Goobear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

It's like $8 per gallon in Europe. How much did you pay and where was it? Do you think people in Italy are demanding Biden lower their gas prices? How about in HK? South Korea? Jordan?

---

I was born in Europe. Actually just was there so please spare me…they care less what we pay and I care less what they pay…

---

Then you probably understand why prices are high. So why did you ask the question? You solicited open ended feedback and I obliged.

---

Your answer was a non answer. You could have said well it should be double what we pay now. Or it sucks it should be half of what it is now..People in Europe know they made a mistake of depending on Russia for energy. It took a war to figure it out. I have told my friends in Europe for the last 10 years that dependency on Russia for this energy is a fools game….By you mentioning Biden it seems like you acknowledge that he could do something about it, my point if he can he should. Wind and solar are not going to be enough to wean us off fossil fuel. We will need to build nuclear reactors. The tech is much safer than it was in the past.

---

Not sure any of this has to do with the price of gas at the pump today, but cool story. Also, if you were looking to say this, why did you instead ask an open-ended vague question?

Your response was not an answer to your question but I will respond to the non-sequitur. I'm not too concerned about day to day gas prices. When they go up, it causes people to make rational decisions about reliance on gas in the future. It incentivizes people to buy more fuel efficient cars or to drive less. I'm okay with that. I also understand that it serves as a regressive tax and that those who can least afford it get hit hard by gas prices. I wish there were a way to provide tax refunds to poor people to help offset some of that burden but it's not practical to do so. I don't blame the president for high gas prices and don't give him credit for low gas prices. Never have and don't expect to start now.

NVBear78 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Let me know what you do with the battery when used up and how much carbon footprint was used to mine the metals for that battery….

---

Never heard a greenie care about pollution from batteries

---

I predict Fox News will melt down over something that never happened. Like this.

hi im literally crying and throwing up how did they not realize this was fake????? https://t.co/9usyzLt0iY pic.twitter.com/nPwhtcEqGw

— KELGORE (@KelgoreTrout) March 1, 2022

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Where is your electricity going to come from, hamster wheels?

---

There are these little black magic devices called PV cells. Maybe you've heard of them. Anytime the sun shines on them they make electricity. Crazy. Also, and this is real voodoo stuff, when you combine hydrogen with oxygen under the right conditions it makes electricity.

---

Elites drive Tesla's and their policies empower Putin and destroy the poor. But no worries for them as they hide their head in the sand at the energy needs of the world.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-wests-green-delusions-empowered?utm_source=url&s=r

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera...

Goobear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Let me know what you do with the battery when used up and how much carbon footprint was used to mine the metals for that battery….

---

First your complaint was about gas prices. I pointed out that is a choice you made. So you complain that electric vehicles aren't perfect for the environment. No they aren't. But they are still much lower polluting than gas powered cars, if that is suddenly your concern. They also cause fewer wars and reduce the power of oil despots like Putin and Saudi Arabia.

So, what do you do with the lithium batteries in your cell phone, ipad, etc?

WalterSobchak said:

---

That's not how Trump did it. He did it by eviscerating the EPA and ultimately suspending all refinery emissions regulations. So the prices you're using as a comparison came at huge environmental cost. This is not the first time these prices have been seen, at least not in California. It's an issue he literally manufactured by rigging production cost. Unless of course you're a climate change denier who thinks clean air is for suckers.

---

"eviscerating" is a very apt word.

As a by-product, morale among the valuable worker-bees at the EPA became extremely low.

NVBear78 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Where is your electricity going to come from, hamster wheels?

---

I guess you've never ever heard of hydroelectric power?

Goobear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

It's like $8 per gallon in Europe. How much did you pay and where was it? Do you think people in Italy are demanding Biden lower their gas prices? How about in HK? South Korea? Jordan?

---

I was born in Europe. Actually just was there so please spare me…they care less what we pay and I care less what they pay…

---

Then you probably understand why prices are high. So why did you ask the question? You solicited open ended feedback and I obliged.

---

Your answer was a non answer. You could have said well it should be double what we pay now. Or it sucks it should be half of what it is now..People in Europe know they made a mistake of depending on Russia for energy. It took a war to figure it out. I have told my friends in Europe for the last 10 years that dependency on Russia for this energy is a fools game….By you mentioning Biden it seems like you acknowledge that he could do something about it, my point if he can he should. Wind and solar are not going to be enough to wean us off fossil fuel. We will need to build nuclear reactors. The tech is much safer than it was in the past.

---

Doesnt sound like your aware of how much LNG we export to Europe.
Do some homework.

DiabloWags said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Where is your electricity going to come from, hamster wheels?

---

I guess you've never ever heard of hydroelectric power?

---

Hydroelectric power is awesome, totally in favor. California Dem's haven't allowed any new hydro power forever.

Here are the Facts on California power generation for 2020:

Oil: 0.01%

Small Hydro: 1.39%

Biomass: 2.45%

Coal: 2.74%

Geothermal: 4.89%

Nuclear: 9.33%

Wind: 11.13%

Large Hydro: 12.21%

Solar: 13.23%

Natural Gas: 37.06%

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total Renewables: 33.09%

Total Non-Renewables: 66.91%

2020 Total System Electric Generation (ca.gov)

NVBear78 said:

---

Hydroelectric power is awesome, totally in favor. California Dem's haven't allowed any new hydro power forever.

---

This may have not occurred to you.
You can build more dams, but there isnt more water flowing into California.
There also arent many sensible dam sites left in California.
Ever think of that?

Current capacity levels of reservoirs in California:

Shasta: 37%

Oroville: 47%

New Melones: 41%

rescond.pdf (ca.gov)

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera...

---

Why? Is she hypnotizing you?

NVBear78 said:

---

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Where is your electricity going to come from, hamster wheels?

---

There are these little black magic devices called PV cells. Maybe you've heard of them. Anytime the sun shines on them they make electricity. Crazy. Also, and this is real voodoo stuff, when you combine hydrogen with oxygen under the right conditions it makes electricity.

---

Elites drive Tesla's and their policies empower Putin and destroy the poor. But no worries for them as they hide their head in the sand at the energy needs of the world.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-wests-green-delusions-empowered?utm_source=url&s=r

---

I don't know what this has to do with what I wrote or how it's tethered in any way to reality, but I would think you'd be a huge Musk fanboy. You keep using "greenie" like it's a pejorative and he's trying to make it possible for you to live on Mars where there is absolutely no vegetation whatsoever to annoy you. Say what you will about the guy and his many flaws, but he was massively successful in proving the concept that modern EVs are superior to ICE vehicles in every way except creating pollution. Because of him you can now buy an EV from every major manufacturer with many more just over the horizon. The lowest priced Tesla starts at under $40k, and several other makes start under $30k. Truly the vehicles of the elites.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera.

---

Since you're a "neutral" party, what would you have to say about Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene's behavior last night?

Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene heckle Biden during State of the Union (yahoo.com)

DiabloWags said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera.

---

Since you're a "neutral" party, what would you have to say about Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene's behavior last night?

Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene heckle Biden during State of the Union (yahoo.com)

---

Don't like it.

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Where is your electricity going to come from, hamster wheels?

---

There are these little black magic devices called PV cells. Maybe you've heard of them. Anytime the sun shines on them they make electricity. Crazy. Also, and this is real voodoo stuff, when you combine hydrogen with oxygen under the right conditions it makes electricity.

---

Elites drive Tesla's and their policies empower Putin and destroy the poor. But no worries for them as they hide their head in the sand at the energy needs of the world.

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-wests-green-delusions-empowered?utm_source=url&s=r

---

I don't know what this has to do with what I wrote or how it's tethered in any way to reality, but I would think you'd be a huge Musk fanboy. You keep using "greenie" like it's a pejorative and he's trying to make it possible for you to live on Mars where there is absolutely no vegetation whatsoever to annoy you. Say what you will about the guy and his many flaws, but he was massively successful in proving the concept that modern EVs are superior to ICE vehicles in every way except creating pollution. Because of him you can now buy an EV from every major manufacturer with many more just over the horizon. The lowest priced Tesla starts at under $40k, and several other makes start under $30k. Truly the vehicles of the elites.

---

Not a big fan of Musk because of the way he has used Government subsidies to sell high end vehicles. But he has made better automobiles then ever expected from him.

And he doesn't follow the liberal groupthink of the elites of our time. Don't like or agree with everything he says but happy to see someone not afraid to speak out against Political Correctness and Authoritarian social media companies.

My point is that California as an example is forcing the use of electricity without building the power generation needed to support it. We need more natural gas electricity generation, more hydroelectric power generation and if people were serious about lowering greenhouse gases would be considering nuclear as well.

DiabloWags said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

Hydroelectric power is awesome, totally in favor. California Dem's haven't allowed any new hydro power forever.

---

This may have not occurred to you.
You can build more dams, but there isnt more water flowing into California.
There also arent many sensible dam sites left in California.
Ever think of that?

Current capacity levels of reservoirs in California:

Shasta: 37%

Oroville: 47%

New Melones: 41%

rescond.pdf (ca.gov)

---

California passed a large water bill a while back but despite the people voting for it no new reservoirs built from that nor in the proceeding decades. You just promoted hydroelectric and now argue against it? And yes the reservoirs are very low! If we had twice the number of reservoirs we would be in a different position and the desire to switch to more electric in California would be more feasible.

DiabloWags said:

---

Here are the Facts on California power generation for 2020:

Oil: 0.01%

Small Hydro: 1.39%

Biomass: 2.45%

Coal: 2.74%

Geothermal: 4.89%

Nuclear: 9.33%

Wind: 11.13%

Large Hydro: 12.21%

Solar: 13.23%

Natural Gas: 37.06%

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total Renewables: 33.09%

Total Non-Renewables: 66.91%

2020 Total System Electric Generation (ca.gov)

---

BTW, the other issue is based on the last year's statistics I could find we get 28% of our electricity from out of the State. What do you think they do to produce this electricity? I haven't researched but would guess the majority is Natural Gas through there could be some coal.

The amount of electricity coming from outside the state has been increasing rapidly. And we will see an exponential growth in out of State electricity if CA goes through with their electricity mandates while refusing to build enough new electrical plants of size and substance.

So the percentage of non-renewables providing our electricity in CA is greater than that chart.

https://www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CA

NVBear78 said:

---

My point is that California as an example is forcing the use of electricity without building the power generation needed to support it. We need more natural gas electricity generation, more hydroelectric power generation and if people were serious about lowering greenhouse gases would be considering nuclear as well.

---

How is CA forcing the use of electricity? Or do you mean PV? How is CA forcing the use of PV?

pic.twitter.com/taMFKhA1FC

— Jimmy Kimmel (@jimmykimmel) March 2, 2022

NVBear78 said:

---

California passed a large water bill a while back but despite the people voting for it no new reservoirs built from that nor in the proceeding decades. You just promoted hydroelectric and now argue against it? And yes the reservoirs are very low! If we had twice the number of reservoirs we would be in a different position and the desire to switch to more electric in California would be more feasible.

---

I'm aware of the bill.

It was Prop.1 from 2014 and it was a $7.5 Billion dollar bond measure to pay for new water projects, including dams and reservoirs. It was supported by both parties, and endorsed by Gov. Brown, Feinstein, Boxer, etc. It passed with 65 - 35% vote.

But there was some "fine" print to deal with in the legislation, which produced hurdles for various water districts. For example, the bond money could pay no more than half of any project's total cost, with local water agencies or the federal government paying the rest. Most importantly, it required that every storage project must be ranked by the CWC with a scoring system that took into account "public benefits".

Those benefits are defined not as how much water a reservoir can hold, but rather, how much it improves recreation, like boating or hiking, flood control and environmental conditions, such as helping endangered salmon populations come back by providing cold water to streams during dry periods.

The commission wrote rules to calculate a "public benefit ratio" that would account for 33 percent of the overall score of each project, with the rest coming from categories like how feasible it is to construct or how resilient it will be as the climate changes. For example, supporters of an $800 million project asking the state for $400 million must show that their project would provide $400 million in new public benefits, like improved salmon runs, flood control or recreation. If they don't hit that 1-to-1 ratio, they are less likely to receive the money. Further, half of all the money the state gives must be for "ecosystem improvements," the ballot measure said.

"If the state is going to put up taxpayer money for a project, it is appropriate that there be broad public benefit rather than just subsidizing private interests or agencies who have other means of getting the funding from local ratepayers," said Kyle Jones, a policy advocate with Sierra Club California. "It's not fair for people in Redding to subsidize a dam in Los Angeles unless the whole state is benefiting."

Plans to build new huge dams and reservoirs in California hit hurdle (mercurynews.com)

Since we are talking Tesla I'll throw in two cents, I spent a good chunk of my professional career analyzing Teslas's EV production. We spent hours on the factory floor, consulted with everyone from geologists to climatologists to chemists. Went through their Gantt chart for their first car on a line by line basis and talked to their executives, and others in the industry, for 100s of hours. I came to two conclusions.

First, the dirtiest electricity from the worst coal fired plant powering a fleet of Tesla's is still substantially cleaner in terms of overall greenhouse gas emissions than the emissions would be from an equivalent fleet of internal combustion engine vehicles. And of course the cleaner the electricity the better. But even worst case it's a remarkable improvement.*

Second, the idea that we can produce enough electricity to make a whole sale move to an EV world, or even a significant move, without nuclear power is fantasy. Nuclear absolutely has to be part of the solution. And we can't wait on this stuff. The global climate implications of ignoring this emission problem are simply far too dire and obvious. We need nuclear and we need it now.

*Edit to add: and yes, part of our emissions analysis included the emissions from mining, smelting, refining and transporting the rare earth minerals needed for battery production. Honestly those were an emissions rounding error. Their location in certain "geopolitically undesirable" parts of the world are more of an issue but there's a lot of work going into finding other sources for these minerals in more stable regions.

DiabloWags said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera.

---

Since you're a "neutral" party, what would you have to say about Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene's behavior last night?

Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene heckle Biden during State of the Union (yahoo.com)

---

There's precedent..

Sebastabear said:

---

Since we are talking Tesla I'll throw in two cents, I spent a good chunk of my professional career analyzing Teslas's EV production. We spent hours on the factory floor, consulted with everyone from geologists to climatologists to chemists. Went through their Gantt chart for their first car on a line by line basis and talked to their executives, and others in the industry, for 100s of hours. I came to two conclusions.

First, the dirtiest electricity from the worst coal fired plant powering a fleet of Tesla's is still substantially cleaner in terms of overall greenhouse gas emissions than the emissions would be from an equivalent fleet of internal combustion engine vehicles. And of course the cleaner the electricity the better. But even worst case it's a remarkable improvement.*

Second, the idea that we can produce enough electricity to make a whole sale move to an EV world, or even a significant move, without nuclear power is fantasy. Nuclear absolutely has to be part of the solution. And we can't wait on this stuff. The global climate implications of ignoring this emission problem are simply far too dire and obvious. We need nuclear and we need it now.

*Edit to add: and yes, part of our emissions analysis included the emissions from mining, smelting, refining and transporting the rare earth minerals needed for battery production. Honestly those were an emissions rounding error. Their location in certain "geopolitically undesirable" parts of the world are more of an issue but there's a lot of work going into finding other sources for these minerals in more stable regions.

---

Any feasibility to putting solar panels everywhere, such as on the tops of cars?

Anybody want to give me the "BI nutshell version" on the status of nuclear power in 2022?

AFAIK, the main environmental drawback was considered to be what to do with the waste. That, and the possibility of some sort of Chernobyl happening, largely due to mismanagement/human error.

Can we now do nuclear better than we could've, say, forty years ago? What are the current pros and cons?

oski003 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Since we are talking Tesla I'll throw in two cents, I spent a good chunk of my professional career analyzing Teslas's EV production. We spent hours on the factory floor, consulted with everyone from geologists to climatologists to chemists. Went through their Gantt chart for their first car on a line by line basis and talked to their executives, and others in the industry, for 100s of hours. I came to two conclusions.

First, the dirtiest electricity from the worst coal fired plant powering a fleet of Tesla's is still substantially cleaner in terms of overall greenhouse gas emissions than the emissions would be from an equivalent fleet of internal combustion engine vehicles. And of course the cleaner the electricity the better. But even worst case it's a remarkable improvement.*

Second, the idea that we can produce enough electricity to make a whole sale move to an EV world, or even a significant move, without nuclear power is fantasy. Nuclear absolutely has to be part of the solution. And we can't wait on this stuff. The global climate implications of ignoring this emission problem are simply far too dire and obvious. We need nuclear and we need it now.

*Edit to add: and yes, part of our emissions analysis included the emissions from mining, smelting, refining and transporting the rare earth minerals needed for battery production. Honestly those were an emissions rounding error. Their location in certain "geopolitically undesirable" parts of the world are more of an issue but there's a lot of work going into finding other sources for these minerals in more stable regions.

---

Any feasibility to putting solar panels everywhere, such as on the tops of cars?

---

I don't think solar on cars makes sense. Not a lot of surface area and adds complexity and weight. Better to invest in large scale solar projects in the southwest.

In response to Sebasta and others, I love the idea of nuclear but the fear of cyber terrorism worries me. I just watched BlackHat which didn't help.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

I'm just a neutral party here, but someone needs to tell that idiot vice president of ours to quit staring directly at the camera.

---

Since you're a "neutral" party, what would you have to say about Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene's behavior last night?

Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene heckle Biden during State of the Union (yahoo.com)

---

There's precedent..

---

That was after the speech.

oski003 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Since we are talking Tesla I'll throw in two cents, I spent a good chunk of my professional career analyzing Teslas's EV production. We spent hours on the factory floor, consulted with everyone from geologists to climatologists to chemists. Went through their Gantt chart for their first car on a line by line basis and talked to their executives, and others in the industry, for 100s of hours. I came to two conclusions.

First, the dirtiest electricity from the worst coal fired plant powering a fleet of Tesla's is still substantially cleaner in terms of overall greenhouse gas emissions than the emissions would be from an equivalent fleet of internal combustion engine vehicles. And of course the cleaner the electricity the better. But even worst case it's a remarkable improvement.*

Second, the idea that we can produce enough electricity to make a whole sale move to an EV world, or even a significant move, without nuclear power is fantasy. Nuclear absolutely has to be part of the solution. And we can't wait on this stuff. The global climate implications of ignoring this emission problem are simply far too dire and obvious. We need nuclear and we need it now.

*Edit to add: and yes, part of our emissions analysis included the emissions from mining, smelting, refining and transporting the rare earth minerals needed for battery production. Honestly those were an emissions rounding error. Their location in certain "geopolitically undesirable" parts of the world are more of an issue but there's a lot of work going into finding other sources for these minerals in more stable regions.

---

Any feasibility to putting solar panels everywhere, such as on the tops of cars?

---

It seems like putting them on the roof of your car would be the logical placement (your own mobile power plant). Unfortunately the truth is the energy yield from the most efficient solar panels ever invented on your car roof would maybe be enough to power your radio and headlights. Maybe. They just can't create enough juice to make the vehicle go. Solar panels on house roofs and everywhere else though is a very good idea. It's just not enough by itself.

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

My point is that California as an example is forcing the use of electricity without building the power generation needed to support it. We need more natural gas electricity generation, more hydroelectric power generation and if people were serious about lowering greenhouse gases would be considering nuclear as well.

---

How is CA forcing the use of electricity? Or do you mean PV? How is CA forcing the use of PV?

---

Aren't more CA cities passing regulations forbidding new construction projects from installing natural gas appliances in order to make residential and commercial buildings all-electric?

The irony is that these reports are often followed by a flex alert saying we need to cut back on electricity use because there isn't enough to go around...

Cal_79 said:

---

Aren't more CA cities passing regulations forbidding new construction projects from installing natural gas appliances in order to make residential and commercial buildings all-electric?

---

I don't know, you tell me. You and nv are the ones making the claim of being "forced to use electricity." Do you personally have any LNG or propane burning appliances or have the "greenies" raided your homes and ripped them out?

What's the list of CA jurisdictions that have banned gas burning appliances?
What's the list of CA jurisdictions that haven't?
Is the ban always limited to new construction?
How many projects have been built under these new restrictions?
How many preexisting projects are there that are exempt from them?
Are there any other new requirements that might offset the grid demand of these new projects?
In short what possible correlation, let alone causation as you seem to imply, is there between these projects and intermittent grid shortfalls?

oski003 said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Since we are talking Tesla I'll throw in two cents, I spent a good chunk of my professional career analyzing Teslas's EV production. We spent hours on the factory floor, consulted with everyone from geologists to climatologists to chemists. Went through their Gantt chart for their first car on a line by line basis and talked to their executives, and others in the industry, for 100s of hours. I came to two conclusions.

First, the dirtiest electricity from the worst coal fired plant powering a fleet of Tesla's is still substantially cleaner in terms of overall greenhouse gas emissions than the emissions would be from an equivalent fleet of internal combustion engine vehicles. And of course the cleaner the electricity the better. But even worst case it's a remarkable improvement.*

Second, the idea that we can produce enough electricity to make a whole sale move to an EV world, or even a significant move, without nuclear power is fantasy. Nuclear absolutely has to be part of the solution. And we can't wait on this stuff. The global climate implications of ignoring this emission problem are simply far too dire and obvious. We need nuclear and we need it now.

*Edit to add: and yes, part of our emissions analysis included the emissions from mining, smelting, refining and transporting the rare earth minerals needed for battery production. Honestly those were an emissions rounding error. Their location in certain "geopolitically undesirable" parts of the world are more of an issue but there's a lot of work going into finding other sources for these minerals in more stable regions.

---

Any feasibility to putting solar panels everywhere, such as on the tops of cars?

---

Coming in from the Athens airport it is amazing to see the panels on almost every roof in the City. If what is close to a third world economy can do it....The one thing people don't get is both the solar farms and their distribution systems take up huge amounts of land. As someone who represented SCE, it was amazing the amount of battles we had with environmentalists trying to acquire (condemn) land and develop it for solar capacity. And it was very strange set of allies and opponents. For example, we would have the coastal Sierra Clubs helping our team politically and legally against Sierra Clubs from Inland Empire and Desert communities who opposed SCE. Might make some of you cynical.

Cal_79 said:

---

WalterSobchak said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

My point is that California as an example is forcing the use of electricity without building the power generation needed to support it. We need more natural gas electricity generation, more hydroelectric power generation and if people were serious about lowering greenhouse gases would be considering nuclear as well.

---

How is CA forcing the use of electricity? Or do you mean PV? How is CA forcing the use of PV?

---

Aren't more CA cities passing regulations forbidding new construction projects from installing natural gas appliances in order to make residential and commercial buildings all-electric?

The irony is that these reports are often followed by a flex alert saying we need to cut back on electricity use because there isn't enough to go around...

---

One of the big struggles down in SoCal is to find "off-hour" alternative sources because the production from the "solar grid" is daytime only. A landfill gas collection cogeneration plant or a nuclear facility, for example, can run all night. The grid right now is overly dependent on solar.

Edit: I'm not versed on Bay Area/NorCal issues - other than you guys have much bigger issues than SCE and SDG&E.

Not again, Ted!!!😂😂😂 pic.twitter.com/N7GWEn9IgY

— il Donaldo Trumpo (@PapiTrumpo) March 2, 2022

FOX - "uninspired"
NBC - "didn't age well
Ted Cruz - "huh, what?"

AunBear89 said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Goobear said:

---

Got gas today and that was an expensive endeavor. What say you.

---

I don't buy gas anymore. You don't have to either.

---

Let me know what you do with the battery when used up and how much carbon footprint was used to mine the metals for that battery….

---

Never heard a greenie care about that. And they have nonstop lab to provide more electricity.

---

You righteous righties are right: It's too hard. Let's just keep burning coal and oil. What could go wrong? And it's not like evil f&ckers are getting rich off exploiting the environment.

---

I already said nuclear energy is needed. France has been doing it. However Germany is getting rid of it. In the mean time, Asia is building 200 coal plants. What do you do about that? You think the pollution only stays there and there is some imaginary wall to protect our environment from theirs? So now we have people dying over energy once more…Is that an unintended consequence? I am libertarian and for a clean earth. But I am against hypocrisy. That is all I read when it comes to clean energy and fossil fuels regardless what side of the debate you are on..