Taibbi also reveals that Goldman Sachs “ramped up its push for cap-and-trade" back in 2008 "when their firm spent $3.5 million to lobby for climate issues, pointing out that one of the lobbyists at that time was Mark Patterson, who now serves as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s chief of staff." Goldmanites also made early “green investments," including wind power, renewable diesel, and partnered with BP Solar” –– BP another major contributor to the Obama campaign, but right now they are in "deep water" with the White House. Goldman Sachs "has invested over $2 billion in alternative energy projects in the US, Europe and Asia" –– a "green portfolio" along with Kleiner Perkins, that should be thoroughly investigated, but we'll take a brief glance.
GOLDMAN SACHS CASHING IN ON THE OBAMA GREEN STIMULUS TOO
As the Climate Scam turns, one of the early investments reported by Taibbi is Horizon Wind Energy –– still on the Goldman Sachs Environmental Markets portfolio, but owned by Portuguese EDP Renewables –– won a $229.8 million grant from the Obama Green Stimulus package, as reported by GreenTechnology.Daily.com in December 2009, pointing out that it was one of the "top grant recipients." The article also notes, "European companies have scooped up the majority of U.S. stimulus money set aside for wind power projects."
Nordic Windpower, funded by Goldman Sachs and Khosla Ventures (and others) –– Vinod Khosla, an affiliated partner of Kleiner Perkins –– in July 2009 announced that it had "received a conditional commitment for a $16 million loan guarantee offer from the US Department of Energy (DOE), supported through the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act."
U.S. Geothermal Inc. –– an Idaho-based geothermal energy developer with three main projects in the works (San Emidio in Nevada, Raft River in Idaho, and Neal Hot Springs in Oregon) with plans for more –– are a Goldman Sachs investment and they are a 5.98% shareholder in the company.
Back in October 2009, the San Emidio Project, a 3.6 megawatts power plant in Nevada was awarded $3.77 million in federal stimulus money. Also, in February 2010 it was declared that "work has begun" on USG's Raft River Project –– a $10 million Enhanced Geothermal System grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. Lastly, June 2010, USG announced that it “was offered a conditional commitment for a $102.2-million loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy," slated to build a 22-megawatt power plant in the eastern Oregon desert –– the Neal Hot Springs Project. The Associated Press reported that "once it [the Neal Hot Springs Project] is done (around 2012), the company is counting on a separate, $34 million federal tax rebate" –– money that's part of the 2009 federal stimulus act meant to help spur investment in renewable energy, which will help pay down the federal loan as well as pay off some private investors."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Silas Kain
You've laid out a very compelling article here. The problem I have is that the other extreme has a reciprocal web of cash and financial interests here as well. I'm not convinced at the green movement's "honesty" but at the same rate what have we learned from the opposition? Hopefully this piece can open up some debate which leads to reasonable conclusions.
2 - Ruvy
Real nice job, Christine.
3 - El Bicho
It's odd that you keep referring to "Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth" yet make no mention that you contributed to it as Stubborn Facts Radio indicates. Any reason?
4 - jeannie danna
Christine,
I find your new style of writing hard to believe...
I recognized you in the summery.
Also, you could take a hundred of these dropped names, and replace them with Republicans. the same old story...
: )It's not what you know, it's who.
5 - jeannie danna
So Christine, You have proven that everybody in your article knows one-another. nice job
BTW, the Leaf will be available to the general public in December.
6 - jeannie danna
Christine,
You could also investigate these characters.
: 0 catch ya later
7 - Christine
Good morning all.
EL, I disclosed that in my interview with one of the authors a while ago here on BC.
Interview With Lee Troxler, Co-Author of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth. And linked to it in part one. So, since I had a ton of data in my head from helping with Chapter 10 of their book, I decided to write a story about it. Thanks for the nice comments Silas, Ruvy and Jeannie (lol).
8 - greenhunt
These are relationships you've pointed out. Is there another portion of the article I missed? I kept thinking you were preparing us for a point. but then the punchline never came. So these people know eachother and somehow this is a massive left-wing conspiracy? Involving Goldman Sachs? Good Lord. Please try and do a better job moving forward.
9 - handyguy
As in the first part of this endless and pointless article, the message is clear [if numbingly repetitive]:
Capitalism is wonderful when people whose politics Christine [and Dave Nalle and Troxler and Brown] agree with are doing it, and ominous and scary when people she disagrees with are doing it.
Throw in a few [completely unsubstantiated] labels of "radical" and "crooked," and you have a thoroughly substance-free conspiracy theory.
What is smelly or illegal about any of the moneymaking activities you describe?
Basing your "moral compass" entirely on how far left or right you perceive an investor to be is disgraceful. And certainly not journalism.
10 - Christine
Handy, I guess when Republicans partake in crony capitalism it is evil and worth reporting, but NOT when Democrats do it.
11 - handyguy
Christine, you just reversed my argument, without answering it all, and with nothing to back you up.
I didn't say anything about Republican crony capitalism. But by the [quite low] standards of your article, why wouldn't it be news? Does it not bother you a tiny bit?
Report about anything you want, of course. But when you start attaching "radical" and "crooked" to people's names and reputations, you had better be able to prove it. Otherwise, you are writing propaganda, not journalism.
Same for the talk-radio hacks who wrote the ridiculous book you keep promoting.
12 - Christine
Handy, crooked means dishonest and many of them on the right and left are, especially in this case. Crony Capitalism IS dishonest! "Radical" on the other hand is not always bad, and it is up for interpretation whether or not you think "global governance" and "redistribution of wealth" are "radical" or not. I happen to think so.
13 - handyguy
If you say "crooked," prove it, don't just assert it.
You use "radical" to add more ominous notes to a non-ominous story. It is highly questionable whether the individuals and groups you mention are making a coordinated effort toward "global governance." That's just Nalle-speak. You can do better. I hope.
And the only "redistribution of wealth" outlined in your article is into the bank accounts of companies and their investors. Not into the hands of the poor[a kind of distribution I would support and you wouldn't, but in any case, it isn't what you're describing.]
If the result of all this activity is more jobs and a boost to the economy, this is a good thing. You could at least acknowledge that possibility.
Just finding some connections between people you don't like and large amounts of money forms a very partial story. You haven't connected the dots. There's no there there. If you believe there is, it's incumbent upon you to prove it.
14 - John Wilson
Wow! Today I learned that a lot of politicians from Chicago know each other. Wow!
15 - Christine
Handy, you are overlooking the obvious, and as mentioned in part one, there are investigations underway that are being stonewalled. I spoke directly to someone involved. So, will we ever know the truth? Also, I haven't gotten to the radical agenda yet, as stated at the end part two, it will be in part three. May be a while though, in the middle of some personal issues.
16 - jeannie danna
christine,lol
there are investigations underway that are being stonewalled. ???
You mean the way the Republicans/Conservatives are stonewalling any progress this country might make towards a better future?
You mean, like what you are attempting to do by writing this article?
17 - Christine
Jeanne, like I have any power to stonewall anything. Now, that's funny!
18 - jeannie danna
I didn't mean you alone...I meant the collective bunch of you...lol
19 - Christine
lol, Jeanie, I can barely "stonewall" my teenager's bad behavior when it rears it's ugly head. Thank goodness it is not too often because I caught it early. But even though I am a strong-willed type, teenagers these days are tough.
20 - jeannie danna
Well, with the banks holding out their hands for government welfare and the big corporations receiving government welfare and tax cuts on top of that, and then of course, the top 1% gets tax cuts and the republicans want tax cuts and the tea party wants tax cuts and everyone wants tax cuts from borrowed money.
:[ No stonewalling here...NLOL Christine, it's not funny.
21 - John Wilson
Christine,
As a writer you are doing a disservice to your readers by, essentially, saying "here are some potential occasions for corruption, so if YOU the reader go investigate perhaps YOU will find it!"
22 - handyguy
Jeannie, your description of the bank bailout is pretty grossly inaccurate. For one thing, several of the banks took the money only because Hank Paulson made them. And for another, it's all or very nearly all been paid back, with interest, by now.
There's plenty of corporate welfare to complain about for sure...start with oil companies and defense contractors.
But some very smart economists say TARP saved us from an even scarier economic disaster, and I tend to believe them.
If we had 20% unemployment and a Dow of 1500 now, would that be worth it to have avoided TARP?
Finally, you're probably preaching to the choir because libertarians like Christine hate TARP at least as much as you do.
23 - jeannie danna
handyguy,
My description of the bank bailouts is an accurate description of what they are, welfare.
The banks revealed so conveniently of all that toxic asset are now free and clear to make huge profits for their stockholders. those are the people they service
24 - handyguy
Yes, just ignore everything I wrote as if I have no idea what I'm talking about, and repeat the slogan/mantra until you believe it. You may then rejoin the real world at your convenience.
Righteous indignation can be a good thing. Paranoid fantasy, not so much.
25 - roger nowosielski
I don't mean to be contrary, but I tend to subscribe to Jeannie's view of things. No one knows what the effects would be if the bailout didn't take place, and no economist worth his salt would go on record predicting the future. Otherwise, he'd be a star gazers.
And so what if the Dow dropped to 1500 hundred or so. It's a far more realistic level than present inflated prices. So this argument is not resolvable unless from hindsight.
Meanwhile, plenty of good could be accomplished if the bailout money was diverted to avert the foreclosure crisis and to help out Main Street in general. That's one reason, as far as I can see, for Mr. Obama's lack of popularity, and I'd have to agree it's deserved. The little people were forgotten while the movers and shakers were rescued. Hardly a kind of policy from a president who billed himself as the most progressive ever. The Radical Left is indeed very disenchanted.
Jeannie displays a great deal of courage in critiquing the bailouts, and I give her much credit for that. She is an ardent Obama supporter.