Print 74 comment(s) - last by Kurz.. on Jul 8 at 9:49 AM

  (Source: Hybrid News Demo)

  (Source: Red, Green and Blue)
Hopes to increase use of green technology and create jobs

In addition to the recent $20 million the government gave to support the development of offshore wind energy, the Obama Administration is making another hefty donation to support additional efforts in renewable energy, but this time, it's for solar power. President Barack Obama is giving $1.85 billion to two solar companies in order to build new solar plants throughout the United States.

Obama's plan behind this new financial commitment is to create different avenues of renewable energy use and to also create new jobs for American citizens. His announcement regarding the donation for this project was presented in his weekly online and radio address on Saturday, which was one day after the U.S. Department of Labor revealed that employers, for the first time in six months, cut payrolls once again due to the possible end of 225,000 temporary census jobs.

The two solar companies that Obama has chosen to present the money to are Abengoa Solar and Abound Solar Manufacturing. Abengoa Solar plans to build one of the world's largest solar plants near Gila Bend, Arizona while Abound Solar Manufacturing will build plants in Indiana and Colorado. Together, these plants will create more than 2,000 construction jobs and 1,500 permanent jobs.

"We're going to keep competing aggressively to make sure the jobs and industries of the future are taking root right here in America," said Obama.

Out of the total $1.85 billion, $1.45 billion will go to Abengoa Solar, since it's Arizona solar plant will create 1,600 jobs alone and will be able to power approximately 70,000 homes. The other $400 million will go to Abound Solar Manufacturing. 

"Already, I've seen the payoff from these investments," said Obama. "I've seen once-shuttered factories humming with new workers who are building solar panels and wind turbines; rolling up their sleeves to help America win the race for the clean energy economy."

The U.S. Department of Energy announced some clean energy news as well. The Weatherization Assistance Program, which insulates and protects homes and buildings with energy efficient improvements, has already helped perform weatherization work on more than 30 percent of homes in 12 states. This totals to approximately 108,000 homes and is saving more than $47 million on energy bills. The program has also created 10,000 jobs. 

In addition, the U.S. Department of Energy has approved another $76 million for energy efficient building equipment and technology as well as new training programs for commercial building operators, technicians and auditors.

Obama holds high hopes for these new programs and developments, hoping they'll boost the economy, and saying that "the administration is accelerating the transition to a clean energy economy and doubling our use of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power -- steps that have the potential to create whole new industries and hundreds of thousands of new jobs in America."

The construction of these new solar plants are the latest efforts toward cleaner energy and employment under the U.S. Recovery Act

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Instead of...
By JediJeb on 7/6/2010 3:00:49 PM , Rating: 1
Healthcare and education aren't entitlements, they are rights. You have a natural right to live your life free of pain and suffering, and to learn to make intelligent decisions for yourself.

Show me one example in nature that shows that living beings have the right to be free of pain and suffering! I don't see Seals giving free pain killers to Whales, or Lions performing free knee replacements on Elephants. Any time that you take money from one individual and give it to another to provide a service that amounts to an entitlement not a right, because to take the money from the first party to give to the second denies the first party their right to their money. By your definition I should be required to work in order to provide someone else with a benefit.

If I wish to provide help to another person through my own charity then that is my own decision. The people of this world were much more charitable and of a communal mind before large centralized governments decided to force people to be that way. I challenge you to do a study of all past governments and societies. You will find in the past that every single one that has moved from a community centered government structure to a large centralized government structure has utterly failed and disappeared. From the Ancient Egyptians to the Persians, Romans, Ancient Greeks, to the Mongols united under the Kahns, over to the Colonial periods of the British, French, Spanish, Danish and Portuguese and on to the Soviets, all grew to a point that they became too big to sustain themselves and were either brought down by corruption within or smaller, more efficient groups from the outside. How is it that a loose knit band of Galls, was able to defeat the mighty Roman Empire? Why is much of the world no longer ruled by the Persian Empire as it once was?

Small, agile governments that operate at a local level can much better provide what is needed to it's citizens than the large central governments could ever hope to do. The large central government should exist to provide defense to the whole and arbitrate among the local governments, but not to take the place of the local governments. If you read the US Constitution you will see this is what the Founding Fathers of this country knew and believed. Read any of their writings and you will see they stressed self reliance, that the individuals are responsible for their own success or failure, not the government. Also that people(and corporations) who make poor decisions should be allowed to fail. And by the way, you can learn to make informed decisions without being given a free college education.

Any person that works and tries to better society should have access to those basic rights. I don't think that a freeloader should, as they aren't contributing to society, but any man or woman who puts in an honest days work that furthers society in any way should be "entitled" to free/extremely affordable healthcare and education, and should be able to live in an environment free of oppression, famine, and plague. Get some humanity, prick.

Take away the heavy taxes needed to provide those services and the person who works hard to contribute to society will be able to pay for those services out of their own pocket. Doctors and hospitals that aren't taxed and inundated with burdensome and useless regulations and paperwork can operate with much less expense and therefore offer less expensive services. As for education, I worked my way through college and I have a healthy respect for both my education and what it has provided me. I know those who had free to almost free rides through college who have no respect for what they had given to them and little respect for the things they have now. What is needed for a better society is not so much education, but wisdom, and you can not teach wisdom from a book. Wisdom is learned through each individuals success and failure in life.

Also anyone who believes that the world is entitled to be free of famine and plague must be dreaming. You say that everyone should have such "rights", so let's see how that would work. HIV is probably one of the worst plagues to come upon this world in modern times. The one way to solve the problem of HIV would be to restrict the sexual activities of everyone on the planet. That alone could end this plague in a couple generations. Yet to provide the "right" of freedom from HIV you would have to take away another right of free choice from the world. Who gets to make the decision of which "right" is the more important? Of course you will say the "right" of freedom from HIV should come from pouring huge amounts of money into research into finding a cure for HIV, but what if that cure can never be found? Is it proper to deny people their "right" the the money they earn to attempt to fulfill a "right" of freedom from HIV to those who have it?

Don't get me wrong, I believe HIV is a horrible thing and we should work to cure it if possible. I just grabbed it as a good example to use, I could have used many others.

My point is we have the "rights" to make our own choices in life, for good or bad, but not "rights" to an easy life no matter what our choices may be. Self Reliance is what should drive us, with a mind towards promoting the common good through a charitable lifestyle. Forced charity is not really charity at all, just as forced obedience is not really obedience but more like slavery or indentured servitude depending on what the reward for the obedience is.

"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki