. I'm here in Georgia, with he gas cutoff, and I'm just aghast.
I have nothing else to say other than this is the prelude to ten (?) years from now for the whole country.
We're dead in the water here.
Reducing energy usage is a waste of time and money for almost anyone. It represents a reduction in the value and quality of human life for the benefit of "The Earth".
These companies could be producing good and services for their customers or profits for their shareholders. That's what they were created to do -- not wasting their employees' time to try to save energy. Why should they want to spend $100 in employee time to save $50 worth of energy? To go to environmentalist heaven?
Let's see, I think those companies lost that much in their shareholder value in probably 1.2 seconds of trading today. Geez, maybe if the Feds invested 700 billion into energy production and effeciency, it would do more for the markets than just pouring it into banks.
This is my sig.
Good job, Congress! Thanks to your failure to save the economy, energy use will decline.
Bankrupt companies don't have to worry about turning on their lights ever again.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
We need some serious banking regulation in this country
How would that help and what would be the lessons learned? You need a government that does not oppose the constant calls for regulation that came from other (more sensible?) nations. You need a government that listens to common sense and reason and - maybe, at the end of the day - the people, not to megacorps, big bucks, the particular interests of capital stakeholders, fear mongers and war mongers in pursuit of even more money, and more things I'm too tired to list.
Actually, typing this I guess what you really need is less money, which is probably what you meant in the first place. A lot less, so much less actually that it really really hurts. Offtopic, though, so mod me down.
--
Yes I have a sig, but I'm too shy to show it.
I'd like to congratulate you, americans, for putting your country away from a path that would lead to the 3rd world and demonstrating that there is still some democracy in there.
Well done!!!
Rethinking email
This is offtopic but screw it, it needs saying. I'm sick of anonymous asshate like the parent poster defending the sociopaths who caused the necessity to save the country.
That money didn't just go away. It went to extremely rich people.
You're not going to solve the problem by rewarding the people who caused the problem in the first place. We need some serious banking regulation in this country, starting with a cap on interest rates at some multiple of the prime. Outlawing golden parachutes.
The government isn't going to bail me out, but you want it to bail out the people who have the means to bail themselves out? Smartassed comments are needed a whole lot more than bailing out uber-rich sociopaths. Ever hear of Will Rogers?
"No bonus" boxes checked.
You could have just screeched 'Off with their heads!' instead of typing all that.
"The government isn't going to bail me out"
Stimulus check. Twice!
The bailout does not include golden parachutes
WHY do we need incentives to do the "right" thing?
Why are we beholden to evil, unless someone pays us to not be?
{sarcasm} I guess I'm just too stupid or naive to understand {/sarcasm}
By "we" you're obviously including all the American people. Otherwise why would there be "energy credits" come tax time and "rebates" from energy companies to their customers. We ALL are willing to do what's right without incentives. Right?
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
We need some serious banking regulation in this country, starting with a cap on interest rates at some multiple of the prime.
Capping interests rates would not have prevented this.
The problem isn't high interests rates..
The problem is that the mortgages went from really low to unaffordable.
Why? Because people overextended themselves on the teaser rates and assumed rising house prices would allow them to refinance before the interest rate reset.
Sounds to me like some are making the argument for thin clients and centralized servers. Throw in virtualization and you have your energy savings right there.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
Your PC is 200-300 watts (another 150-250 if your monitor is a CRT), but your laser printer is 2,000 watts.
If my laserprinter was 2kW, I wouldn't have to heat my home.
I think your number is a bit high. Wikianswers says a laser printer uses 400 to 750 watts. (and, of course, we know that any website with the name "Wiki" in it has to be accurate, right?)
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
The problem I see it isn't that the $700 bill is going to bail out corporate execs, the problem is if they DON'T give that money to companies, shareholders are going to be wiped out.
And I'm not talking about Wall Street speculators, I'm talking about virtually every salaried adult in the US with a 401K or other similar retirement plan.
For instance, my dad is 59, his 401K has lost like 25% value recently. That's fucking ridiculous. 25% of the money he's saved for retirement over his ENTIRE CAREER. GONE because some fucks on Capital Hill are teasing Wall Street and then pulling it all away.
That money didn't just go away. It went to extremely rich people.
Not exactly. The money was lent to unqualified borrowers that were unable to pay their mortgages at the behest of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Democrats.
Here are some quotes from the Fannie/Freddie Fraud Investigation in 2004
BAKER (R-LA): It is indeed a very troubling report, but it is a report of extraordinary importance not only to those who wish to own a home, but as to the taxpayers of this country who would pay the cost of the clean up of an enterprise failure.
WATERS (D-CA): Through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke, Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines.
MEEKS (D-NY): As well as the fact that I'm just pissed off at OFHEO, because if it wasn't for you, I don't think that we'd be here in the first place, and now the problem that we have and that we're faced with is: maybe some individuals who wanted to do away with GSEs in the first place, you've given them an excuse to try to have this forum so that we can talk about it and maybe change the, uh, the direction and the mission of what the GSEs had, which they've done a tremendous job. There's been nothing that was indicated that's wrong, you know, with Fannie Mae! Freddie Mac has come up on its own. And the question that then presents is the competence that -- that -- that -- that your agency uh, uh, with reference to, uh, uh, deciding and regulating these GSEs. Uh, and so, uh, I wish I could sit here and say that I'm not upset with you, but I am very upset because, you know, what you do is give -- you know, maybe giving any reason to, as Mr. Gonzales said, to give someone a heart surgery when they really don't need it.
ROYCE (R-CA): In addition to our important oversight role in this committee, I hope that we will move swiftly to create a new regulatory structure for Fannie Mae, for Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks.
CLAY (D-MO): This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.
FALCON (OFHEO Regular to MEEKS (D-NY)): Sir, Congressman, OFHEO did not improperly apply accounting rules. Freddie Mac did. OFHEO did not fail to manage earnings properly. Freddie Mac did. So this isn't about the agency engaging in improper conduct. It's about Freddie Mac.
SHAYS (R-CT): Fannie Mae has manipulated, in my judgment, OFHEO for years -- and for OFHEO to finally come out with a report as strong as it is, tells me that's got to be the minimum, not the maximum.
FRANK (D-MA): ...etcetera. Uh, I -- This -- You -- you -- you seem to me saying, "Well, these are areas which could raise safety and soundness problems." I don't see anything in your report that raises safety and soundness problems.
WATERS (D-CA): Under the outstanding leadership of Mr. Frank Raines, everything in the 1992 has worked just fine. In fact, the GSEs have exceeded their housing goals. What we need to do today is to focus on the regulator, and this must be done in a manner so as not to impede their affordable housing mission, a mission that has seen innovation flourish from desktop underwriting to 100% loans.
MANZULLO (R-IL): Mr. Raines, 1.1 million bonus and a $526,000 salary. Jamie Gorelick, $779,000 bonus on a salary of 567,000. This is -- what you state on page 11 is nothing less than -- than staggering. The 1998 earnings per share number turned out to be $3.23 and 9.mills, a result that Fannie Mae met the EPS maximum payout goal right down to the penny. Fannie Mae understood the rules and simply chose not to follow them. If Fannie Mae had followed the practices, there wouldn't have been a bonus that year.
RAINES: Because
You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
"Remember if it's not broke don't fix it. $19K a year may be a lot to you or me, but that's chick feed at the corporate level. "
Fortune 500 maybe. But the majority are small companies and $19K would be sorely missed.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
Umm, you do know with sub prime mortgages, it's about the rich people/companies GIVING out their money to keep a lean on an asset (ex: a home) and with the housing market vastly undervalued, the value of the asset is less than the cash given to the previous owner.
I'm not pro bail-out, this the matter is way more complicated than simply "giving money to rich people".
With two exceptions, everyone who voted *for* the bill was not in a hotly contested reelection race. Everyone who voted *against* it was.
This is not democracy in action, it's just people looking out for their own interests.
It saddens me to think that this bill didn't pass or fail on its merits, but was the result of short-term thinking by people who want to benefit themselves and friends, but can't do it at this exact point in time.
If the bill had come up a month from now, it would have passed.
A bunch of that money could be recycled back into reelection campaigns and not be noticed. $100 million would buy a lot of congresscritters, and it's less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the total.
Anonymous Coward to the rescue! After I finish flaming someone with my helpful comments!
I'd rather be an Anonymous Coward than an attention whore any day.
All the shuttered businesses and foreclosed homes which are resulting from the financial mess should reduce energy consumption considerably. Remember, if you're the last one out, DO turn off the lights.
Good thing it's an election year. Hopefully voters will change so that there will be a change.
Can I bum a sig?
You mean sociopaths like Barney Frank? And all the other mostly-DEMOCRAT pols who prevented regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Because this meltdown wasn't caused by corporate greed, but by government incompetence:
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
This is relatively simple - pass the bailout and get the nervous nellies back on a solid ground. Take over assets where necessary, and resell them later.
Now to the executives with golden parachutes. We know exactly what these instruments are which have cased the meltdown and we know the industry which has gotten the multi-billion dollar incomes off of the mess. Add an income tax which is 95% of all income over 250k, and make it retroactive for the last 3 years. The money is coming from the treasury, so to get it back via the tax code puts the money back in the system.
I'm personally no proponent of tax code social engineering, but this looks a lot more like payback than taxes.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Help me out here. I took a quick look around the net for a bit more information on this article and came up dry. A quick search on google news and the DOE's site didn't turn up any reference to this article's content. However, there is a recent announcement regarding $17.9M for PV tech. companies. Am I missing something, or is Network World just a step ahead of everybody else?
Umm, you do know with sub prime mortgages, it's about the rich people/companies GIVING out their money to keep a lean on an asset (ex: a home) and with the housing market vastly undervalued, the value of the asset is less than the cash given to the previous owner.
You do know that the sub-prime tag given to this is to blame the poor people for the faults of the rich, right? The rich bankers chose to lend money to people they thought couldn't afford an increase in interest rates because they assumed the housing prices would continue going up. The poor would sell or be forclosed on for a gain. The percentage of the problem that are the sub-prime mortgages is smaller than the non-sub-prime. But the sub-prime ones were first, and it's a great tag to stick on the problem to shift blame.
The rich white bankers are the cause of this, and it's the poor blacks that are blamed (just read the racist stuff about equal opportunity loans being thrown about if you think there aren't people blaming minorities).
Learn to love Alaska
"Making a grocery store more energy conscious is a great idea."
Yes it is.
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
Government encouraged then coerced the bankers into making loans to people that couldn't afford it, it's hardly their fault. Minorities weren't at fault, government intervention that forced banks to lend to minorities that had no hope of repaying the note is at fault.
You can't blame everything on rich white people, racist.
Want to save energy? Put energy-inefficient box stores like Bush Buy, er, Best Buy, out of existence.
If you cap rates, banks won't want to make large loans or make them as often.
The people who defaulted on their mortgages got foreclosed on, and the properties went to the rich bankers who loaned the money out.
My own mortgage company seems to be trying its damndest to bankrupt me so it can take my house away. I just took in two boarders, I sure hope they pey their rent.
These companies have gotten into trouble because they're like the RIAA: their business models haven't kept up with the times. What their model is, loan Joe Schmuck 100k at 5% (adjustable), jack it up to 15% the next year so he can't pay, take the house which is now worth $150k and pocket the extra 50K plus whatever Joe Schmuck paid.
It caused the housing market to crash and ruined his business model, and the entire economy with it.
Joe Schmuck loses, the taxpayer loses, the multimillion dollar per year thieves who ran this legal scam get richer on it while the economy falls into shambles and working people lose their jobs and houses.
BTW, the housing market is far from undervalued. It is way overvalued, which is why it crashed in the first place.
Free Martian Whores!
The rich white bankers are the cause of this, and it's the poor blacks that are blamed
Race has nothing to do with it. There are rich black bankers and rich Asian bankers and rich Jewish bankers and rich Arab bankers, and there are a lot more poor white people getting hurt by this than the poor people of all the other races.
Free Martian Whores!
Race has nothing to do with it.
Sure it does. "Sub-Prime" is the name of the problem, and that is a term created to pin it on the poor. And if you don't think that it's being blamed on the minorities, then read more comments about how Clinton is evil and it's his Affirmative Action initiatives that caused all this by giving loans to minorities. I'm not saying anything about whether that's true or not, I'm saying that people are blaming it on minorities. And the majority of "bankers" in the US are white males. If race has nothing to do with it, it's interesting that the lines are being drawn based on race and there are multiple people pinning it on race, and those that aren't explicitly pinning it or race, are using terms that many associate with race.
Learn to love Alaska
Sure it does. "Sub-Prime" is the name of the problem, and that is a term created to pin it on the poor.
There are more poor white Americans than any other race in the country. So anyone blaming it on "minorities" is abysmally ignorant and doesn't need to be listened to.
It's true that most bankers are white, but then again, most AMERICANS are white. Racism is a tool of the rich to keep the normal people (i.e., working whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians) at each others' throats so we don't come together and wage class warfare against the bastards who exploit us.
Face it, nobody would mind Bill Cosby or Oprah Winfrey living next door (not that they would ever move in next door to the likes of us), but most people wouldn't want my redneck friends living next door to them any more than they'd want a Crip or a Blood next door.
It is about class, not race.
Free Martian Whores!