Fact check, please: Spanish green debt bubble

[Quartz]

No debate, please. I’m just after a fact check.

I’ve been reading this RedState article on climate change. Now I know that doubts have been cast on Gabriel Calzada’s (Sourcewatch) claims on the job side. (I note that the two sides are talking about slightly different things). But I haven’t found a fact-check of his description of the green energy debt bubble.

@Redstate article

It doesn’t take much business acumen to note that if you have a guaranteed return of 12% - 20% while interest rates are much lower than those levels, someone has set up a perfect type of arbitrage situation for you to exploit. So, not surprisingly, there was a tremendous rush to borrow as much money as possible - since it was guaranteed that one could, as it were, buy low and sell high. Thus, many (if not most) of the newly-minted (pun intended) “green” energy companies became very, very highly leveraged (that’s finance-speak for “they got themselves into a great deal of debt”) because the rules of the game made it a no-brainer - as long as the bubble didn’t burst.

Fair use prevents me from quoting more - this is just one paragraph.

Now Calzada’s entitled to his opinions, just as you and I are, and as long as he’s open and honest about his funding sources, there’s no foul, so no carping there, please. But it does make me take his comments with a larger pinch of salt than usual. Yet I’ve not found anyone debunking the debt-subsidy part of his tale. Can you? Perhaps Nava can shed some local knowledge?

[Quartz]

Are those crickets chirping, or is the claim true?