Nice try NYT.
Where are the safeguards? How much should we risk, for what return? When should we pull the plug?
The fact is, many of the safeguards were in place at the DOE. They were over ridden by politics.
Hence, we need to limit how much we can afford to spend on this stuff. We already have a huge national lab structure in place, and grants to universities.
We can’t afford to be venture capitalists as well as underwriters of basic research.
Another problem is that not only Joe Nocero doesn't critically examine the facts, he is also wrong in his main premise: "... federal loan programs — especially loans for innovative energy technologies — virtually require the government to take risks the private sector won’t take." Joe doesn't want to examine why private sector wouldn't invest in certain kinds of technology or companies, or why the company had to apply for the government loan / "investment and whether company was seeking but failed to find private investment first - there should have been a strong profit motive on both sides of the deal, while DOE is just playing with Other People's Money.
Private sector has invested plenty in all kinds of solar energy projects without direct federal money "investment" or "loans" - there is no shortage of solar energy research and development within and outside the U.S. This is not anywhere near a Manhattan Project of solar energy power.
BTW, when Bill Clinton killed the funding for Texas particle accelerator (Superconducting Super Collider, a truly worthwhile scientific project that private industry couldn't and has no need to fund) did NYT or Joe Nocero write an article about the need to invest in research that private sector would not fund?
Also, everybody in the solar industry knew or understood that Solyndra's method was way to expensive, not just relative to Chinese-sunsidized solar panels but against their American and foreign competitors as well.
From Obama $8 Billion Solar ‘Betamax' Undercut as China Backs Rival Technology - BL, by Ben Sills, 2011 September 20
The Department of Energy guaranteed loans to six plants that will reflect sunlight to boil water for making electricity, aiming to kick-start commercial projects. Four of those, and a third of $26 billion pipeline encouraged by U.S. aid, may switch to standard photovoltaic panels that generate a charge directly from the sun, said Brett Prior, a solar analyst at GTM Research. The cost of generating power with panels plunged about 37 percent in the past year as Chinese factories cut prices, pushing three U.S. makers including Solyndra LLC into bankruptcy protection in the past quarter. Germany's Solar Millennium AG (S2M) walked away from a $2.1 billion U.S. loan guarantee last month and ditched thermal devices for a cheaper photovoltaic system. “If Solar Millennium, a major developer that has the technology, can't do it with a loan guarantee, then it's not clear who could," Prior said in a phone interview from Boston. ..... < snip > The U.S. government's $8 billion bet on solar energy that would pave the deserts with mirrors risks following the Betamax into the technological wilderness because of Chinese backing for a cheaper system.
From World's First Solar Building Exporting Power Shelved by Abu Dhabi's Masdar - BL, by Ayesha Daya, 2011 September 15
The Abu Dhabi state-owned company said it's evaluating a different design for its headquarters than the one selected in 2008 from Chicago-based Adrian Smith & Gordon Gill Architecture for a 100,000 square-meter (1.1 million square-foot) structure equipped with enough solar panels to cover four soccer fields. ..... < snip > Masdar shelved plans for the world's first building that makes more energy than it consumes, a year after the financial crisis forced the Abu Dhabi company to step back from setting up the first carbon-neutral city.
Not only these DOE "investments" or "loans" failed but these failures may drag down with them and set back the R&D funding from private sources which may find certain viable uses for solar and other technologies on the strength of the cost-benefit analysis.
It seems there has been plenty of money in the world in private sector devoted to developing solar energy power, and some fiscally responsible companies who plan to stay in business are walking away from guaranteed DOE loans. Solyndra had no real competitive plan to stay in business. NYT and Joe Nocero either pretend or really don't understand this and have no interest in government spending accountability (unless it's on military).
Solution? Simple. How about the same accountability which exists in the private sector? Congress can reduce DOE funding by $535M next fiscal year (and add other failed political "investments" to the "penalty box" amount) and see how much appetite they have for "investing" in other dubious projects of this kind in the future. Because in private sector this would be the money no longer available for investment.