Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:03 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Are you talking about the 2009 bounceback? The latest two bouncebacks took oil from $41 to around $60 and from $26 (really $30) to around $50. I don't count one or two day wonders in figuring high and low prices.
Zero interest rates didn't have quite the bumping power as Q.E. All the same, both have harmed the middle and lower classes in favor of Wall Street.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:05 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Taxes on energy are regressive taxes. Once again liberals screwing the poor and downtrodden.
This is true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
37,474 posts, read 61,423,512 times
Reputation: 30439
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Solar is really a wise investment for a very small group of people in specific situations.
A high percentage of 'people' live in apartments or condos, so they can not use solar power. After subtracting all the people who are in circumstances that preclude solar. You are left with technically a minority of the population.

I am not convinced that it is truly a small minority.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:36 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Because it works maybe.
They both work.

From 3 months ago:

What do Texas and California have in common? 'Negative power' caused by renewables glut

Quote:
...Texas’s own renewable power boom was driven in part by policies that led to a $7 billion build-out in high-voltage transmission lines designed to carry wind power out of West Texas. The Competitive Renewable Energy Zone, or CREZ as the project is known, was completed in January 2014 with the capacity to deliver more than 18,000 megawatts.

Wind generation on Texas’s grid rose to a record 14,023 megawatts on Feb. 18. It accounted for almost half of the state’s total supply on March 23, the highest ever, according to the state’s grid operator....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:39 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo View Post
Taxes on energy are regressive taxes. Once again liberals screwing the poor and downtrodden.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
It's not surprising you left out the role of government.

Additionally, I'm still wanting to know if you favor hidden taxes on gas or if you prefer the taxes are visible by just a visible collection at the pump.
Pollution isn't free and environmental degradation has a cost. Either way you pay somehow. I've only been to China once and it was the only time I have ever experienced pollution it stung my face. Not too many Chinese happy with the state of their environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:42 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,122,688 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Solar is really a wise investment for a very small group of people in specific situations.
Huh?

Solar Potential

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...map-USA-en.png

Wind Potential

http://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/80m_w...300dpe4-11.jpg

We have plenty of potential use, just need to upgrade and expand the grid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:43 PM
 
14,024 posts, read 15,037,335 times
Reputation: 10471
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
the issue with wind is it is unreliable to a greater extent than any other renewable (at least in most parts of the US), Hydro, solar etc. Load leveling is the largest issues for overland windfarms, while places like the North Sea and Martha's Vineyard Sound are shallow waters and consistent winds, geographically, wind is not really great for being the backbone of the Power grid the "on March 23rd" part is sort of the issue with wind.
For wind you don't need strong wind, you need consistent wind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 01:56 PM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,631,426 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Pollution isn't free and environmental degradation has a cost. Either way you pay somehow. I've only been to China once and it was the only time I have ever experienced pollution it stung my face. Not too many Chinese happy with the state of their environment.
Why hide the tax and put more overhead on it?

Do you favor moving the tax directly to the consumer to make the tax visible while removing corruption and overhead?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 02:05 PM
 
Location: New York Area
35,083 posts, read 17,043,458 times
Reputation: 30247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeptical View Post
People who have their own solar arrays and wind generators pay just as much for electricity they get from the grid as those who depend exclusively on the grid. I don't get how you think you are paying for someone elses electricty.
Because the utilities still have to provide adequate peak-load power for people who get some of their power for "free." Thus the utility's overhead is distributed more heavily towards the remaining non-free units. In other words the utility needs to maintain the same capacity as always but will have lower sales.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2016, 02:49 PM
 
Location: The South
7,480 posts, read 6,265,780 times
Reputation: 13002
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Because the utilities still have to provide adequate peak-load power for people who get some of their power for "free." Thus the utility's overhead is distributed more heavily towards the remaining non-free units. In other words the utility needs to maintain the same capacity as always but will have lower sales.
Yep and most utilities are not going to invest money in a plant to only run half the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:06 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top