Clock's ticking on Memphis solar farm project at Agricenter

Agricenter International wants to build a four-acre solar farm but must settle issues with a prospective lender by a drop-dead deadline Tuesday.
The 4,000 solar panels for the 1 megawatt array would sit on a hillside just west of Ducks Unlimited and generate enough power for 200 homes or 20 businesses.
But the $3.5 million-$4 million project hangs in the balance over the next four days as Agricenter tries to iron out issues that have surfaced with the financing company.
"We've hit a bump in the road and are trying to get it resolved," Agricenter president John Charles Wilson said Friday.
The deadline is not the lender's but the Tennessee Valley Authority's. The project's feasibility counts on a TVA program that pays a premium of 12 cents per kilowatt hour for solar power.
Because TVA has been losing $5 million annually on the program, the agency cut the size of eligible projects first to 200 kilowatts and then to 50 kilowatts.
The reduction effectively limits participants to residential and small-business customers.
But the 1 megawatt Agricenter project, in the works for about a year and a half, got an extension from TVA. The extension period ends Tuesday, Wilson confirmed.
All the design, engineering and permits for the project have been accomplished, said David Weiler, marketing and sales director for Nashville-based Lightwave Solar Electric. The company would serve essentially as the general contractor for the construction and maintenance.
For perspective, the Agricenter project would be one-fifth the size of the 5-megawatt West Tennessee Solar Farm being built 40 miles up I-40 in Haywood County.
But still, the Agricenter array would generate about $360,000 worth of electricity a year to sell to Memphis Light Gas & Water Division, Weiler said.
The lender would reap the proceeds the first 10 years while Agricenter used the solar array as an educational tool for schoolchildren and the public, he said.
But after a decade, the Agricenter would collect the revenue from a system that should last 40 years, Weiler said.
The solar project would be unique in Tennessee because it would have "single access tracking," Weiler said.
That means the panels would be mounted on motorized tracks that slowly move them so they point toward the sun throughout the day: East in the morning, straight up at noon and west in the late afternoon.
Tracking the sun makes the system more efficient.
The panels would be purchased from Memphis' own Sharp Manufacturing Co., which is offering them at a substantial discount, Weiler said.
But it's a complex project.
"I would say it's a toss of the coin whether it will happen," Weiler said of the project.
"But not from lack of effort from Agricenter or Shelby County or Sharp or a lot of other people.''

more

Brave Free Us (join now!!!)

http://bravefreeus.newsvine.com/

Freed nurse describes 'living hell'

A nurse who spent more than six weeks in custody accused of contaminating saline said she had been "living in hell".

The case against Rebecca Leighton was dropped by prosecutors, who said on Friday it was "no longer appropriate" to continue the proceedings".

Leighton, 27, was arrested at her home on July 20 over a string of suspicious deaths at a hospital in Stockport, near Manchester.

After her release from jail, Leighton said her life had been turned upside down.

"I have been living in hell and was locked up in prison for something I had not done," Leighton's solicitor Carl Richmond said on her behalf after her release.

"It was so frustrating for me knowing that the person who actually carried out these terrible acts is still out there.

more

Bid to block AT&T deal reflects telecom industry

The Obama administration has explained its effort to block AT&T's purchase of T-Mobile USA by saying it will fight mergers that would reduce competition and hurt consumers.

Yet few think the lawsuit the administration filed Wednesday signals a more aggressive stance toward acquisitions in other industries. Rather, experts say, the administration's challenge of AT&T's purchase comes down to this: Telecom is dominated by just a few big companies. Reducing the number of major players could all but kill competition and drive prices up.

By contrast, few other major industries are controlled by just a handful of giants. And none relies on access to a limited number of public airwaves.

With previous big mergers, the administration has taken a middle-ground approach to antitrust: It's green-lighted deals such as cable company Comcast's acquisition of media giant NBC Universal and Ticketmaster's merger with concert promoter Live Nation. But it also imposed conditions in those deals that are intended to preserve competition.

"They're looking even at very big mergers on their merits, and if the merging parties can't satisfy their concerns, the Justice Department will say, 'We can't let this go through,'" said Melissa Maxman, an antitrust attorney with the law firm Cozen O'Connor.

AT&T says it will fight the court action. But it also plans to meet with Justice lawyers and offer more concessions in hopes of avoiding a court battle, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the confidential nature of the talks.

President Barack Obama, on the campaign trail, had pledged tougher antitrust policy. And early in his administration, the Justice Department repealed Bush-era guidelines that had discouraged government action against companies with near monopolies.
As a result, many had expected bold action from the department — crackdowns on industry-dominating companies and roadblocks to many big mergers.

That didn't happen. The lawsuit against AT&T might satisfy some critics who hoped for a much tougher antitrust policy. But it probably doesn't suggest a policy shift.

The AT&T proposal was unique, said Benjamin Brown, a former Justice Department antitrust lawyer, now a partner with the law firm Cohen Milstein.

"I could very easily have seen this same decision being made under the Bush administration," Brown said.

more

Obama Looking Like Job Killer In Chief

Friday morning, many on Wall Street were stunned by the big fat zero put up by the August jobs report, the worst showing in 11 months. The data convinced many previously optimistic economists that the United States will slip back into recession.

I believe that we have been in one giant recession all along that was only temporarily interrupted by trillions of useless and destructive deficit and stimulus spending.  Unfortunately, the August numbers will increase the talk of government efforts to stimulate the economy.

As President Obama prepares to unveil a new plan for the Federal Government to create jobs, evidence is rapidly piling up on how his administration is actively destroying jobs with stunning efficiency. Recent examples of this trend are enough to make anyone with even a casual respect for America’s former economic prowess hang their head in disgust.

The assault on private sector employment began in April when the democrat controlled National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a complaint seeking to force Boeing aircraft to move Boeing’s newly opened non-union production facilities in South Carolina back to its union controlled plants in Washington State. Although Boeing simply says that it is looking to open a cost effective domestic manufacturing facility (an endangered species) to employ American workers, the NLRB alleges that the company was punishing union workers in Washington for past strikes.

Despite a lack of any direct evidence that Boeing was being punitive, and the fact that the company was not laying off any union workers, the NLRB has not backed down. Against little public support and nearly universal revulsion among business leaders, the NLRB is continuing its campaign to keep Boeing from exercising its freedoms and to employ people in a manner that makes sense for its business.

The Boeing move served notice that the Obama’s loyalties were firmly tied to the Union interests that were so critical to his election in 2008. This week, the anti-business tendencies of the administration came into even sharper focus.

In the telecommunications industry, service provider AT&T made the seemingly essential move in its attempt to acquire wireless specialist T-Mobile. But the Justice Department sued to block the $39 billion deal on antitrust grounds, saying that the merger between the second and fourth largest cell phone providers would unfairly restrict competition and raise prices.

In so doing, the DOJ seems to be operating under the assumption, without any direct evidence, that at least four companies are needed to provide healthy choice in the marketplace, and that three providers simply won’t cut it. More broadly, competition may increasingly come from outside the telecommunications sector (in particular from cable and satellite industries).

Plus, with the speed of technological change, who knows what types of competitors will arise in the years to come. The situation reminds me of the broken merger in 2004 and 2005 between Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video. Based on antitrust concerns emanating from the Justice Department, Blockbuster backed off from the deal. Of course, just a few years later the whole sector was made obsolete by Netflix, and any advantage Blockbuster would have gained would have only been temporary.

In light of the current and future competition that is sure to change the way consumers talk with one another over great distances, AT&T and T-Mobile are much better positioned to survive as a combined entity. In any event if AT&T can’t buy T-Mobile, someone else will. The company’s parent, Deutsche Telecom, has stated its intention to divest itself of its American subsidiary.

So why not help American business survive in an increasingly competitive market? Most likely antitrust lawyers at the DOJ have been otherwise bored with the lack of merger deals to scrutinize (another downside to a weak economy), and this transaction just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. But the legal activism will certainly cost jobs. Even the unions recognize this and have supported the merger.

But the absurdity of the current environment reached a peak when the DOJ, and agents from, get this, the U.S. Fish and Wild Life Service, raided the Nashville factory of the legendary Gibson Guitar company. The raid resulted in agents carting off more than a half million dollars of supplies and essentially shutting the company down. The take down of one of America’s commercial icons apparently resulted from Gibson’s purchase of partially finished ebony and rosewood guitar fingerboards (these endangered trees are carefully managed) from an Indian supplier.

Now here’s the interesting part. The Indian government had issued no complaint about the transactions and there was no evidence that the company had violated U.S. law. The DOJ acted simply on suspicion that Gibson had violated Indian law. Since when do U.S. companies have to make sure that they comply with laws of every country in the world before they produce a product?

I had the good fortune on interviewing Henry Juszkiewicz, the CEO of Gibson on my radio show this Thursday.

After speaking to him, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry at the stunning economic incompetence of our government officials, who in the cause of arbitrary regulatory nitpicking, seem willing to sacrifice the reputation and prospects of one of the few remaining American manufacturers. God help us all.

On the other side of the coin, the government’s own efforts to create jobs in the private sector have met with little success. It was announced yesterday that Solyndra LLC of Fremont California, a manufacturer of solar panel has filed for bankruptcy protection and has laid off its remaining 1,100 workers. The development is notable because the company was a veritable poster child of the Obama Administration. The president himself visited their facilities in May of 2010 and touted the company as the template for America’s “green technology” future. As a result of its politically advantageous profile the company was able to secure $535 million in loans guaranteed by the government.

But apparently government blessing does not guarantee market success. Unfortunately, Solyndra could not sell its products profitably despite the government support and cheerleading. Instead $535 million in investment capital was diverted from potentially money making enterprises to a money losing enterprise. This is what happens when government calls the shots.

When it comes to the financial sector, the government can’t seem to decide whether it wants to preserve jobs or destroy them. After bailing out the banks three years ago (and making some of them too big to fail), it was reported today that the government is preparing to launch a multi-billion dollar lawsuit to recoup losses that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac suffered on mortgage backed bonds (loans that the government itself encouraged the banks to make). If the government were to prevail, job losses would surely emerge in the sector, and the government may need to bail out the banks once again!

So as we wait with eager anticipation as to what the President may reveal in his jobs speech next week, you can be sure that it’s not going to help America regain its competitive edge. The sooner we regard the government as a job killer rather than a job creator, the sooner we can all get back to work.

Iran says kills 30 Kurd rebels in new border push

By Karolina Tagaris | Reuters – 13 hrs ago

 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran said its troops killed or wounded 30 Kurdish rebels in a fresh assault on the mountainous border with Iraq where witnesses reported fierce fighting and shelling on Saturday.
A commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said the military push was launched after giving the rebels a one-month "grace period" during Ramadan to withdraw from the area from where they have launched ambushes and sabotage attacks on gas pipelines.
"The Revolutionary Guards forces have killed or injured 30 members of the PJAK (Party of Free Life of Kurdistan) terrorist group since Friday afternoon to now," Colonel Hamid Ahmadi told the official IRNA news agency.
PJAK is an offshoot of the Turkey-based Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which has been pounded by Turkish air strikes in recent weeks.
One Turkish air strike killed seven civilians late last month and on Saturday Iranian soldiers shot dead a Kurdish shepherd outside the border town of Haj Umran, according to the town's mayor, Maghdid Ahmed.
Hundreds of people have fled their homes in the area to small camps since mid-July.
Witnesses and local officials reported fighting in the Qandil mountains and shelling around the Iraqi village of Sone.
The PKK has fought for Kurdish self-rule for more than 27 years in a conflict that has killed 40,000 people.
Managing the PKK presence is a tricky task for Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish government with Iran to the east, Turkey to the north, and to the south a fragile, power-sharing central Iraqi government with whom the Kurds still disagree about territorial and oil rights.
The PKK has previously said it believes Turkey and Iran are coordinating their attacks in the region and that it would join forces with the Iranian offshoot to better counter the assaults.
A PKK spokesman confirmed that would happen.
"After realising that the Iranian forces are not only targeting the PJAK party but targeting all Kurds and their achievements, for this reason we announce that from now on we will start fighting the Iranian forces side-by-side with PJAK fighters," Dozdar Hamo told Reuters
"From now on we will start to cooperate directly to support the PJAK and together defend the achievements of the Kurdish people."
(Additional reporting by Shamal Aqrawi in Arbil, Iraq and Mitra Amiri in Tehran; Writing by Robin Pomeroy; Editing by Karolina Tagaris)

Kabul, Afghanistan

Explosions and heavy automatic gunfire were heard hours after five well-armed suicide bombers attacked the British Council in the Afghan capital on Friday, leaving at least eight people dead, officials said.
White smoke billowed from a building in the compound while heavily-armed British and Afghan forces cordoned off the area in the center of the capital, establishing a security perimeter around the buildings.
The attacks occurred inside a well-guarded Kabul neighborhood, leaving at least another 10 people wounded, the Afghan Interior Ministry said.
The British Council is a British government-affiliated body that fosters cultural and academic exchanges in Afghanistan.
The strike, which the Taliban has claimed responsibility for, also coincides with the 92nd anniversary of Afghan independence from Great Britain. read more