Slashdot Mirror
New Wyoming Bill Penalizes Utilities Using Renewable Energy (csmonitor.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a Christian Science Monitor report on "a bill that would essentially ban large-scale renewable energy" in Wyoming.
The new Wyoming bill would forbid utilities from using solar or wind sources for their electricity by 2019, according to Inside Climate News... The bill would require utilities to use "eligible resources" to meet 95 percent of Wyoming's electricity needs in 2018, and all of its electricity needs in 2019. Those "eligible resources" are defined solely as coal, hydroelectric, natural gas, nuclear, oil, and individual net metering... Utility-scale wind and solar farms are not included in the bill's list of "eligible resources," making it illegal for Wyoming utilities to use them in any way if the legislation passes. The bill calls for a fine of $10 per megawatt-hour of electricity from a renewable source to be slapped on Wyoming utilities that provide power from unapproved sources to in-state customers.
The bill also prohibits utilities from raising rates to cover the cost of those penalties, though utilities wouldn't be penalized if they exported that energy to other states. But one local activist described it as 'talking-point' legislation, and even the bill's sponsor gives it only a 50% chance of passing.
The bill also prohibits utilities from raising rates to cover the cost of those penalties, though utilities wouldn't be penalized if they exported that energy to other states. But one local activist described it as 'talking-point' legislation, and even the bill's sponsor gives it only a 50% chance of passing.
Wind murders countless migratory birds every year, and the environmental impact of Chinese solar panels is similarly out of this world. There are no environmental regulations in China.
This is a good move by WY to help save the environment.
They just are trying to protect their coal industry so that it doesn't wind up the West Virginia of the western US.
The retards have really taken over, alright.
If we don't burn ourselves up, we're headed for a really nice repeat of the dark ages.
Surely, there is interstate commerce going on here, which would take the issue out of the hands of local politicians?
Also, it's anti-employment, anti-business. Renewable energy employs more people than coal. The only people to benefit are a small number of miners and a tiny special interest group (coal mine owners).
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
the gov of wyo...get a clue...dont pentalize...help pay for it unless u r not into recycling.
Letting big businesses get back to work without all those pesky environmental regulations. It is such a relief to know climate change was fixed yesterday.
If this bill's author has had the temerity to claim to be in favor of 'freedom' or 'free markets'; and then pushes this nonsense, somebody needs to feed him to a wood chipper.
I know politicians are not very bright, and some, if not many, are corrupt, but how can they allow this to pass, especially when the alternative is coal powered power plants! Hopefully the governor has more intelligence and veto this bill if passed.
Time to close at least some of the coal mines and find alternative jobs for the workers, in alternative, more environmentally friendly energy.
Now if we could just get Wyoming to also pass a bill to put up a wall around the state, then send the bill Colorado. Then they could put a dome on the wall and send the bill for that to Utah.
No walls, no gates, no windows. Must contain the tard.
and even the bill's sponsor gives it only a 50% chance of passing
... and a 100% chance of being a completely retarded idea!
AC comments get piped to
I was raised and educated in Wyoming, it was a relatively decent place to grow up. However, most of the people I grew up with could not wait to get the hell out of there. The current people in charge there really want to make it a hole in the ground, very few want to stay there. Once they are to a point where they can, they move out and leave that place.
This is what happens when you have Republicans run the place since Johnson was president. Dig it all up, cut (what few trees there are) down anything green, when the wind stops all the buildings fall over (Neb. sucks and Utah blows) then move to Arizona - that's what you do.
So how does this work? Is a domestic consumer is given an electron which has passed through a wind generator, there is going to be hell to pay, but a different pool of electrons must be used to export power from the state.
And sure, with a mix of energy sources, local consumption can be less than generation from coal.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Or more accurately, a backlash against subsidies - $10 per megawatt hour.
The 4500 people who live in Wyoming can be served by a few laptop batteries arranges in series. Who gives a shit if they want to burn a cord or two of wood or whatever annually to keep their CB radios running.
I literally couldn't give two shits what happens in Wyoming, as long as their backward stupidity doesn't bleed out into the rest of the country. Wyoming is the poster child for describing what's wrong with national government in the US: 5 people in Wyoming have more voting power than hundreds or thousands in other states.
DIA(coal)F
Are we going to light our hair on fire now every time some random conservative state legislator anywhere in the country introduces a bill we don't like? Is this how the Trump years are going to be?
Basically every article about this seems to be from ecozealot websites, so I can't even find an unbiased presentation of the bill's sponsors' motivations to evaluate them. An article on the Wyoming Public Radio site says no one thinks the bill is going anywhere anyway.
as long as the CO2 from Wyoming is contained within Wyoming. They can build a dome and then suffocate if they like.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Wyoming is 'America's Smokestack' - a proud title to compete with India and Northern China for honors. Sure, tourism might take a hit, but the coal dollars will continue to roll in. Another slogan they like- Coal=Jobs; well how many jobs? You've seen those huge machines digging, transporting, processing the coal ... how many humans are actually working there? In almost every case, the employers bragging about jobs or potential jobs are lying and thinking about profits and potential profits for themselves.
...omphaloskepsis often...
This is coal-fired anti-intellectual cowardice and pandering to billionaires. GOP SOP.
Get used to all kinds of this shit in the next four years. Everything Obama has accomplished will be completely rolled back.
So all the other states that by the same logic punish the use of fossil fuels get know mention, do to the inherent liberal bias of modern media.
They are just protecting their own economy which is heavily dependent on dead things decomposing in the ground for millions of years. Protecting and looking after the interests of the governed is what government is supposed to do.
When the USA is divided up between Russia, China and Mexico you can all give yourselves a pat on the back and congratulate yourselves for a job well done.
,
It seems like paid shills are posting under every renewable energy article about renewables not being viable without government subsidies. Well here you go. It seems that coal is now the one in need of government hand outs.
Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
This may sound so immature, but seriously, win. Your post was spot on.
Many decades ago, Groucho Marx posed the question "Why not Oming?". Finally we have an answer.
... and if you leave them with the "free market", they are subject to profiteering. In the US today, electricity (public utility) is much *more* reliable, and affordable than Internet connectivity (private) is. So, I'm sorry, but your ideas don't really hold up in reality.
I don't respond to AC's.
Just saying
Where the entire country is now filled with complete morons. IE nothing new. So glad I don't live in that sh*t hole.
The currently profitable companies buy a legislature to outlaw competition.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
If you transfer functions to government, they become subject to politics. So, public utilities may be forced to use coal, public schools may be forced to teach creationism, etc. You don't like that? Don't transfer these functions to the government.
Please read a high-school level Civics book, Tea Party troll.
Unless you have the time and skill to generate your own utilities (water, electricity, telephone, internet) – and to home-school your children, then you NEED to have a governing power of some kind. There is your traditional "Government," but alternatively also a private provider (profit-motivated), or a neighborhood association (AKA government). Unless you are the king and own everything, that is how it is everywhere on this planet.
Or more accurately, a backlash against subsidies - $10 per megawatt hour.
It's a middle finger to progressives.
This is the problem with the political right at the moment. They're not trying to correct the market or protect local jobs, they're trying to rile up their base by pissing off people concerned about global warming.
And the problem with the left is that they can't compromise and won't evolve.
I was just listening to Bill Maher from last night, and all the liberals encouraging the audience to fight, disrupt, oppose, insult(*), and combat everything the right wants to do.
Nowhere did anyone say "we have to become better". Nothing about making better policies, making more intelligent arguments, doing things voters want, making the country better, or anything that could be considered noble.
The fundamental difference between the left and the right, through the campaign and after, is that the right has tried to make themselves the better option, while the left tried to make the *other side* the worse option. Trump's speeches were warm and inclusive, saying essentially "we're in this together, we can win, we can do better". Clinton's speeches, delivered by others during campaign rallies, were essentially throwing insults at the other side.
I don't think anyone on the left has a clue how ineffective their campaign of crying, whining, and insulting is. Their actions are not turning minds and swaying the voters they will need if they want to win future elections.
I have no idea how they can continue with this ludicrous behaviour, but I'm sure the right will continue to laugh at them while they do it.
(*) One of the panel members was saying "always call racism".
President Col. Sanders, beloved mascot of KFC passes an ordinary bill mandating the purchase of KFC chicken once a week. People will rejoice at this yet another natural outcome of the amendment passed during the Trump administration that relinquished the vote of the common people to the companies that are responsible for them.
I'm not a fan of solar power. It's expensive, unreliable, and lacking any kind of storage or backup power it is pretty much useless. If given enough cheap storage then any energy source looks good. Which is one thing that boggles me about those that say, "Just you wait, when we get good batteries any day now then you'll love solar power." If we had this magical battery technology then why would we bother using solar power to charge it? Wind, nuclear, and even natural gas would be better choices. They are cheaper than solar, and with a battery for load balancing they'd meet every need for power without expensive and dirty peak power plants.
I'm okay with wind. It's generally cheap when put in the right places. The problem is that with government subsidies they are not put in the right places. The subsidies are made to subsidize capacity, not necessarily output. So what happens is that windmills are put close to natural gas lines, so that the backup generators have fuel and they don't have to run a power line that isn't carrying power.
Nuclear is good. It's the safest energy source we know of, based on deaths and injuries per MWh produced. It's got the lowest carbon output, if one believes that is even a problem. It's cheap, reliable, and domestically sourced. Any law that makes building nuclear power sounds good to me.
A big problem for me though is that this messes with the free market. People should be able to choose where their energy comes from on their own. That means that not only is this bill a bad idea but so is those laws that made this bill necessary in the first place. Had they taken a gentler hand on this, by merely cancelling out the federal subsidies on these energy sources, then I could probably support it. They took it a bit far with these punitive taxes. But then this makes nuclear power look good.
I'm torn on this one.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Because voter turnout is so high?
You can't dictate that a company can't sell a legal product.
Yes you can. It turns out that legislators can pretty much do whatever the hell they want. They could ban peanut butter tomorrow if they felt like it. They could even pass laws that violate the constitution and police can happily enforce those laws until a judge explicitly tells them to cut it out, with no punishment whatsoever.
This is one of the many, many reasons why the world's democracies often seem dysfunctional. And it's part of the reason why the emergency $700 billion bailout in 2008 included a tax break for a company that makes wooden archery arrows for kids (of the sort commonly used in summer camps or scouting groups.)[1]
It would be very interesting to create a constitution for a country or state/municipality that says you may only pass laws for XYZ reasons, you have to give the justification for every law you pass, and if the justification given for that law is ever found to be invalid then the courts can strike it down. And you aren't allowed to invent a new justification after the law has been passed. That is what "draining the swamp" would truly look like. That, plus figuring out a way for politicians to run campaigns that doesn't involve legalized bribery.
1. This is just too precious to not include:
"Kids' arrows costing 30 cents to make had an additional 43 cents tacked on through the federal excise tax. The extra cost proved too much for low-budget archery programs offered by schools, clubs and Boyâ(TM)s and Girl Scouts around the country, who quickly canceled orders," Dishion said.
Yeah, I'm sure the extra ~$3 per archery station for something that doesn't wear out quickly was the straw that broke the camel's back. It's definitely not the cost of the bows or target backstops or liability insurance or anything.
He's not that. He's an anarchist who goes as far as saying you should be able to break any contract so long as it's to your advantage. Government of any kind expects people to play by rules so is automatically his enemy so you are not going to convince him.
Typo should be "biased towards"
The government should levy a fee on Wind power, and to a much lesser extent solar power, to pay for the cost of the unreliability of the wind generation and the extra infrastructure that needs to be constructed to compensate for when the wind generation system fails to generate power in a timely fashion. I'm not making this up South Australia has a lot of trouble generating wind electricity so much so that it went into a statewide blackout for several hours.
This is regulation of regular privately owned utilities. They're called "Public Utilities" because they provide utility services to the public, not because they're government owned.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Government run stuff is subject to voter interference, private stuff is only subject to rich white man interference.
The Wyoming State Legislature will soon make the acquaintance of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. And after that, possibly the Justice Dept. Essentially all bulk energy transfers fall under federal, not state, jurisdiction.
sPh
Nonsense; rich white men can't afford to run private companies at a loss. What private companies do is primarily determined by customers, and that's far more democratic than voting.
Why are the tea turds so gay?
That's not all: they are also heavily regulated even if there is some degree of private ownership.
What they are not is independent, private, for-profit companies, and that's the problem.
Do the world a favor and go fuck yourself. You don't like living in society? I see a couple options for you... both of which will put you on the wrong end of a weapon in short order. Ungrateful little bitch.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
That "governing power" can be a simple private corporation or association. That means that the people making the decisions are the owners on the one hand, and the customers on the other.
When you open up governance to political processes and have the government grant monopolies, that is precisely when you get these problems, because then fossil fuel companies (or solar or whatever companies) will push through legislation by which they can enrich themselves.
Actually, I'm a minarchist.
No, I'm simply stating a fact: contracts define actions and consequences, and people behave accordingly.
Government is the enemy because it isn't bound by contracts but can instead take your property, your liberty, or your life with no recourse.
Of course, you, being a totalitarian, aren't bothered by that.
Let them do it, this will lead to higher prices for Wyoming consumers.
No, in a free market, competition keeps prices down. In fact, European countries have deregulated their electricity markets and simply give customers a choice between fossil fuel and renewable energy sources.
That statement is wrong in many ways. Seriously, do some background research.
Simply BANNING renewable energy?
DUMB!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I already exercised my "options" by coming to the US. And I don't want the US to turn into the kind of stagnant, oppressive system that I came from, where ending up "at the wrong end of a weapon" was an actual possibility.
I'm sorry if some pampered, privileged, ignorant Americans like you may not understand. Fortunately, as the election shows, not all Americans share in your delusions.
Non voters preferences literally don't count.
Nobod is complaining about Hillary losing, they are complaining about having an orange moron babbon as president, so fuck off right wing snowflake, and watch every promise Trump made come to nothing, just what the deplorable scum that are his suppporters desevrve.
Watching and laughing from another country as American fucks itself up the arse. LMAO, what a bunch of dumb cunts.
Please read a high-school level Civics book, Tea Party troll.
Perhaps you should take your own advice. A great many of our problems today stem at least in part from a general failure to imagine what the people on the other side of an issue are thinking and why. Instead, we ascribe to them an epithet and write them off as irredeemable or deplorable when in fact it's our own failure to imagine and understand that prevents meaningful dialog from occurring.
More power disruptions are caused by squirrels than any other entity. Website with mapped out known attacks: http://cybersquirrel1.com/
Supporting the idea of a Republic where people get to vote makes me that? Good to know.
Don't go writing any dictionaries.
They may not count, but that is not the same as without significance.
If you see any form of government as you enemy you are clearly not.
But neither are you from that long discussion earlier.
You are a fucking idiot. The problem is people like you who have no fucking clue about reality, but seem to think your worthless fucked in the head opinion means something. The problem with the right is their base is the most gullible, uneducated, self serving, anti-American, anti-Christian pieces of shit around.... and their politicians are all lying sacks of shit.
Here's a good example of my point. This post adds nothing to the conversation, it's simply a leftist vomiting insults at the other side.
Look, I want there to be competition among politicians. I want the left and the right to compete against each other for best policies, best governance, and best leadership.
I'm an independent, so I'm free to vote for whichever side I want in any election. The left has several positions I agree with, such as abortion rights for women, universal health care, and social safety net (and others).
I'd really *really* like to support your side, and have sided with these issues in the past, but your group is just so toxic right now that no one wants to have anything to do with you.
A recent poll showed that about 5% of Trump voters regret voting for him, but almost twice as many (9%) Clinton voters now regret voting for her(*).
Your group is protesting the outcome of fair elections that you participated in, it's whining and cursing about unfair rules that everyone agreed to. Your group is breaking windows, smashing cars, and lighting things on fire. And because of it, people are regretting having supported you.
You lefties just don't get it. You could get your way by earning respect, being smarter and better than your opponents.
You don't look to yourselves as a way to succeed, your only action is to make other people look worse.
(*) Which, BTW, erases and reverses the popular vote that Clinton won.
Trump America starts.
Not at all; minimal government is simply a "necessary evil".
You say that because you live under the delusion that the term "bound by a contract" has a meaning beyond the consequences of breaking the contract. There are no consequences to government for breaking a contract, and the consequences for you breaking a contract with the government can be arbitrarily dire.
You seem to believe that voters can impose whatever they like through voting. That makes you a totalitarian.
I believe in limited government with enumerated powers, where voters can only make decisions within those enumerated powers.
How not?
Always quick to take the bait when inconsequential politicos or would-be politicos want to grab some media coverage by doing something out of the ordinary, slashdot continues to lower the level of discourse by stupidly humoring them in search of clicks.
I get it that there is a significant fetish for "renewables" in geeky circles, but responsible state leaders need to have other more-practical concerns... chiefly among them: keeping the lights on. Voters might like the sound of "renewables"in the abstract, but those same voters get REALLY angry when the power goes out.
The simple fact is that most of the renewables often cited (wind, solar, etc) are [a] not consistently reliable and [b] cannot provide any surge to meet upticks in demand or to cover for the dips power production. If the grid is half solar and half wind and then the wind slows at night there's a BIG problem. If consumers all suddenly increase their power usage (like by nuking snacks and popping popcorn during a SuperBowl) the grid needs to be able to instantly ramp-up the available energy or we get blackouts/brownouts. When traditional power sources energize a power grid and there's a sudden surge in demand or a power plant needs to go offline, the plants hooked to the grid can simply increase their output. Solar and Wind simply cannot do this basic function. It would be supremely irresponsible of lawmakers to support power companies energizing the grid with these fashionable, expensive, boutique energy sources that are incapable of doing one of the most-basic functions of a power plant.
I for one would be extemely pissed if the hospital caring for a family member had a brownout because some idiot politician needed Tom Steyer's and George Soros' money and therefore legislated that the power grid could be composed of "green" energy sources.
Oh the HUMANITY! A corporation is making a PROFIT!!!! It's EVIL for somebody to enrich himself providing somebody else with a product or service!!!!
It all sounds so very good... until you think it through...
Don't you notice all the politicians who spend millions of dollars campaigning for a 150K per year job and then, having won that job manage, to become multimillionaires? Don't you notice all the unionized government workers who are virtually un-fireable and have exorbitant pensions? Don't you see how massively Washington DC and all the surrounding counties have grown and how much property values and rents there have skyrocketed? Government and its workers profit enourmously fromeverything they mess with. Government and politicians are just as bad as corporations and are profiting VERY handsomely from all your left-leaning benevolence.
Why is it that you guys on the left think people cannot be trusted with guns... unless you put them into government uniforms and then they are supremely trustworthy?
Why is it that you guys on the left thinkg people cannot be trusted to raise their kids... but if you stuff those people into suits and give them government credentials they are suddenlysupremely qualified to grab other people's kids away from them and raise them?
Why do you lefties think it's dangerous to let people operate businesses without supervision and approvals... but you see no irony in the idea that it's otherwise dangerous and untrustworthy human beings who take jobs in government supervising and approving business people.
Why do you people suddenly invert your view of a person's basic human nature based on whether that person is an individual citizen, or a government employee? Do you truly believe that being a government employee completely changes a person and makes him/her perfect? Perhaps rather than having government officials oversee everyone, we should just make everyone a government employee and then let them all self-regulate?
In reality, there's NOTHING that makes government employees any more humane, rational, selfless, intelligent, etc than private sector employees, and NOTHING that makes a politician or career bureaucrat superior in ANY way to a corporate executive. The only differences are that government people have the legal power to incarcerate and/or kill you and they are far less accountable than corporate people. Government people can hold corporate people to account,but corporate people cannot hold government people to account. The individual has NO recourse when wronged by government, but can turn to government for recourse when wronged by a corporation.
There is NO EXCUSE for this. This is some mindless bullshit or the summary does not reflect accurately the whole story. Or both, but if that's what they're saying and that is the situation, that's fucking insanity.
...the only high-school level civics-related book you read was socialist Howard Zinn's disgusting anti-American screen "A People's History of the United States" which left-leaning educators have used as propaganda for a number of years now.
Our nation's founders placed NONE of the activities you are arguing about into the government sphere. They are simply not the business of the federal government. If people want schools to raise and educate their kids, then they are free, along with their neighbors, to create schools within their communities and to hire teachers. If the people want to, they can even create structures for school systems at the state level, but this is NONE of the federal government's business. Same thing for telephones, electricity, the internet, water, gas, transit busses, etc. These things belong to the people themselves and the state governments the people create.
The federal role in all this is mostly just to keep states from fighting each other and favoring/disfavoring certain other states.... in other words to keep commerce between the states REGULAR. The commerce clause hase been mutated severely over the past 7 decades... when the commerce clause of the Constitution was written "regulate" meant "to make regular" NOT "have armies of government workers dictate rules and regulations for everything".
There's no magic that makes these things automatically superior if government is involved in them; indeed when government is involved, things slow down and get burdened by rules and bureaucrats. The internet is a great example: yes, it was initially sponsored as a government research project but it was at that point largely unregulated and mostly ignored by government. The internet grew at an insane rate and the innovation was so fast it was hard to keep up with while government was mostly uninvolved in it. Had it been run by the government and overseen by a federal Department of the Internet, the specs for a web browser and HTML would still be under development in Washington. Lobbyists for Microsoft and Apple would be competing behined closed doors, in an unofficial auction with campaign funds, to get their proprietary stuff locked-into the specs and required-by-law. WooHoo! Licensing fees galore!!!! Regulatory capture, crony capitalism and actual fascism all rolled into one big nasty ball.
And this bill would prevent the customers to feed back to the grid from their own private solar installations as that would amount to illegally distributing solar energy. "You wouldn't shine some power into the net, would you?" is the new FBI slogan of the coming ages. As a result, people will turn to dark nets for their solar energy needs.
why Trump won and Hillary lost.
People in "fly over country" are tired of your snobbery and hatred.
Your bile has nothing to do with "inclusiveness" or "open mindedness" - you are simply shovelling heaping stinking piles of hatred and apparently lack any sense of introspection or even irony. Congrats! You are the posterchild for progressivism and I eagerly await your YouTube video calling for people you do not like to be gassed to death.
Go to YouTube and look for famous progressive hero George Bernard Shaw cheerfully calling for people to be required to justify their existence to government panels annually and to be "humanely" gassed to death if they cannot justify their existence... the idea took off in Germany and thus progressivism became a bad word in the western world for decades until Hillary ressurected it a few years ago.
If anyone bothered to read the actual bill... this article is Fake News. The bill in no way prohibits wind or solar energy.
They're out of commission for maintenance, which doesn't happen to an entire solar or wind farm installation across acres. What do you do when nukes are offline??? I guess we can't use nuclear, either then, eh?
Stupid fucking games instead of trying to run something properly
Take a look at the moderation in this conversation. Screaming, swearing insults and personal attacks in support of the left are modded up to 4 and 5 as "insightful" or "interesting", those arguing on the right (without swearing or personal attacks) are modded down "offtopic" or or "overrated".
You shouldn't expect to be taken seriously if you don't behave like someone who should be taken seriously.
Always have been fake, always will be fake.
Well, they wanted a list of everyone in the gov working on climate change. Soon we will have a list of politicians that we can target with funding their opponents all over the country. Let me see... It is legal for a superpac to fund local, and state canidates, right?
I'm not a huge fan of renewables for large scale use but this seems kinda petulant to me.
Better to have no subsidies or penalties, either way, on any energy production method. The market will work it out; just don't put a hand on the scale.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
We all know what the next step is. If renewable energy is not a threat to coal powered energy, it would just die out, and we would be using coal.
But if you have to go out of your way to punish the users, you are just admitting that competing with them is not winning.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
If you weren't so hung up on and blinded by your stupid childish anti-Hillary or anti-liberal or anti-whatever mindset you have, you might actually stop and think and see that Trump and his administration are pretty deplorable people with no interest other than gaining wealth for themselves and their friends, and pushing their own religious ideology via legislation. None of them care about America and fixing its real problems.
It defies belief that anyone would actually propose such nonsense legislation.
What is more worrying, is that it comes from politicians in nuclear armed state, with a moronic president, and a long and rich history of militaristic and expansionist tendencies. Not that I'm saying the sociopath Hillary would have been any better.
It all seems to be extreme (or should I say extremist?) embarrassment and humiliation for America these days...
typical environmentalist. Such a blinding ignorance that they really believe their lies.
Bills like this are actually pretty common. The James Taggart's and Orren Boyle's of the world have to feel important and look busy somehow. Fortunately enough, these types of bills are not often passed and if they do it's usually lacking support from the public. Meaning they don't tend to last long.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Taxing the crap out of each and every industry they can. Why should wind and solar be special? You know, those are big evil corporations building those plants, and selling that electricity!
The people running wind and solar seem to think they should never be taxed on their very profitable business...
http://www.latimes.com/nation/...
In the four years since Wyoming began taxing power generated by wind turbines, it has collected a little less than $15 million in revenue.
No, that is not much money in a resource state rocked by the simultaneous decline in the prices of coal, oil and natural gas, a state trying to close a budget gap that could reach $500 million.
But now, as one of the world’s largest wind farms is about to begin construction here on a project aimed at providing clean electricity to nearly a million homes in California and the Southwest — potentially transforming this fossil fuel state into a major player in renewables — some powerful state lawmakers are looking to raise those taxes.
And some in the wind industry, which has long benefited from incentives and subsidies, say they are worried. The company that has spent nine years trying to build the wind project says higher taxes could further delay or even halt the plan.
“Just about every legislator we’ve met with asks us, ‘You tell us how much we can tax you before we put you out of business,’” said Bill Miller, chief executive of the Power Co. of Wyoming, which is planning the wind farm. “I just shake my head and say, ‘Zero.’”
I propose that Wyoming add "cats" to it's list of energy fuels along with nuke, oil, coal, wood and them libral east-coast democrats and californicatin commie pinko faggots. yee-ha.
Too bad about wind. It definitely blows up there. Really really blows.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
No, in a free market, competition keeps prices down.
Nope. Average price in Europe in 2015 was $0.20/KW. It was $0.12/KW in the US.
Seriously, do some background research.
I can't find any research that shows that Internet connectivity in the US is more reliable or relatively cheaper than electricity. If you have some research that you'd like to share.
I don't respond to AC's.
Are you so stupid that you think that's an argument?
So why are you making stupid claims about the relative reliability of Internet connectivity and electricity in the US?
Fact-checking should be a sport. Now, I'm not sure that this bill is benign. But I've done a little bit of fact-checking, and I think the story is incorrect. My understanding of the bill is that wind and solar will continue to remain eligible generating resources, as defined by the bill. Following links and looking around Wyoming's legislative website, I've found two documents: 1. A PDF of the bill in question. See page 3 for a definition of "Eligible generating resource": http://legisweb.state.wy.us/20... 2. Title 37: Public utilities: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/LS... (scroll down to find Title 37). Now, note that on page 3 in the bill, it lists coal, oil and those sorts of things. Okay, you won't find solar and wind in there... but, in (D), this is included "Net metering system, as defined by W.S.37-16-101(a)(viii)". Now, here's something for news hunters to realize. A lot of well-meaning reporters jump to conclusions like the rest of us. Even though that may seem like an intimidating thing, it's actually quite simple. Those numbers mean something. They're an address. They will help you find more information. Now, the 37 clearly means Title 37. So grab Title 37, which is distributed in .docx format, and see that at the top, you have the string "371101". Now, look for "3716101" (37-16-101 without dashes), it'll be called: "Definitions." - interesting, right?
You'll find (a) right below, which lists a bunch of things, so find (viii) as per the reference in the bill.
It'll say: "(viii)"Net metering system" means a facility for the production of electrical energy that:
(A)Uses as its fuel either solar, wind, biomass or hydropower;
(B)Has a generating capacity of not more than twentyfive (25) kilowatts;
(C)Is located on the customergenerator's premises;
(D)Operates in parallel with the electric utility's transmission and distribution facilities; and
(E)Is intended primarily to offset part or all of the customergenerator's requirements for electricity."
Note that (A) says: "Uses as its fuel either solar, wind, biomass or hydropower;"
Now, I don't know enough about the subject matter to really give an opinion on B-E, but it seems clear to me that solar and wind power, as defined in existing Wyoming law, IS INCLUDED in the definition of an eligible generating resource in this new bill which the story revolves around.
It's like trying to talk to a rock. Have a nice life, rock!
I don't respond to AC's.
And now there are *slightly* fewer.
That "governing power" can be a simple private corporation or association. That means that the people making the decisions are the owners on the one hand, and the customers on the other.
HOA's have plenty of politics going on in them. . . to the point of some individuals trying to exert monopoly-like influence to their own personal ends. Strong President + weak res-of-board invites abuse. It happens all the time.
Give anyone or any sub-group power, and they will be in a position to abuse it – unless a system of checks and balances are put in place.
It is basic human nature. If you learn how to escape the effects of being an individual among a group of co-equals, then I and many philosophers, political scientists, and people in general will be delighted to hear it.
So? Did I claim anywhere that HOAs were apolitical or functioned perfectly? Private associations and corporations have most of the problems of regular government; but the one problem they eliminate is that people with no skin in the game enrich themselves through political ends.
I don't have an answer to that problem, but that's not the problem private associations answer. Private associations, rather, ensure that you are at least an individual among co-equals, as opposed to an individual subject to arbitrary outside force.
Because the reason the opinions matter in the first place is because it is the people matter, not the built-in limitations of the choices they've been given. By the logic as currently expressed, once the representative has been chosen, the people are no longer voting, and the preferences being expressed are no longer of the people and your original expression that the "your own" is of the People of Wyoming does not make sense. Two degrees of meaning have been removed from the conventional meaning of "the preferences of the people of Wyoming", first the people who did not vote for a representative, then the people who did vote for a representative, because then it is the preferences of the representative and not the people.
So your point is that representative government imperfectly represents the will of the people, even in a very small state like Wyoming. Ok, thanks for that.
Why would we think non-voters would prefer something different than voters?
I think the line was that snowfall in South England would be rare by 2010, and focusing on the claims in the popular press rather than the scientific evidence is not a wise idea. What exactly about the properties of CO2 has been fixed incorrectly? CO2-based warming was discredited entirely up until at least the mid-1950s, and the opinions of climate researchers shifted rather suddenly with better information about the upper atmosphere. Do you know what that evidence was, and do you have any reason to dispute it? I'll give you a hint, the answer has nothing to do with global climate models.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
The way the bill is worded; it sounds like a politicians attempt to codify an engineer's take that "base load calculations should be made with controllable consistent generation mechanisms".
Wind and solar are geographically limited and intermittent sources of electrical power. I would not expect them to be included in "base load" calculations which justify a continued area monopoly to a public utilities commission. Nothing wrong with Wyoming wanting to require a utility company to certify 95% of their capacity is actually there when required. And nothing to say that when a solar or wind farm is actually producing they can idle a base load plant to save some bucks. Only that they have to have RELIABLE 95% load capability.
NRRPT/RCT
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Brings back the heady days of when indy racing couldn't compete with turbine cars, so they outlawed them. Freedom!
Keep those post reality laws coming! I've heard that scientists have a big machine tht keeps humans fmor flying - but it only works if a few try, so if all deniers and anti-competitive true citizens just jump off a cliff at once, the machine will over load and we will reach our greatest potential. You will soar with the birds!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I don't have an answer to that problem, but that's not the problem private associations answer. Private associations, rather, ensure that you are at least an individual among co-equals, as opposed to an individual subject to arbitrary outside force.
Fair enough. You seem to be saying, effectively, that the US (for example) has strayed far from the "... all men having been created equal ..." part of the US Constitution. Yes. Yes we have.
The US is a (doubly) Representative Republic which is likely on the cusp of diving sharply into fascism, towards which we leaned anyway. All this "free market" and "the market is the most important thing" and "growth must be sustained" are all in essence statements used frequently to justify political actions – self-serving or segment-serving ones – which are at-root fascist in holding the markets as more important than the people.
Sounds like you are just as much of an "anti-fascist" as the guys who said this:
True; but by kicking both Hillary and Sanders to the curb, we have avoided that fate... for now.