Comments on: CA solar plans snarled by controversy

By: Just Another Disgruntled Citizen

Just Another Disgruntled Citizen — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 20:20:59 +0000

First, that is taxpayers’ money being “invested” in new energy technologies that have so far not shown any sign of being competitive or “clean” in the strictest sense of the word. These investments are government subsidies that benefit one set of citizens at the expense of another set, thereby creating two or three separate classes of citizens. This is not free market or Equality under the Law and it isn’t solving the problems that need to be solved;
Second, there is no reason we have to destroy California’s beautiful deserts and other places to save the planet. For too long, far too many people have been laboring under the delusion that America’s undeveloped wilderness is “wasteland” that should be put to some “use” of “benefit” to society, meaning it is in some way contributing to our Gross National Product and generating revenue for the public treasury–AS IF THE BEAUTY AND EXISTENCE OF NATURAL UNSPOILED PLACES HAVE NO INTRINSIC VALUE OF THEIR OWN. A people who do not value the natural world for its own sake are not really civilized;
Third, there are an awful lot of rooftops in California, both public and private, and more than enough are quite suitable for solar panels. If our fearless leaders in Sacramento and Washington would stop thinking with their prejudices, we could use solar panels owned by whoever has title to the roof as an off-the-grid energy source to power the seasonal use of air conditioners, electric heaters, pool-heaters and so forth–the kind of uses that fluctuate and cost a lot of money. Independent closed-systems. That would save the countryside from being destroyed by ugly, polluting, publically-funded solar projects and money for whoever wants solar on their rooftop (including government buildings);
Fourth, our so-called “energy policy” is a construct of wishful thinking and self-serving assumptions that at best might just be a boondoggle, but at worst might just be catastrophic;
Fifth, even though I am not an advocate of current energy policy, I don’t think people who signed onto the rooftop solar program with assurances from both the government and solar-panel producers that they would be given credit for the electricity they contributed to the grid have a legitimate gripe. It is their own equipment (nobody got it for free even if taxpayers did subsidize it like the Chrysler bail-outs). The energy generated by that equipment should belong to them. If the program was set up so that the utilities or solar companies own the equipment or the electricity, however, they are victims of a bait-and-switch operation. Theft is theft. It doesn’t matter if nobody could foresee what is happening now. I think the utilities or solar companies, whoever thinks they are entitled, should buy back all the equipment or pay for the energy generated by it. Period.
“Without wisdom, a people perish.”
Psalms

By: readysetgo

readysetgo — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 19:12:04 +0000

In reply to Dork. So, you don't mind if we store the nuclear waste in your back yard?

By: Rex the Wonder Dog!

Rex the Wonder Dog! — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 18:44:14 +0000

In reply to Ulysses Uhaul. So what you're saying is that it is similar to our government ;)

By: Ulysses Uhaul

Ulysses Uhaul — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 17:14:28 +0000

Biggest fraud in history. Junk parts. Payback poor. Repair people no warrant work. Obsolete within one year. Companies BK regular so warranties are useless.

By: Dork

Dork — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 15:54:28 +0000

develop a total of 22 million acres in California’s desert,” the site added, advocates claimed the plan could contribute to the production of some 20,000 megawatts of alternative energy

What a Boondoggle, just put up some nuclear plants:

As of December 1, 2015, there were 99 operating nuclear reactors at 61 nuclear power plants in the United States. The Fort Calhoun plant in Nebraska has one reactor with the smallest generating capacity1 of 479 megawatts (MW). The Palo Verde plant in Arizona has three reactors and has the largest combined generating capacity1 of about 3,937 MW.

The amount of electricity that a nuclear reactor or power plant generates depends on the amount of time it operates at a specific capacity. For example, if the Fort Calhoun reactor operates at 479 MW capacity for 24 hours, it will generate 11,496 megawatthours (MWh). Most power plants do not operate a full capacity every hour of every day of the year.

By: Spurwing Plover

Spurwing Plover — Fri, 04 Dec 2015 15:18:39 +0000

Its always amazing to see the nature freaks at each others throats like this over such ideas as wind and solar energy and Hanoi Jane the hollyweed crowd and the Greenfreaks opposing nucular energy over this China Syndrome poppycock