Comments on: San Francisco offloads green power bills onto U.S. taxpayers

By: Jere Kapour

Jere Kapour — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 21:37:51 +0000

You have so many of your facts wrong, it is almost comical. – Jere

By: ZZMike

ZZMike — Fri, 21 Sep 2012 19:49:10 +0000

First off, this is San Francisco, where the laws of logic do not apply, and where reality seldom sets foot (and if it did, it’d be run out of town).

By: Wayne Lusvardi

Wayne Lusvardi — Thu, 20 Sep 2012 20:38:33 +0000

Tom
Good point. Where the “externalities” to green power will show up is with increased transmission costs (your balancing plants, new smart grid, blackouts, etc).

So cities can buy cheap power but the transmission cost may offset any decrease in price.

By: Tom Tanton

Tom Tanton — Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:10:39 +0000

The production tax credit that Misters Alexander and Pompeo refer to (along with section 1603 grants) is scheduled to expire at the end of this year (although there will be legacy projects as the credit is good for ten years.) NOte that the PTC is so generous that green power producers can pay ANYONE to TAKE it, not just municipal power departments. Of course there are huge costs imposed on others (balancig plants, transmission system) that actually increase the costs but that are offloaded by the green power developer. When those costs are properly accounted for and allocataed, Cities like SF are in for a rude awakening.

By: Stanley K.

Stanley K. — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 21:26:27 +0000

“Strangely, the government green power subsidy is so generous that green power producers can pay municipal power departments to buy it.”
Now THAT’S crazy. We can’t go on like this!