Pacific Swell | Southern California environment news and trends

Solyndra won't talk DOE energy loan at House hearing on Wednesday

In Washington tomorrow, an oversight subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on Solyndra and loan guarantees by the Department of Energy. Those loans have been critical to development of a few projects here in California, including others we've covered underway from Solar City and Brightsource Energy.  Department of Energy loans program director Jonathan Silver is slated to appear. So were two members of Solyndra's executive team, Brian Harrison and Bill Stover, who, the committee reasoned, would have some answers about how the company went from doubling its expectations to having few at all.

Except Solyndra won't be there. Solyndra's media contact, David Miller, cited "the timing for the hearing, legal complexities arising from last week's activities and the urgency of the Bankruptcy proceedings" as reasons why Harrison and Stover won't be appearing. "The Company is in direct communication with the committee staff and working with them on a future date" for appearances. "Given that it is in the best interest of all creditors, including the U.S. government, to attempt to gain maximum value for the Solyndra assets, either via sale of the whole company or in parts, including its intellectual property, it is in the best interest of all interested parties for them to remain in California to engage with potential purchasers."

Since I reported the news, we've been parsing through the Solyndra news here at Pacific Swell. I explored Steve Chu's penchant for baseball analogies in terms of DOE investments. Madeleine Brand's show has asked why Solyndra failed. Matt DeBord over at our new DeBord Report has asked whether Solyndra's failure means the government hasn't invested enough in solar, and whether green energy just is a lame thing to invest in. 

We're clearly fascinated. We clearly would love to know some answers. Solyndra's saying we've got to wait. You think the House Energy subcommittee on Oversight see it that way?