ECOtality Scandal: Cost/Benefit
It was all for 5,700 metric tons of CO2!
ECOtality, a featured green energy success story in President Obama’s 2010 SOTU Address, blew $135 million in federal tax dollars, $8 million in California state tax dollars and an unknown amount reportedly from investment by the Australian and Chinese governments.
That is not counting another lost $115 million committed to The EV Project by Ecotality and its corporate business partners.
Today, ECOtality will appear in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Arizona, to discuss sale of its last remaining assets to pay off angry creditors and stockholders. It’s bankrupt!
How did Obama’s darling of the electric car charger industry come to a pathetic end?
It is the direct result of two ill-conceived Obama green energy initiatives:
- Reduce U.S. CO2 emissions to save the world from global warming
- Put 1 million plug-in hybrid electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015
When no forethought is put into the economic viability or cost/benefit of a policy or project, disasters like ECOtality are the inevitable result.
Always keep your eye on the ball. Lose sight of it and you lose the game.
Bottom line, lets see what everyone gained from ≈$250 million pored into ECOtality…
The President’s Goal
President Obama’s primary energy policy goals are to reduce U.S. CO2 atmospheric emissions and create jobs. Putting 1 million plug-in hybrid cars on America’s roads by 2015 is one way to kill two birds with one stone.
Those two policies drove the ECOtality investments. It was to create a nationwide network of plug-in hybrid “filling stations”.
Make no mistake… reducing CO2 is the President’s primary goal. He sees it as direct threat to life as we know it on this planet. For him, and many others, it transcends all other goals.
10s of millions lost their jobs in the Great Recession. What better way to get them back to work than by creating an entirely new green energy economy that saves Earth?
That is considered brilliant thinking in egg-head academia.
Who cares what it costs or how much “carbon pollution” it actually saves? The end goal justifies everything!
ECOtality Reduces Global CO2!!
The graphic above is a slide taken from Beauregard’s Powerpoint™ presentation. The slide summarizes ECOtality’s accomplishments up to that time.
Highlighted in yellow on that slide, for all the world to see, is that ECOtality’s EV Project has saved 5,700 metric tons of CO2 emissions.
At an IPCC global warming rally of the uninformed, that sounds like a lot. It isn’t.
According to the World Bank the U.S. averaged 17.3 metric tons of “carbon pollution” per year per person from 2008-2012.
In other words, for ≈$250 million invested before going belly-up, ECOtality had reduced global CO2 emissions by about 330 American’s CO2 emissions in one year!!!
To be fair, ECOtality has saved more “carbon pollution” since April and American’s emit less pollution now in 2013.
So… maybe ECOtality has saved 400 citizen’s annual CO2 output over its entire existence.
At the ECOtalty rate, it would cost a mind-numbing $395 trillion dollars to reduce U.S. CO2 emissions to zero for one year.
Heck, that’s 12 times the entire GDP of the United States. It’s 3.2 times the entire GDP of the whole earth,
Since ECOtality went bankrupt, no net jobs were created. It topped out at 179 employees. VP Garrett Beauregard was let go last month.
Obviously, ECOtality is a special case. Inept, corrupt mismanagement played as much a roll in its demise as anything. But so did lack of demand and the high cost per metric ton for reducing “carbon pollution”.
Both Obama main energy policy goals are grossly unachievable. The Administration would have known that if it had spend an hour on cost/benefit analysis to estimate the cost per metric ton to “avoid” CO2 emission.
Even under perfect management, it’s impossible for all the companies involved in the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle industry to reduce CO2 emissions enough to amount to a hill of beans.
Nobody in their right mind would have invested one red cent into electric plug-in hybrids for the microscopic return on investment vs. its high cost for emissions reductions.
Yet that is exactly what President Obama did without one iota of cost/benefit analysis.