ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Aquion added to Pa. economy

| Friday, Sept. 29, 2017, 8:57 p.m.

A number of publications have covered Aquion Energy's path through bankruptcy into new ownership and the subsequent movement of some production assets to China (while keeping research and development and global headquarters here — a fact not mentioned in many articles).

The editorial “Aquion's move to China: Winner-picking folly” (Sept. 21, TribLIVE) intimates that the $16.6 million in Pennsylvania money disbursed to Aquion (by the Republican administration of Gov. Tom Corbett) was lost without the people of Pennsylvania receiving any benefit.

The reality could not be further from the truth. What the editorial fails to mention or account for (and what is often overlooked in many cases of government investment) is a reasonable assessment of the total economic activity generated.

In addition to the state money (some of which has been paid back), Aquion also garnered over $200 million from private investment sources outside of the state, and much of that money was spent in the Pittsburgh region to the direct benefit of many individuals, businesses and the public.

A conservative assessment shows Aquion spent $30 million to $40 million in Western Pennsylvania over the past five years in salaries, rent, infrastructure improvements and equipment sourcing/servicing. Had the state not invested in Aquion, the company would have scaled its operations elsewhere, and this economic activity would have been lost.

Given these facts, it is less clear that state funding decisions like this are without benefit — this decision resulted in over $30 million in local economic activity, a 2-to-1 return on the state's investment that also resulted in recruitment and training of technically skilled employees who will stay in the region.

Jay Whitacre

Squirrel Hill

The writer is a Carnegie Mellon University materials science and engineering professor who founded Aquion Energy in 2009.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me