AuthorTopic: Agelbert's Newz Channel  (Read 1969414 times)

Offline Snowleopard

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« Reply #4050 on: May 12, 2015, 07:28:30 PM »
Quote
Snowleapard,
With your 24/7 evidence free Propaganda laced with "scientific" remarks like "The captain got lucky", you have earned a permanent sign (mendacity expert) painted on your back by Eddie, UB and myself.

As to you "agreeing" with me on corruption in government, the point of my post is that  ANYTHING that rankles the feathers of the fossil fuel industry is something YOU refuse to bring up. Spare me the "China is doing this and Russia is doing that" PROPAGANDA pro-war hysteria while you "tactfully" ignore the destruction of our finances for the benefit of the fossil fuel industry.

Your SILENCE is the issue, pal! And that stack of agonotology based graphs you just presented are a perfect example of your disingenuous double talk.

The majors of the fossil fuel industry are subsidiaries of TPTB.  Attacking them directly is futile, the only victims will be poor folks out of jobs, folks who cannot afford to heat their homes, and later, people who cannot afford to eat.  This process is well underway in UK/EU.

Obama may pretend to "go after" the oil industry.  But it will usually be just enough to keep the price up, thus bleeding the working man.  When they actually NEED new drilling rights they will be granted, as will likely happen soon in Alaska.

 Meanwhile USA keeps raising corn and soya, (ie. food crops) to turn into biofuels.  This process is so inefficient the only way it can be said to reduce CO2 emissions is by reducing third world populations by starvation due to increased food costs.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-03/pu-dbp032715.php
"A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest." -  Simon and Garfunkel

Offline Karpatok

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 1427
    • View Profile
Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« Reply #4051 on: May 12, 2015, 07:50:09 PM »
Quote
Snowleapard,
With your 24/7 evidence free Propaganda laced with "scientific" remarks like "The captain got lucky", you have earned a permanent sign (mendacity expert) painted on your back by Eddie, UB and myself.

As to you "agreeing" with me on corruption in government, the point of my post is that  ANYTHING that rankles the feathers of the fossil fuel industry is something YOU refuse to bring up. Spare me the "China is doing this and Russia is doing that" PROPAGANDA pro-war hysteria while you "tactfully" ignore the destruction of our finances for the benefit of the fossil fuel industry.

Your SILENCE is the issue, pal! And that stack of agonotology based graphs you just presented are a perfect example of your disingenuous double talk.

The majors of the fossil fuel industry are subsidiaries of TPTB.  Attacking them directly is futile, the only victims will be poor folks out of jobs, folks who cannot afford to heat their homes, and later, people who cannot afford to eat.  This process is well underway in UK/EU.

Obama may pretend to "go after" the oil industry.  But it will usually be just enough to keep the price up, thus bleeding the working man.  When they actually NEED new drilling rights they will be granted, as will likely happen soon in Alaska.

 Meanwhile USA keeps raising corn and soya, (ie. food crops) to turn into biofuels.  This process is so inefficient the only way it can be said to reduce CO2 emissions is by reducing third world populations by starvation due to increased food costs.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-03/pu-dbp032715.php
   This makes a lot of sense so far Snowleopard, but who exactly are TPTB? Karpatok

Offline Snowleopard

  • Waitstaff
  • ***
  • Posts: 505
    • View Profile
Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« Reply #4052 on: May 12, 2015, 08:46:09 PM »
Quote
You will have to stand in line behind Golden Oxen, MKing, Snowleopard and a few others who would love to see one more salt water nigger silenced.

Naah....No fun in that.   Against my rules too. 

Those who wish to silence (or denigrate, ostracize, smear etc) their opposition, rather than help them see the light are usually my opponents. 

Since the basic battle IS spiritual, adopting the tactics of the enemy is tantamount to joining his side in fact, if not in name.

THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS.

"A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest." -  Simon and Garfunkel

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Germany's power houses not only feel the pinch, they're done with.
« Reply #4053 on: May 13, 2015, 04:12:40 PM »
Quote

Jane Jones 
 May 13, 2015 

Germany's power houses not only feel the pinch, they're done with.

The CEO of EoN held a speech last week agreeing they're finished.

And RWE's CEO said that all reserves are gone.

------------------------------

I wrote a posting today on:

http://www.renewablesinternational.net/are-the-poor-paying-for-the-rich-in-the-energiewende/150/537/87495/

Quote:

I don't know where to put this, so here is probably the best place ...:
The share holder meeting of EoN was last week, CEO Teyssen declared the Energiewende a success and says the revolution is in full swing. The large generators are at loss, the small scale generation is the future.

Here the speech in English:

http://www.eon.com/content/dam/eon-com/Investoren/Hauptversammlung/HV15_Speech_Johannes_Teyssen_EN.pdf

An article by Franz Alt (in German) in Telepolis:

http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/44/44927/1.html

Remarkable: Teyssen hails the successful Energiewende in Canada and Australia!

That'll give some up-swing to the people there who are still trying to digest Mr. Abbott.
Home-made power is already the cheapest power, so Teyssen.

Well, we know that.  ;D

The impact of these words should not be underestimated: Germany's laws (and those in other states as well) demand public money to be spend wisely, economical.

Some extracts:

- the hedging price in central Europe will drop from 2014= € 56.-/MWh to 2015= € 50.-/MWh

 - batteries in combination with PV will be the cheapest power


Teyssen at page 8 :

" How should we address the heterogeneous and in some cases mutually contradictory developments in our markets? Last year we thoroughly analyzed this question. We talked to a lot of people: experts in the energy industry as well as other industries, investors, researchers, startup founders, and above all with the many experts and practitioners across our company. We asked ourselves what do solar panels and gas pipelines still have in common? We asked the same question about micro CHP units and large - scale power stations, smart meters and intraday trading. Our answer is: not very much anymore "
........

" It became clear to us that our company’s current business profile is no longer viable for the future. We believe the integrated business model is obsolete. "
----------------
This is not a won battle, this is a total surrender.
----------------

Another one from RWE, EoN's main competitor in Europe: (in German)

http://www.sonnewindwaerme.de/panorama/kernkraft-rwe-hat-vermutlich-nichts-zurueckgestellt

RWE has probably no financial reserves left. They should have enough money set aside by law to pay for the demolition of their atomic power plants.

But this money is gone says the boss. Everything they are going to need, for demolition of atomic power plants, for re-naturation of coal pits, for pensions and so on ...everything has to be earned in future. They're bankrupt.

In other words: they must burn coal to finance their faltering. 
-----------------------------
end of quote

-----------------------------------------------------

Small-scale PV has broken the neck of Europe's utilities.   

The ants kicked the elephants off their back.   

And they run for their lives  , begging for mercy for their souls.


For 100 years these gangsters reigned the world, the bloodiest which mankind ever faced
.



http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/05/germanys-powerhouse-feels-pinch-of-merkels-shift-to-renewables#comm142778
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Quote
You will have to stand in line behind Golden Oxen, MKing, Snowleopard and a few others who would love to see one more salt water nigger silenced.

Naah....No fun in that.   Against my rules too. 

Those who wish to silence (or denigrate, ostracize, smear etc) their opposition, rather than help them see the light are usually my opponents. 

Since the basic battle IS spiritual, adopting the tactics of the enemy is tantamount to joining his side in fact, if not in name.

THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS.

I WISH that you believed that! The proof that you don't is the FACT that you have never said WORD ONE about the horrendous damage that the visible and invisible "subsidies" for dirty energy producers has visited upon we-the-people.

This is from a peer reviewed book covering just the war profiteering fun and games that you TOTALLY IGNORE:

Dilworth (2010-03-12). Too Smart for our Own Good (pp. 399-400). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.

Quote

"As suggested earlier, war, for example, which represents a cost for society, is a source of profit to capitalists. In this way we can partly understand e.g. the American military expenditures in the Persian Gulf area. Already before the first Gulf War, i.e. in 1985, the United States spent $47 billion projecting power into the region. If seen as being spent to obtain Gulf oil, It AMOUNTED TO $468 PER BARREL, or 18 TIMES the $27 or so that at that time was paid for the oil itself.

In fact, if Americans had spent as much to make buildings heat-tight as they spent in ONE YEAR at the end of the 1980s on the military forces meant to protect the Middle Eastern oil fields, THEY COULD HAVE ELIMINATED THE NEED TO IMPORT OIL from the Middle East.

So why have they not done so? Because, while the $468 per barrel may be seen as being a cost the American taxpayers had to bear, and a negative social effect those living in the Gulf area had to bear, it meant only profits for American capitalists. "

Note: I added the bold caps emphasis on the barrel of oil price, money spent in one year and the need to import oil from the Middle East.

This totally unjustified profit, never mind the needless lose of lives, then increases the power of the fossil fuel corporations to perpetuate a biosphere harming dirty fuel status quo. How? By "funding" politicians with rather large "donations" to keep renewable energy from competing with dirty energy.

For the above war profiteering fossil fuel corporate bastards, THE END DOES JUSTIFY THE MEANS!

So when someone that studiously AVOIDS exposing the above bastards then makes the statement that "THE END DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS", I have difficulty believing they are being sincere.

Talk is cheap. Actions speak much louder.

Agnotologists ALWAYS employ the Null Hypothesis (no harm done). IOW, YOU claim that YOUR actions AND inactions have NOT contributed to the world we have now. The reverse is true.

Your obvious defense of the fossil fuel industry with disingenuous statements like "CO2 is not a pollutant" (true when humans are the producers - blatantly false when a machine puts out as much CO2 in one HOUR as a human does in ONE LIFETIME! ) is another clever attempt to apply the "no harm done" baloney to the fossil fuel industry.

You also FLAT REFUSE to accept that the fossil fuel industry IS the government AND that the fossil fuel industry HAS fomented wars for profit along with engineered price hikes, IN ADDITION to getting kid gloves treatment by the bought and paid Court system when PROVEN MASSIVE environmental damage (e.g. Exxon Valdez among a LONG FUCKING LIST that you play blind, deaf and dumb about). They are DOING IT RIGHT NOW with the Ukraine totally fabricated crisis. LOOK at the price of crude today that is making Mking dance with joy! It's ALL BULLSHIT! And YOU just point at China this and Russia that!!??

That is why you and I cannot even start a discussion. When you admit your complicity in the current state of environmentally degraded affairs, never mind the politically SUPER degraded affairs, we could have some common ground. But you WILL NOT admit your hands, and the hands of those you DEFEND (by failing to are point to their skullduggery while furiously pointing in every other direction  ;)). are DIRTY.

That's an essential part of the Null Hypothesis Agnotologist Modus Operandi.

Let me make it crystal clear to you why you would ALSO claim that your "rules"  allegedly don't allow you to attempt to silence an opponent:


« Last Edit: May 13, 2015, 04:59:44 PM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Space is a Dangerous Place
« Reply #4055 on: May 13, 2015, 06:55:46 PM »
Space is a Dangerous Place...<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/OiTiKOy59o4#&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/OiTiKOy59o4#&fs=1</a>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZV-UEca2W9U#&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/ZV-UEca2W9U#&fs=1</a>

More "code" from Agelbert...  :icon_mrgreen:
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline Karpatok

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 1427
    • View Profile
Re: Space is a Dangerous Place
« Reply #4056 on: May 13, 2015, 07:05:17 PM »
Space is a Dangerous Place...<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/OiTiKOy59o4#&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/OiTiKOy59o4#&fs=1</a>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZV-UEca2W9U#&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/ZV-UEca2W9U#&fs=1</a>

More "code" from Agelbert...  :icon_mrgreen:
   Sorry AG, Where's "the Code"?   I don't get it.    Karpatok

Offline Surly1

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18654
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« Reply #4057 on: May 14, 2015, 02:15:29 AM »
AG,
You are certainly more than capable of stirring your own shit, but I must say this Dilworth quote:

Quote
So why have they not done so? Because, while the $468 per barrel may be seen as being a cost the American taxpayers had to bear, and a negative social effect those living in the Gulf area had to bear, it meant only profits for American capitalists. "

...is the truest thing every written on this form. Or anywhere.
At least since God gave Moses the first commandment.
"...reprehensible lying communist..."

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
10 Reasons Why Libertarianism is Bullshit
« Reply #4058 on: May 14, 2015, 10:14:53 AM »
10 Reasons Why Libertarianism is Bullshit
  :icon_mrgreen:

1.  It's impossible.  Libertarianism is impossible except for survivalist nutters and hermits.  Humans need a social structure because we're a social species.  Trusting that humans can moderate their own behavior on their own is just a fantasy.  If we were as sparsely distributed as wolf packs, we could get along in our small groups without intervention from a higher authority in theory.... but the matriarch or patriarch would be the higher authority so even that isn't strictly libertarian.  Anyway, we're long past the point in evolution where we could manage our behavior without a formal structure.  Michael Shermer theorizes the optimal size for a human community to manage without any oversight is about 150.  Those days are gone.

2.  It's naive.  It assumes people are basically good.  This is a nice thought, but it's just plain wrong.  Just as we differ in our DNA we differ in our personalities.  Some of us will go through life making very few decisions that negatively impact others, and some of us are sociopaths.  At its best, government protects the truly good from the sociopaths.  Without a government, we would be reduced to lynch mobs which can only avenge bad deeds, not prevent them.  And we certainly wouldn't have something like the FBI, which can trace the path of a serial killer from one area to the next based on DNA evidence, etc.  I think the people who believe that "survival of the fittest ergo libertarianism" probably assume they are the fittest themselves.  They don't think that they would be the victims of a sociopath.  Bernie Madoff counted on this kind of hubris to make his illegal millions.

3.  It's cold-hearted.  For example, regulations about safety in cars aren't needed because over time car companies would be forced to make safer cars or they'd go out of business.  So the people who died in fires caused by exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, or in wrecks caused by the design of their Corvair were just collateral damage in the evolution of better cars.  People who died because of unregulated businesses did nothing to deserve that fate, except perhaps not be able to afford better cars.  And the pseudo-Darwinism of libertarianism really doesn't care what the strong do to the weak.  Rich and powerful people are good and deserve to be rich and powerful.  The poor and powerless deserve what they get.

4.  It ignores history.  We haven't always had a U.S. government.  It's only a little more than 200 years old.  But we do know earlier forms of society.  We've had monarchies.  We've had theocracies.  We had the ancient Roman & Greek systems that privileged people with money.  Modern democracy certainly has its failings, but we really be better off returning to "less" government considering what our previous systems gave us?

5.  It's not natural.  The underlying assumption of libertarianism is that government is an artificial construct that interferes with natural behavior, which they believe works just fine on its own.  There's no evidence that humanity could have survived without some form of social organization.  The instinct for survival that causes some to climb to the top of the heap and others to hide from the climbers just doesn't result in a society that works for large numbers.  It probably won't work for small numbers, either. 

6.  It ignores human failings.  We no longer live in family groups in tiny villages, and if Libertarianism became the "law" of the land, we would pretty much have to go back to that.  In our distant past, we helped each other within our own group and competed against other groups for resources.  Surviving without a government would require all of us to gather into small groups for protection and predation.  Child abuse and spousal abuse would again be perpetrated with no recourse.  Victims of alcoholism or mental illness would have no access to services, and their families would suffer.  A small group's only hope of survival when "infected" with a defective member would be to ostracize that member.

7.  It ignores human compassion.  Libertarianism denies the instinct to help others, which has been shown in other species as well. Government taking a role in "lifting up" the poor is an extension of the instinct we would follow individually in a smaller group.   By blaming the victim, libertarians can imagine themselves the agents of their own good luck.  There's no place in their worldview for helping the blind, the deaf, the physically impaired, or the children of these people.  The mentally ill who are incapable of working for a living due to their illness?  *shrug*  At least religions have charities that make a dent in these issues.  Secular libertarians leave the powerless to their own devices as if blindness or mental illness were somehow the victim's own fault.  There have been hundreds if not thousands of examples of other animals helping each other or even other species, so compassion seems to be instinctual.  I have yet to meet a libertarian who has a relative that needs help to survive.  If I had the power to curse people, I'd curse libertarians with multiple sclerosis.  Let's see how many ways they make use of the ADA law's provisions.

8.  It ignores Somalia.  Somalia is the perfect example of libertarianism in action. There's basically no government in Somalia so we can see what would happen.   Without a government, pirates and tribal groups terrorize others.  Women and children are mistreated.  Disease is rampant.  There's no viable business other than crime.  It's a chaotic mess.  Why would anyone want to copy that model?

9.  It's selfish.  On the surface, a Libertarian saying that he doesn't know what's best for someone else seems humble and charitable.  But really, sometimes he would know what's best.  He would know that a woman being beaten on a daily basis by an abusive husband would be better off if she could get out of that situation.  He would know that someone with asthma would be better off in a world with less air pollution.  His pseudo-humility covers up a basic unwillingness to get involved.  Or, he's got his head in the sand when it comes to the problems of society and of individuals that are just too big or complicated for a family or small group to help with.

10.  It's provincial.  It ignores the fact that the economies and socieities of all the world's nations are now interconnected.  If someone lives in the country with well water, septic tank and a burn pit for their garbage, they can fantasize they are not relying on the government.  But then when their four-year-old comes down with cancer, they're only too happy to take him to the big city hospital for chemo that was studied using federal funding.

 So...  I call BULLSHIT on libertarianism.  It's a stupid position to take.  Even if it could be implemented it couldn't succeed.  Its thinly veiled social "darwinism" but without any of the nuance of true evolutionary theory.

Don't worry about this logic reaching a Libertarian. When they run into hard nosed reality and logic they scream, "tyranny!" Somebody wants to take my STUFF! 



« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 10:16:39 AM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Prophet or Profit
« Reply #4059 on: May 14, 2015, 10:25:35 AM »

Quote
Beginning with the construction in 1894 of power stations run by the descending waters at Niagara Falls, Tesla and Westinghouse entrenched their system for generating, transporting, and using huge amounts of AC electricity. At age 38 Tesla was just beginning the most fruitful part of his career in applying breakthroughs in science, including some of his own discoveries, to the development of paradigm-shifting technologies.

In his legendary public presentations Tesla introduced many new theories, including those that enabled him to display dramatically wireless systems of electric lighting.

For a time many of the leading financiers of the day vied with one another to invest in Tesla’s projects. Eventually the most important US banker of his generation, J.P. Morgan, became Tesla’s exclusive backer during the period when he experimented most actively using the earth itself rather than wires for conducting electrical current.

First at Colorado Springs and then with his Wardenclyffe installation on Long Island New York, Tesla worked on ways for drawing electricity from the ionosphere, the earth’s outer atmosphere. He combined his work on tapping naturally-occurring systems of electrical interaction with wireless means for communicating text, pictures, and sound.

Morgan is said to have turned against Tesla’s work when he realized the scale of its revolutionary implications. The financier, who was a conduit between the Rothschild banking family’s European and American interests, complained famously that Tesla’s technological innovations were problematic because it was not clear how meters could be imposed for the buying and selling of energy.

Morgan could easily see that Tesla’s main motivation was not to make money. Rather it was to emancipate humanity with new forms of technology that would liberate people from darkness, drudgery, and various forms of top-down oppression. Neither Morgan nor the class he represented shared Tesla’s goal of conducting research and development to make life easier and better in ways that operate within, rather than against, prevailing patterns of nature, including what is best in human nature.

Tesla suffered a nervous breakdown after 1904 when Morgan betrayed him. Tesla’s famous tower and laboratory at Wardenclyffe were subsequently destroyed even as Morgan placed many obstacles in the way of the inventor’s ability to gain backing from other financiers.

The next four decades of Tesla’s life remain shrouded in mystery. Some believe that Tesla fully recovered and returned to his work covertly with a new set of secret collaborators. Some believe his secret inventions include devices for teleportation and communication with other life forms in the universe. Whatever transpired, the FBI intervened to seize his papers and prototypes when Tesla died penniless in New York in 1943.

There is good reason to believe that to this day the US military continues to exploit Tesla’s inventions and theories in ways that directly violate the animating philosophy of the person who was, perhaps, the most gifted and enlightened inventor ever given to humankind.

One of the best examples of such a military abomination is HAARP, the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program based in Alaska. Rather than following through with Tesla’s  goal of deriving electric power from the ionosphere to provide humanity with free energy, HAARP has become a vehicle to advance the goal of what the US Armed Forces has described as “full-spectrum dominance.”

Among those systems of electromagnetic warfare being developed by HAARP’s technologists are, quite likely, devices to assist in the geo-engineering of weather patterns and the targeted generation of earthquakes. Such hostile interventions in the harmonious workings of nature run against everything that Tesla stood for.

Looking back it seems clear that humanity was forced in the early 1900s into a very wrong turn when it came to establishing the basis for systems to generate, transform, and use energy. While his early innovations were adopted as the basis of AC systems of global electrification, Tesla’s most advanced theories and inventions were eschewed in order to keep the way open for further development of less sophisticated but more profitable means of running the engines of commerce.

The consequences of our wrong turn in the early 1900s are showing up in the grotesque obscenities entailed in the derivation of energy from ecologically-disastrous activities like fracking and mining the Alberta Tar Sands. Most illustrative of the the utter insanity of the energy business as presently constituted is the slow motion holocaust of radioactive contamination being spewed into earth, air and ocean at Fukushima. This global disaster is still in its infancy.

Much depends on revisiting the wrong turn forced on humanity during the early years of the twentieth century. We still have it in our power to return to Nikola Tesla’s vision of a global political economy of peace, harmony and equity. How many other inventors after Tesla have seen their offerings of emancipatory technology spurned and repressed because of obstructions thrown up by vested interest hostile any progressive changes that might negatively affect the bottom line?

We still have it in our collective power to turn away from the vision of for-profit energy historically promoted by the likes of Morgan, the Rothschilds, Rockefeller, Edison and Ford.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/04/22/prophet-or-profit-nikola-teslas-vision-vs-j-p-morgans-greed/
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Quote

Gerry Wootton   
 May 13, 2015 

Great article.

The constant for utilities is profit, ideally in their view, ever increasing. Since profit is margin on delivered commodity, distributed generation paired with self-consumption removes a profit making opportunity. Energy efficiency has the same effect. One remedial option is to raise rates. In regulated systems rate settings typically have an inordinate focus on 'reasonable' profit for the utility - residential rates become corporate welfare.

Rates ever increase. What the article doesn't mention is that CII rates are frequently underpinned by long term agreements leaving small customers (with essentially no contracted price) as the available source of increased revenue.

An additional influence of incentivizing large customers with low rates is that it increases demand, perhaps disproportionately as it decreases the incentive for those customers to espouse energy efficiency. The effect of increasing demand is to drive up wholesale prices which are passed on to consumers as justifiable(?) rate increases. One interesting indicator is hourly price versus industrial rate and whether it is net positive or negative.

An example of export subsidy is provided by Ontario where firm nuclear capacity requires power to be exported/dumped to neighboring systems at a net loss of >1B $/a. Obviously, provincial consumers rates support this loss to the benefit of consumers in other jurisdictions.

The article fails to mention yet another fallacy which is to use the residential retail rate as a proxy for the cost of generation: this ignores efficiency of T&D which is variable by jurisdiction as is taxation.

In many jurisdictions the tax burden falls disproportionately on small users even more so than proportional taxes (e.g. sales tax) tied to rate. Importantly, it assumes that utilities will apply proportionate markups for small customers that have no leverage.

Residential rates also seem to be a common vehicle for raising capital for improvements to the system - politicians will unashamedly proclaim that rates 'have' to go up to support new developments.

Rates also seem to be a place to park financial SNAFUs such as unsustainable/stranded utility debt, losses on failed developments and cost over-runs, general liability and decommissioning costs.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/05/the-fantasy-of-electric-rates-time-to-educate-ratepayers#comm142798

Agelbert NOTE: Wootton is right. What is fascinating about this whole discussion of who pays for what and what energy REALLY costs is that it CONSISTENTLY (see mens rea) results in the fossil fuelers pushing the FANTASY that shit (i.e. inequitable distribution of enery costs because of corruption) does not flow downhill.   

And we KNOW who (sorry for the "code", K  :icon_mrgreen:) is at the top of that hill, don't we?  ;)



Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
"Big money does get gov help and special deals from the utilities"
« Reply #4061 on: May 14, 2015, 11:19:27 AM »
Quote
 

Brian Donovan 
 May 13, 2015 

We need a gov regulated electricity freeway, not private toll roads. On the other hand, we want private companies to compete to provide low cost clean electricity to feed the grid.

Wind is cheaper, Solar is too. Solar pv is only so much cheaper in the USA mostly because of gov regulations and fees. In the rest of the renewable world, residential and commercial is cheaper up to several megawatts, and even then the big land killing pv farms are only slightly cheaper. Residential is around 2$ per watt an many countries, except the USA.

Solar is peak electricity. It would get paid more with time of day. Solar already reduces peak KW load of customers.

Offshore wind is within 100 miles of some 80% of all demand. That's the place to put wind.


The problems are that private companies own both the grid and the generation. 
 
Yes, big money does get gov help, and special deals from the utilities, who seriously doubts that?

Agelbert Note: No one seriously doubts that. But the fossil fuelers disingenuously pretend to.  :evil4:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/05/the-fantasy-of-electric-rates-time-to-educate-ratepayers
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Quote

Kurt Grossman 
 May 13, 2015 

Agreed: Utilities will continue to flex their political muscle to maximize their profit.

Does a business pass on cost to a consumer or do consumers living in a residence pass on cost to businesses? If you charge businesses higher prices the prices go to higher prices for consumers. Residential rates are for consumers at their "residence". Any cost is born by the consumers who purchase goods and services.

Renewable energy is making progress by "flexing its political muscles" and will continue to grow because most people believe the IDEA of Clean Energy is worth higher prices. As prices drop for renewable energy more people will switch and so will utilities.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/05/the-fantasy-of-electric-rates-time-to-educate-ratepayers

Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Quote

Howard Johnson  
 May 13, 2015 

Bill,
"but you can not charge for the sun... "
Unfortunately, SRP, in AZ, did just that: http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2015/02/26/srp-board-oks-rate-hike-new-fees-solar-customers/24086473/

Quote
William Fitch III  
 May 14, 2015 

Hi: HJ, I watched the news cast report.... $50 a month is outlandish to say the least...
I would think their are legal grounds for discrimination since the $50 increase is targeted against solar only.

Solar is nothing more than a customer deciding to use less electricity for themselves. I cannot see where it would be even legal to charge a targeted fee to a customer who has done something specific to reduce demand, I.E. using electricity.

Doing that would be no different than hitting customers who install energy efficient devices such as PWM motor controls, high efficiency refrigeration or heat pump water heaters. All are designed to reduce electric usage which is what solar does....

I suspect someone will take on a legal challenge to the courts regarding this practice...

.....Bill

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/05/the-fantasy-of-electric-rates-time-to-educate-ratepayers
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Agelbert's Newz Channel
« Reply #4064 on: May 14, 2015, 11:36:23 AM »
Quote

John Kennebeck   
 May 14, 2015 

I am part of a coop and OWN part of this company, I sell back my extra.

We subsidize OIL, FARMERS, dam near everything.

In Minnesota we aren't suppose to eat more than 1 fish caught here a week because of the chemicals from coal, WAKE UP PEOPLE !!!

« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 11:38:04 AM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
2793 Views
Last post October 10, 2014, 02:00:44 AM
by Guest
0 Replies
1830 Views
Last post July 05, 2017, 07:11:08 PM
by Palloy2
0 Replies
2053 Views
Last post September 14, 2017, 04:20:30 PM
by azozeo