Question for those who live in California

[California]

I see some objections to these articles. But none mentioned the sentences that expand the headline and give greater understanding, when they say production exceeded consumption for 0.5 to 6 hours on individual days, setting new records, a significant advance in electric generation. Which was the key point of the professor who published his observations on X.

Like anything you read on here or anywhere, go look at the primary sources cited to get a better understanding of an issue. What you see published in the popular press is nothing more than a clue that some issue exists and is rarely an authoritative summary.

 

[California]

Another issue of interest to Californians:

California cracks down on water pumping: ‘The ground is collapsing’

Farm region near Tulare Lake has been put on ‘probation’ as overpumping of water has caused faster sinking of ground

www.theguardian.com

My great-grandparents arrived in California by covered wagon then eventually were landowners there, around 1870 after Tulare Lake was drained to make excellent farmland.

 

[KennyG]

RI has higher electric rates than CA? Where did you read that?

Is California less than 8.91 cents per kilowatt-hour?
State regulators approve Rhode Island Energy’s proposed summer electric rates • Rhode Island Current

I always go to the US EIA website. It provides average rates for states including all classes and charges unlike many news articles.

 

[plowhog]

The primary statement in that article is purposely misleading

After doing some digging, I question whether dailykos received payment for placement of this "article?" In other words, is it a "paid promotion" or a legitimately newsworthy article? I don't know whether "pay for play" is involved, as I have no idea what business model dailykos uses. But after digging, I don't believe it is a reliably sourced article.

The website that pushed the misleading headline is linked to is Electrek.co Who is Electrek.co? I can find no "about us" or company information. According to the registrar of domain names, a .co extension is the Internet country code assigned to Colombia. In South America. So how is a "news article" originating in the nation of Columbia making astonishing claims about achievements of California renewable energy?

A "Michelle Lewis" is the author of the piece. It seems she authors many similar pieces (promotions?) I read a few pieces and every single one was waving the pom-poms for renewable energy. One story I read was about highly exciting new dealer incentives to purchase an EV car. So who is paying Michelle Lewis? (We don't know.)

Michelle Lewis

electrek.co

Michelle writes that in addition to promoting Electrek, she is a writer at DroneDJ, 9to5Mac, and 9to5Google. I went to those sites, but could not find anything there that was contributed by her.

I did a search (using Whois) to find ownership of the domain electrek.co Here is what I got:

Registry Registrant ID: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Registrant Name: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Registrant Organization: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0166757208
Registrant Street: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Registrant City: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Registrant State/Province: ON
Registrant Postal Code: REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Registrant Country: CA

Whoever owns it-- doesn't want you to know. Country code is Columbia, beyond reach of US authorities. Registrant country is Canada. Michelle Lewis says she is in USA. Hmmmmm.

Let's summarize:
- the article came from a blogger who 100% of the time promotes articles favorable to renewable energy.
- its publishing origination and company ownership is purposely obscured.
- this piece is highly favorable about renewables (surprise!) and includes a highly misleading headline.
- the dailykos washed its hands of any responsibility claiming they had not read or reviewed it.

I have a problem with this sort of "journalism." How many young people will see this story link on their phone, never click on it, but get led to believe solar panels are now supplying over 100% of California's energy needs? Some will form that impression-- and you have to wonder if that was the intent of making the headling so misleading and pushing it onto sites such as dailykos.

Dailykos is equally problematic putting material out they don't even review. They are not unique of course-- they and others push stories to fit "confirmation bias" of their readers-- it is a terrible practice.

I don't, and won't, read material at dailykos. I knew better when I clicked on this link ... oh well.

Now back to the regular programming ...

 

[ultrarunner]

I just checked to make sure and I want to be accurate. California doesn't have the highest rates in the US. Hawaii and Rhode Island are higher, CA is only the third highest of the 50 states. Aren't you Californians lucky.

I think it depends… if you happen to be in a California city that adds city Utility Taxes the total price per kWh could be the most expensive?

 

[ultrarunner]

I think you're missing the point that Kos is like here. The editors didn't 'select' this article from somewhere. Rather, people are free to create and post their own opinion. This doesn't mean it represents the editorial opinion of the publication's owner.

It's up to you, and that commenter you cited, to decide if the article improves your understanding of some issue. It's a place for discussion, the articles (most) not written by the staff are nothing more than the opinion of an individual.

Another aspect of articles posted on Kos is in many cases, the comments responding to the article are more knowledgeable than the initial article. Kinda like the threads here. And they have to be read before you have the whole picture. It's not rare for commenters to pile on and declare the original article is nonsense. Like occasionally happens here. (The Kos comments are generally favorable in this instance).

Here's another article on the subject I saw previously. Like this article, I have no idea of its credibility. But the subject in general, that renewables and now batteries, offer a lower cost of adding generating capacity, seems to me to be a subject that I thought others might find interesting.

California doesn't have any more sites suitable for hydro so the subject of where to find added capacity is a current issue. I hope the quoted Stanford professor is correct that this is presently the best path forward.

Sorry if this concerned you.

A major US state just achieved a critical milestone: 'It's wild that this isn't getting more news coverage'

California has hit 100% renewable energy before, but this is the first time the state has sustained that success over an extended period.

www.thecooldown.com

And some are being removed to facilitate salmon runs, etc…

 

[two_bit_score]

I think it depends… if you happen to be in a California city that adds city Utility Taxes the total price per kWh could be the most expensive?

Of course. You have to include the taxes as part of the cost just like the fuel taxes are included when you buy a gallon at any fuel pump.

 

[California]

But that's a 'shoot the messenger' take on what the article describes. Your dislike of Kos and suspicion of Electrek has blinded you to the second sentence!

"Stanford University professor of civil and environmental engineering Mark Z. Jacobson has been tracking California's renewables performance. Jacobson notes that supply exceeds demand for "0.25-6 h per day," and that's an important fact. The continuity lies not in renewables running the grid for the entire day but in the fact that it's happening on a consistent daily basis, which has never been achieved before."

Now that's the essence of what the author wanted to share. Can we please discuss that instead?

Any rational discussion of the topic should be based on digging into professor Jacobson's original claims. Not focusing on the repost on Kos, of the Electrek repost, of what Jacobsen posted on X. Then stopping at dislike of the messengers.

This topic that Jacobsen describes is too important for discussion of it to get halted at the 'shoot the messenger' stage!

 

[California]

@California is trying to slip in his liberal doctrine and act innocent about it.

We can't all be in Texas and do everything like your electric providers do there ....

I think the examination of new and less costly generating capacity is better described as forward-looking, not essentially 'liberal' as you seem to think.

I thought Texas already has substantial renewable energy sources, no? Is that somehow not politically correct to mention it?

 

[jyoutz]

We can't all be in Texas and do everything like your electric providers do there ....

I think the examination of new and less costly generating capacity is better described as forward-looking, not essentially 'liberal' as you seem to think.

I thought Texas already has substantial renewable energy sources, no? Is that somehow not politically correct to mention it?

Texas has wind farms everywhere in the state. Or at least the western and central portions. However much of their electricity generation facilities aren’t winterized and don’t work when it’s cold.

 

[ericm979]

I thought Texas already has substantial renewable energy sources, no?

Texas has more solar than California: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/texas-solar-record-ercot-grid-18705325.php

 

[California]

Texas has more solar than California: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/texas-solar-record-ercot-grid-18705325.php

Oh no! You injected a liberal talking point!

TBS will reply that we can't have none of that here!

 

[California]

I glanced into the feared and reviled Daily Kos this morning to see if anyone has countered what professor Jacobsen posted on X. No. I saw someone else essentially re-posted the article I cited. That's just dumb.

What I did find interesting was a new post describing how insurance costs are rising as a consequence of climate change and this is a factor driving inflation. While the article and comments are presented from a 'liberal' perspective, I think the facts discussed are of interest to most. I like the looking-forward perspective contained in many of the articles there. Note that the quote from Forbes, a never-liberal source, is right in line with the rest of the article. And a Texan is quoted. She will have to abandon her home after revised flood prediction maps tripled her insurance cost. Would that make her a liberal?

All this interesting to me. I was dropped when my ranch insuror left the state due to their fire insurance losses, now I'm paying triple to an inferior firm not even licensed in the state. This Kos article helps show the broader picture of which I am a small part.

TBS, you don't have to look!

[Some editor put a scare headline over what is otherwise a good article. That was a mistake!]

Fed Chair Jerome Powell reveals the cause of persistent inflation - economy is becoming uninsurable.

Jerome Powell, chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, was nominated by Donald Trump in 2018 and confirmed by the US Senate. President Joe Biden renominated him when he entered office in January of 2021. The job of the Fed...

www.dailykos.com

 

[plowhog]

We can't all be in Texas and do everything like your electric providers do there

When I saw the statistic that solar in Texas now outstrips coal produced power, I wondered how much of that was an increase in solar compared to a decrease in coal usage?

I wanted to research that, but my research budget was exhausted after going down the dailykos rabbit hole!!

 

[plowhog]

describing how insurance costs are rising as a consequence of climate change

Yes of course. Has nothing to do with the heavy-handed CA Department of Insurance denying every rate request by insurance companies, despite pleas and evidence to the contrary, driving them into unprofitability, causing them to flee from the 5th largest economy in the world.

As my friend would say, that has "absolutely nothing to do with it!!!"

 

[two_bit_score]

The idea that greedy insurance companies are driving inflation is cow poop. The insurance industry is reacting to higher costs of doing business. We all see the cost of everything going higher daily as the dollar continues to lose value. The current admin has added a staggering amount to the national debt and they are not done spending yet

$2,499,993,043,258.10

And that is the tip of the iceberg that "the current administration" is bringing us. The worst and most anti-American leadership ever.

 

[scootr]

You mean increased class, race, and *** division or higher crime?

 

[two_bit_score]

You mean increased class, race, and *** division or higher crime?

All of the above and then some.

 

[scootr]

All of the above and then some.

You mean like mandated green policy and the no bail criminal revolving door? Or stricter self defense laws.

 

[California]

I hope you enjoy the fruits of the "current administration". Sounds like you are getting exactly what you voted for.

Didn't you notice that the quoted Fed Chair was appointed by the previous president?