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.
You can opt out through a letter they sent, but if you do nothing, you get enrolled in automatically. Looks pretty shady! I'm going to look them up, but I thought to ask here first. Anyone have any experience like this?
Ossining has been getting those letter too. It's a state approved program: http://www3.dps.ny.gov/pscweb/WebFileRoom.nsf/web/C9DCDFF7232D6C4185257DF80063C456/$File/pr15020.pdf?OpenElement
Yesterday as I was driving on Quaker Ridge Rd in New Rochelle there were bright green signs all along the road saying "OPT OUT" and I was wondering what it meant. When I got home I found the letter in my mail and I'm assuming those signs were about this issue. However, I have no idea what the real story is and what the benefits are either way... Need to do research!
Yesterday as I was driving on Quaker Ridge Rd in New Rochelle there were bright green signs all along the road saying "OPT OUT" and I was wondering what it meant. When I got home I found the letter in my mail and I'm assuming those signs were about this issue. However, I have no idea what the real story is and what the benefits are either way... Need to do research!
While anything is possible, what the "opt out" signs were likely referring to is the current round of ELA and Math testing being currently carried out at public schools in the State of New York. There is a vocal group of people who are encouraging families to opt out of their kids taking the test, for a variety of reasons. Their broader mission would be more effective if a large number of kids refuse to take the test.
As for Westchester Power, which is what the OP is referencing, opting out is certainly an option, but there are no meaningful benefits of large scale opt outs, at least right now.
While anything is possible, what the "opt out" signs were likely referring to is the current round of ELA and Math testing being currently carried out at public schools in the State of New York. There is a vocal group of people who are encouraging families to opt out of their kids taking the test, for a variety of reasons. Their broader mission would be more effective if a large number of kids refuse to take the test.
As for Westchester Power, which is what the OP is referencing, opting out is certainly an option, but there are no meaningful benefits of large scale opt outs, at least right now.
Let me see - pay for electricity from renewable energy sources or from non-renewable polluting resources. Hmm. The former definitely sounds shady. As if there's some ulterior motive. Like not further destroying the environment or something. Shady.
This whole thing sounds shady to me. Can someone explain something...it's the same energy, right? I mean the power lines and grid, etc is all the same. It's not like one power line has two sources flowing on it, one from reneweable energy and one from "bad" energy? So what does this actually mean? Maybe I don't understand it completely, but I smell BS here. Also, I don't like the fact that they made it opt-out, rather than opt-in. That alone is a red flag to me.
This whole thing sounds shady to me. Can someone explain something...it's the same energy, right? I mean the power lines and grid, etc is all the same. It's not like one power line has two sources flowing on it, one from reneweable energy and one from "bad" energy? So what does this actually mean? Maybe I don't understand it completely, but I smell BS here. Also, I don't like the fact that they made it opt-out, rather than opt-in. That alone is a red flag to me.
Electricity is all the same, that's true. However, historically the electricity for your home was provided to you by a single provider (ConEdison in this region). When electrical markets were de-regulated, the idea was that if people had more choices in providers, electricity costs would go down. The problem is exactly what you have suggested - electricity is all the same. So what actually changes? When you are paying a utility, you are paying the entity that bought the electricity from the producers (coal plants, nuclear plants, etc.) It's their problem if they make money or lose money on the deal they strike with producers. They make money from customers, who they charge for usage.
There are two ways to introduce competition in this space: First, just give everyone a choice as to who they choose. Today, we all have that; if you've never been cold-called by Agway Energy, then you don't really live in Westchester County (or don't have a listed landline). The problem with this is that Agway has to work really hard to get enough customers before they can really be competitive, and many small providers don't last for this reason. The other way, which is what is being done here, is to aggregate customers at the municipal level. This is sort of the Groupon of electricity buying run by a consortium of towns in Westchester. They got bids from various providers and basically said that this is the best deal that we can get.
This is a decent model, as it has the benefit of introducing a certain amount of scale. The problem is that the goals of the consortium may not align with your own. In this case, if you prioritize the cheapest solution and ONLY the cheapest solution, you might not get what you want, since they are also taking green energy into account. If you like their principles, it is a quite promising solution. There are some other potential disadvantages to their model (average rate buying, etc.), but I'd say the blended purpose is the most significant.
I'm not in one of the cities tied to the consortium, but I would probably stay in for a while just to see it, simply because I like the blended priorities. If I didn't, I would be skeptical about their ability to keep rates lower.
Thanks Kensington - that's a great explanation. The thing I still don't understand is, if it's all the same energy, then what does it mean when you say you can buy from companies that use more green energy, etc? If my neighbor is paying for a plan that uses all coal, and I'm using all solar, we're still getting the same electricity. So what are you really buying then?
Thanks Kensington - that's a great explanation. The thing I still don't understand is, if it's all the same energy, then what does it mean when you say you can buy from companies that use more green energy, etc? If my neighbor is paying for a plan that uses all coal, and I'm using all solar, we're still getting the same electricity. So what are you really buying then?
Theoretically, you're buying from a market maker who will bid for more green energy and creating demand for that energy source. As the market maker has more muscle (customers), then it will drive down demand for non-green energy sources, placing downward pressure their prices. Of course, the problem is that the market maker also puts upward pressure the price of green energy, which puts it and green energy producers in kind of a pickle if they can't ramp up supply, since they are only collecting/charging based on the average rate for the other producers' electricity. Like I said, I'd be willing to support their initiative, but eventually would have to evaluate if they are in an unworkable place with their model. They are a non-profit, not a negative-profit, so they will have to adjust accordingly.
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.
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.
