In typically Obama fashion, another deal was made without Congressional approval. The Navy will be forced into paying four times as much for fuel. One of the folks involved in this sale to the Navy, an adviser at the company selling a portion of the biofuel, is on Obama's Presidential Transition Team. This company also received around 22 million in 2009 stimulus funds. Obama never ceases to amaze me. What a corrupt SOB. Here's the article from IBD: Jet Fuel-Gate Is Obama's New Solyndra Ecofanaticism: SolyndraGate was no isolated case of corrupt government misspending. The U.S. Navy was just forced to buy 450,000 gallons of biofuels from an Obama-connected firm at an outrageous $16 per gallon. The massive Obama stimulus was supposed to generate millions of jobs, but the $535 million loan guarantee it gave to solar panel maker Solyndra on the eve of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy illustrated the fundamental incompetence of Obama's neo-Keynesian economic ideology. Now we find the Navy partnering with the Agriculture Department to purchase hundreds of thousands of gallons of alternative biofuel in place of standard JP-5 fuel for Navy aircraft the biggest federal purchase of biofuel ever. It's part of the White House's "we can't wait for Congress" strategy as the 2012 election year looms. But JP-5 typically costs less than $4 a gallon. If a family on a budget started filling up with $16-a-gallon gas, it might want to adopt the motto, "we can't wait to go broke." A look at the lucky seller of this environmentalist version of the proverbial $600 Pentagon toilet seat indicates that the move is not just wasteful, but ethically suspect. As J.E. Dyer noted over the weekend on the Hot Air Green Room, "a member of Obama's presidential transition team, T. J. Glauthier, is a 'strategic advisor' at Solazyme, the California company that is selling a portion of the biofuel to the Navy. Glauthier worked shock, shock on the energy-sector portion of the 2009 stimulus bill." Solazyme had already gotten a nearly $22 million chunk of change out of the taxpayers thanks to the 2009 stimulus. We heard the ludicrous excuse last week from Obama Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, as quoted in the National Journal, that "we are doing this for one simple reason: It makes us better fighters" because "our use of fossil fuels is a very real threat to our national security and to the U.S. Navy ability to protect America and project power overseas." What about the "very real threat" to the Navy of not having enough money for the ships, fighters and ammunition it needs to protect America? President Obama's assault on the Pentagon could scrap 60 of the Navy's ships, including two carrier groups. Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast The biofuel will be used next summer by we're not making this up "the Great Green Fleet Carrier Strike Force" in exercises near Hawaii. Mabus painted the picture of America's great naval force advancing from sails to coal to diesel to nuclear, and now finally to biofuels. But if we keep starving the Navy, it may soon not have enough loose change to repair the sails on Old Ironsides. And this is only the beginning of this two-for-one bad deal swindling taxpayers while ravaging national security. Obama's Agriculture and Energy departments and Navy plan to spend $510 million over three years buying biofuel for military and commercial purposes, bypassing Congress by "leveraging Defense Department procurement." "Green Fleet" is another of Obama's "borrowings" from Teddy Roosevelt, whose 1907-09 Great White Fleet so called because the armada's ships were painted white circumnavigated the globe to enforce treaties, protect U.S. possessions and show the world that America had become a superpower. But Obama's jolly green Navy is a lot more PR than TR. So much so that at a conference last year, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead found himself publicly insisting that the Green Fleet was not a "public relations gimmick," claiming that "it's more than simply 'how green can we be seen?'" Meaner, not greener, is what the U.S. Navy should be getting. Spending four times as much for biofuels may impress the Democratic Party's environmentalist special interests. But to Russia's Vladimir Putin, North Korea's Kim Jong Il, Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other U.S. adversaries, it will be a sign of weakness and an invitation for aggression Source
another deal was made without Congressional approval? You do realize the Navy's budget to buy this stuff comes from congress right? You do realize when the Navy submits its budget to congress, they include these cost right? Plus this was competitive. 8 other companies competed for the contract.
I don't think this purchase was included in any budget.... "It's part of the White House's "we can't wait for Congress" strategy as the 2012 election year looms." With budget issues, and the Obama Administration wanting to cut the Defense budget, why purchase fuel at four times the cost, when JP5 is around $4/gallon?
There was another thread on this a week or so ago. Have you bothered to check out the company webiste to see what they do?
I do a basic search, and if I cannot find another thread, I start one. It really doesn't matter what the company does. The fact remains that our government is spending way more than it has to. Obama wants to cut the Defense Budget, but then makes stupid decisions like this, and spends four times more than needed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Solazyme's tailored oils provide cost-effective, high-quality "drop-in" replacements for marine, motor vehicle, and jet fuels. Our fuels are compatible with existing infrastructure, meet industry specifications, and can be used with factory-standard engines, without modifications. We currently work with Chevron, UOP Honeywell, and additional industry leading refining partners, to produce SoladieselRD® renewable diesel, SoladieselHRF-76® renewable diesel for ships, and Solajet® renewable jet fuel for both military and commercial application testing. In 2010, we delivered over 80,000 liters of algal-derived marine diesel and jet fuel to the U.S. Navy, constituting the world's largest delivery of 100% microbial-derived, non-ethanol biofuel. Subsequently, we were awarded another contract with the U.S. Department of Defense for production of up to 550,000 additional liters of naval distillate (SoladieselHRF-76® marine fuel http://www.solazyme.com/
Yeah, at a cost of four times to the U.S. Government from what they were paying. How is this cost-effective? No thanks.
What does "tailored oil" mean exactly. I looked at the Renewable Energy Association in Ohio? .. and I still don't understand what it is.
No "green energy" is cost effective, short of hydro power. It is all a giant sham, smoke and mirrors.
The Easy Bake Oven is going to be regulated out of existence when the incandescent light bulb is gone. Girls all over the world will miss out.
This is true. Even electric cars have a larger carbon footprint than gasoline cars, when considering the electrical demands of these cars, replacement batteries, etc.
Everything does for the most part. Biofeuls cause more damage to the environment due to everything needed to harvest corn and the other sources of oils. Solar Panels are a nice idea, but cost so much they are generally unable to effectively repay themselves. Currently on my base there are probably a 20-50 people employed with putting up these solar panels everywhere. And I am sure the amount of money spent on this project will never be paid back. And it is "Stimulus Money In Action". They would have gotten a better ROI I am sure if they had just paid a bunch of people to pick up trash on the side of the road at $15 an hour. Would have employed a lot more people, and done something really good for the environment.
If one does nothing else, (regarding green energy global folly by Obama and his admin and by extention Americans, the EU and China)...other than read and watch the linked below presentation to the Ohio House of Representatives just a few weeks ago...they would put themselves at least in a knowledgeable position of the facts. http://www.globalwarming.org/2011/1...e-ohio-house-on-folly-of-green-energy-policy/
Nope, they will still be around. However, the cost is almost double, and they have a standard heating element instead of a light bulb. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/09/easy-bake-oven-loses-light-bulb-gets-20-makeover/
