Background on SolyndraThe company Solyndra, founded in 2005 by Christian Gronet, designed, manufactured and sold a unique type of solar panels. They were called “solar photovoltaic (PV) systems” and were designed for large, flat or low-slope commercial building roofs. The panels were designed to perform best when mounted horizontally and to be installed very close together to cover a much higher percentage of the roof, thus producing more electricity than typical flat solar panels in comparison. This has been created through production by absorbing light from all directions, including indirect and reflected light as well as direct sunlight when combined with a white roof. This was due to the design of having its copper indium gallium selenite or CIGS rolled into a cylindrical shape. Each tube contained 40 in each 1 meter by 2 meter panel (Solyndra, 2008). The cylinders were about an inch in diameter and made of two tubes. The company used proprietary equipment it developed to deposit CIGS along the exterior of the inner tube, amounting to approximately 200 CIGS cells. On top of the cells was an additional "optical coupling agent", which was used to focus sunlight through the outer tube, then the inner tube was inserted, then the whole thing was filled with silicone oil and then sealed with a glass and metal cap (insideclimatenew.org). Solyndra, of course, believed its product was the best on the market and envisioned becoming the premier manufacturer of solar-powered roofs, particularly in its home state of California. At the time Solyndra was being developed, California was in the process of imposing new construction requirements. These requirements took effect in January...... middle of paper ......gy. (Stephens, 2011) The administration claims it made these decisions because it was concerned about the fate of the fired Solyndra employees. The decision was made so that these Solyndra employees could receive assistance under another program for employees who have been laid off from their jobs by foreign competition. So the question was should the DOE have supported Solyndra in the first place? Well, looking back, the answer certainly seems to be a resounding no! But the bigger question is: should the government fund businesses to such an extreme level, as it did with Solyndra? Because if the company goes bankrupt, then who should be held responsible for repaying the loan. The money donated came from American taxpayers, and it seems a crime to demand that we pay twice for a company that went bankrupt due to unscrupulous government lending..