Subject:
|
Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 May 2001 13:34:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
453 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott P. Costello writes:
> For the second time I have now been victim of California's rolling
> blackouts. The first experience was a few months ago at home, and now today
> 5/8/01 here at work. For those of you not experiencing this wonderful
> phenomenon, it really sucks! This is just the tip of the iceberg, what is it
> going to be like come July or August when power demand is really high due to
> high temperatures? Our idiot govenor Gray Davis has done nothing but spend
> one billion dollars to buy power, this is the equivelant of puting a
> band-aid on a bazooka wound. All the stupid politicians out here can seem to
> talk about is price caps. While I am sitting here in the dark, I would be
> willing to pay a few bucks more to actually have consistant power. Here at
> my work we are a website, so we just shut down for about an hour. Granted
> this all seems somewhat trivial in the face of other global issues, but this
> problem was preventable if our predicessors had even bothered.
True. The problem is that you can't buy power that there's no
generating capacity for. The issue is more that California's
power infrastructure sucks, as you point out:
> Here are a few key facts:
> 1. In the USA, California is dead last in energy production per capita 50
> out of 50
> 2. In the USA, California is first in conservation per capita.
I had always been under the impression that California had been
putting up big ol' farms covered with turbine windmills, taking
advantage of one resource (wind) that California's position gives
it *plenty* of. But of course the capital investment per KwH
output for wind power is higher than, IIRC, any other form, so
of course companies won't invest in it.
> Believe me the solution is not conservation, we are doing that. The answer
> is also not to blow the entire budget on state run power. I doubt a
> realistic motion to impeach govenor Davis would amount to anything by next
> year, but I sure hope the next guy does a better job.
Likewise. It's also not just a point of lifting price caps,
it's a matter of lifting construction and generation restrictions
on power sources that are technically cleaner than oil, gas, and
coal--I still maintain that nuclear power is safest, despite our
horror and fear over accidents when they do happen, much as we
have grave horror over air crashes when cars kill more per day
than air mishaps do in a year. It's scale rather than numbers.
> And here I thought I did not live in a third world nation.
You don't, you just live in a third world state. ;)
best
LFB
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Rolling Blackouts
|
| (...) It's not that (though that IS part of it). They can't even seem to maintain the current wind farms, because the treehuggers are whining about the birds killed by the blades on the windmills, and fight repairing any that break down. Setting up (...) (23 years ago, 10-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Rolling Blackouts
|
| For the second time I have now been victim of California's rolling blackouts. The first experience was a few months ago at home, and now today 5/8/01 here at work. For those of you not experiencing this wonderful phenomenon, it really sucks! This is (...) (23 years ago, 8-May-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
246 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
