PSPS

[Mikey]

PSPS = Public Safety Power Shutoffs

These happen when there is a high fire danger caused by hot, dry winds. Around here they're called Santa Ana winds. In Northern California they call them Diablo winds. Right now about half of San Diego County has either had their power shut off or is in the "at risk for shutoff" status. They do these shutdowns so that downed powerlines won't spark any fires. Luckily we are just outside of the "at risk" zone in kind of a sweet spot. Not sure why. It's not windy at all right now but the winds are supposed to pick up over night and that could change. Possibly 30 mph gusts here but up to 60 mph and higher in the mountains farther inland.

Welcome to the world of climate change and corporate profits for Investor Owned Utilities.

[Roux]

https://www.generac.com/

[Wolfman]

wow---- reminds me of "Hoot Owl"---the fire potential condition in the US Forests where I was a surveyor one summer. Loggers could only use chain saws before or after sunrise, hand saws only during daylight hours. A few times I heard chain saws across the valley from where we were surveying. Got called in to fight a fire once. Scary time. I knew a guy in college who worked suppression (fire) crews all summer for college $$. We got double pay--"hazardous duty" when on a fire line.Also knew an ex paratrooper who was a Smoke Jumper, those guys were nuts.
Guys in the look out towers sat up there during storms on stool with insulators on the legs, spotting lightning strikes and looking for smokes where they hit.Timber is a valuable commodity folks.

[Left Seater]

Mikey,

Do the crazy Kw/hr rates you guys pay for power not include a small portion for upgrades? If wind is such a big concern annually why not move to bury or mitigate these fire risks. I am sure it is being discussed, but this seems it should be a huge priority.

[mvscal]

Climate change has jackshit to do with Santa Ana winds.

[Mikey]

https://www.generac.com/

Actually, I've got that covered. We have 7.5 kW of PV capacity and a 20 kWh storage battery. We could function indefinitely without much effect on our daily lives, assuming the sun keeps shining. I'd have to turn off the pool pump and I wouldn't be able to charge the EV, but that's pretty minor. We still have a gas powered vehicle (I'm not an idiot in spite of what some here might think).

A generator wouldn't do me any good anyway because we don't have any natural gas service. I got rid of our propane service several years ago because it's so expensive, and the 300 gallon tank next to our garage seemed like an unnecessary hazard if we ever do have a wild fire. We used to use propane for heating, water heating and the clothes dryer, but I replaced all of those with heat pump units, and all work a lot better than what they replaced.

Last time we actually had a shutoff here was in 2017 when a fire came within about a mile of our house. One of the reasons we invested in battery storage was to be prepared for the next one, which we haven't had yet. There is some value to peace of mind, plus the battery allows me to arbitrage the ridiculous Time of Use rates we have here.

[HighPlainsGrifter]

Fire Mitigation Protocol in SoCal

Step 1: Be Rich

[Mikey]

Climate change has jackshit to do with Santa Ana winds.

The Santa Ana winds have been here forever. The effects of climate change tend to decrease their frequency but increase the severity.

Plus the already hot and dry drought conditions exacerbated by climate change add significantly to the fire risk that the Santa Ana winds bring with them. We're two months into our "rainy season" without any measurable rainfall.

I know that may be too complicated for you to comprehend. But I don't really care.

[Mikey]

Mikey,

Do the crazy Kw/hr rates you guys pay for power not include a small portion for upgrades? If wind is such a big concern annually why not move to bury or mitigate these fire risks. I am sure it is being discussed, but this seems it should be a huge priority.

That's an excellent point, and you pretty much hit it on the nose.

The utility structure in California is complicated. Most electric customers are served by the three large (regulated) Investor Owned Utilities - PG&E, SCE and SDGE. These are regulated by the state Public Utilities Commission. There are a number municipally owned utilities as well, the largest being LADWP and SMUD (Sacramento). Most are a lot smaller. The PUC regulates just about everything the the IOUs do, including rate setting. The IOUs exist to generate profits for their investors first, and to serve the rate payers second.

Believe it or not, the IOUs don't make any money selling electricity. Their rates include only an even payback for any power that they produce or purchase from other generation sources. They are guaranteed about 10% profit on any and all capital investment, and those costs are added into the rates that we all pay.

So, to answer your question, from 2019 through 2023 the three IOUs were authorized to spend $27 billion on wildfire prevention. All of that gets passed on (with their profit margin) to the ratepayers in their utility bills. This includes burying lines, upgrading above ground lines, and other measures. SDG&E has deployed a massive high tech weather monitoring system throughout their territory which, actually is pretty cool. Worth the cost? I don't know.

https://smdp.com/2024/12/06/californian ... effective/

https://weather.sdgeweather.com/ (the imagery part is amazing, though sometimes slow to load)

This profit motivation is also one reason why they seemingly do as much as (legally) possible to discourage rooftop solar. They don't make any money on it. If we are going to go solar they would rather build massive solar farms in the desert which require expensive new transmission lines, for which they make a profit on every dollar spent.

[Mikey]

Fire Mitigation Protocol in SoCal

Step 1: Be Rich

Your snark is duly noted.

[HighPlainsGrifter]

Mikey,

Do the crazy Kw/hr rates you guys pay for power not include a small portion for upgrades? If wind is such a big concern annually why not move to bury or mitigate these fire risks. I am sure it is being discussed, but this seems it should be a huge priority.

That's an excellent point, and you pretty much hit it on the nose.

The utility structure in California is complicated. Most electric customers are served by the three large (regulated) Investor Owned Utilities - PG&E, SCE and SDGE. These are regulated by the state Public Utilities Commission. There are a number municipally owned utilities as well, the largest being LADWP and SMUD (Sacramento). Most are a lot smaller. The PUC regulates just about everything the the IOUs do, including rate setting. The IOUs exist to generate profits for their investors first, and to serve the rate payers second.

Believe it or not, the IOUs don't make any money selling electricity. Their rates include only an even payback for any power that they produce or purchase from other generation sources. They are guaranteed about 10% profit on any and all capital investment, and those costs are added into the rates that we all pay.

So, to answer your question, from 2019 through 2023 the three IOUs were authorized to spend $27 billion on wildfire prevention. All of that gets passed on (with their profit margin) to the ratepayers in their utility bills. This includes burying lines, upgrading above ground lines, and other measures. SDG&E has deployed a massive high tech weather monitoring system throughout their territory which, actually is pretty cool. Worth the cost? I don't know.

https://smdp.com/2024/12/06/californian ... effective/

https://weather.sdgeweather.com/ (the imagery part is amazing, though sometimes slow to load)

This profit motivation is also one reason why they seemingly do as much as (legally) possible to discourage rooftop solar. They don't make any money on it. If we are going to go solar they would rather build massive solar farms in the desert which require expensive new transmission lines, for which they make a profit on every dollar spent.

I love it when you get all nerdy with stuff like this. I know I give you shit but I do believe personal solar is the future unless someone figures out zero point and gives the plans away for free. Cost and space are barriers to entry. Apartment dwellers have no hope of converting to solar but everyone else should fuel part or all of their energy needs on their own land. If governments (federal and state) would reallocate the bullshit subsidies for wind generation to personal solar, we could see a revolution. A big piece of evidence the Left isn't as concerned about SAVING THE ENVIRONMENT as they claim, is their refusal to support personal power generation. They wrap themselves in the climate crisis flag but only support projects that fund big corporations (donors).

[Mikey]

OK you want some nerdiness?

California, under Newsome and his appointed members of the CPUC, have completely killed rooftop solar in California. California, under an (allegedly) Republican Governor, basically enabled the solar industry in the aughts and the teens by offering generous rebates for solar installations on both residential and commercial/industrial buildings, starting in 2007 and ending I think in 2014. This was needed to kick start the market because the hardware was so expensive. The equipment costs are a fraction now of what they were back then. When those direct rebates ran out, the remaining incentive to install was that the customer would be able to sell excess production (which happens during the day) back to the utilities for the full retail cost per kWh. This essentially makes the grid a big battery, because you can sell it to the utility during the day and buy it back overnight for the same cost. This doesn't account for the cost of building and maintaining the grid, which is a significant part of the rates we pay.

So, in a somewhat simplified summary, if customer produces exactly the amount that they use they pay nothing (they would never be reimbursed for producing more). This results in the non-solar customers, which are generally those who can't afford it or have no place to put it, subsidizing the solar customers. There are a lot of nuances to this, though. The "early adopters" were guaranteed to maintain this rate structure for 25 years in order to be able to recover their significant investment in equipment that's now a lot cheaper to purchase. Another factor is that the distributed nature of rooftop solar decreases the wear and tear on the infrastructure and also lessens the need to add more capacity to the wires.

A few years ago they changed the reimbursement rates to be the wholesale rate that the utility would pay on the open market. So if you send a kWh back to the grid you might be credited with (this is just off the top of my head) $0.07 but to buy it back you might pay $0.40 depending on the time of day. This is how they killed the solar industry, there just isn't any payback anymore.

I do firmly agree that there's an equity issue here, and existing solar customers (of which I am one) should be paying something for being on the system. We now pay a fixed monthly charge (some people think it's too little, some people think it should be zero). And I have no problem with this, and probably wouldn't if it was somewhat higher. But the Investor Owned Utilities (IOUs) have jumped on this equity bandwagon to essentially kill any new rooftop solar in favor of building huge solar farms where they can make a big profit. I think that if the state is going to subsidize anything they should be helping low income homeowners, rental owners and commercial building owners to get panels on their roofs, and also "community solar" where multiple customers can share a larger system. Get solar on every available roof before covering the desert with solar panels.

There's a whole lot more to it, but this is all I have for now.

[Left Seater]

Believe it or not, the IOUs don't make any money selling electricity. Their rates include only an even payback for any power that they produce or purchase from other generation sources. They are guaranteed about 10% profit on any and all capital investment, and those costs are added into the rates that we all pay.

So, to answer your question, from 2019 through 2023 the three IOUs were authorized to spend $27 billion on wildfire prevention. All of that gets passed on (with their profit margin) to the ratepayers in their utility bills. This includes burying lines, upgrading above ground lines, and other measures.

So if the IOUs only path to profits are Capital Expenditures, it would seem that they would be incentivized to push for as much CE as possible. The CPUC as the overseer would be limiting the CE as the defender of the end rate payer, right? So do the IOUs blame the State for holding back upgrades and therefore fire safety?

[Left Seater]

I know I give you shit but I do believe personal solar is the future unless someone figures out zero point and gives the plans away for free. Cost and space are barriers to entry. Apartment dwellers have no hope of converting to solar but everyone else should fuel part or all of their energy needs on their own land. If governments (federal and state) would reallocate the bullshit subsidies for wind generation to personal solar, we could see a revolution. A big piece of evidence the Left isn't as concerned about SAVING THE ENVIRONMENT as they claim, is their refusal to support personal power generation. They wrap themselves in the climate crisis flag but only support projects that fund big corporations (donors).

Personal solar might work in some areas, but it doesn’t work everywhere. We looked into Solar in both San Antonio and in Colorado. In San Antonio our home is completely shaded by large Oak and Pecan trees. For rooftop solar we would have to cut down the trees that provide shade in the summer. This would drastically raise the electricity use for 8 months of the year to cool the house. The trees help bring the rooftop temperatures down by 20 or so degrees. If the A/C had to do this extra work, the net would be a loss.

Then add to that the fact that we have frequent spring hail storms. The trees help protect the roof from said hail. Putting solar panels on the roof then becomes an insurance nightmare. The roof gets marginal protection from the hail, but then bears the brunt of the hail itself. The increased insurance costs don’t offset the reduction in electricity costs.

In Colorado the issue is snow. The solar panels would be snow covered from late Oct to April. A/C isn’t the huge energy draw there of course, but the panels wouldn’t be producing the power necessary to heat the home when temps are usually in the single digits overnight.

So while some personal solar makes sense, some does not.

[88BuckeyeGrad]

Mikey, I hope the fires don’t come your way.

Regarding propane, why not bury a tank below ground? We put a 500 gallon tank in our front yard. The access is in landscaping and virtually impossible to see from the street. Will power our Generac for 8 days. Kinda necessary when those pesky storms come knocking.

[Mikey]

Mikey, I hope the fires don’t come your way.

Regarding propane, why not bury a tank below ground? We put a 500 gallon tank in our front yard. The access is in landscaping and virtually impossible to see from the street. Will power our Generac for 8 days. Kinda necessary when those pesky storms come knocking.

If I was building a house now, and wanted propane, that's definitely the way to go. Our house was ten years old when we bought it and we were stuck with what was here. I don't think it would pass code today because it was only about ten feet from the house, right next to the main electric panel.

So here's the long version of a short story. When we moved here I didn't realize how expensive propane was, and never really bothered to figure it out. We used propane for space heating, water heating and the clothes dryer. Sometime around 2017 or 2018 our washer bit the dust, so we decided to replace the washer and dryer with matching units. Only problem was that the newer washer/dryer combos were too big to fit side by side in our tiny utility room. So we ended up buying a Miele washer/dryer set. It's a high end German brand but both are somewhat small. Larger than "compact" but smaller than the monsters available today. The dryer operates with an electric heat pump, so there's no propane. It's a little slower than a gas dryer, but highly efficient and noticeably less wear and tear on the clothes. It runs off a standard 15 amp 120 volt circuit and has no vent. The heat pump condenses the removed moisture and sends it down the same drain as the washer uses. A bit expensive but they last forever. Haven't had a problem with either since we put them in.

That was the first step (after installing solar in 2012) to electrification.

When we were thinking that we were close to needing a replacement for the propane water heater the heat pump units were just starting to hit the marker. Like I said, I never thought about how expensive the propane was. But when I sat down in 2019 and did a comparison I was a bit shocked. In terms of $/therm, at the prices we were paying back then (about $4.00 per gallon for propane) it was close to four times the cost of natural gas. And when you consider the efficiency of the heat pump water heater vs a conventional gas or propane water heater, and the cost of electricity (not even considering that we generate most of what we use) I would be saving over 80% on the energy cost. The heat pump unit was more expensive than the conventional replacement, but we were moving in that direction anyway, for other reasons as well.

Similar consideration a couple of years later when our propane furnace was reaching the end of its useful life. We put in a zoned system using a heat pump, which works a whole lot better and more efficiently than the old one. Plus it allowed us to completely remove the propane tank.

Now, with the solar and a storage battery I have enough backup to last us indefinitely, with a few inconveniences like not being able run the pool pump or the car charger. I can see why you would want the generator in the event of those storms. For us, fortunately (I guess), the times that we are most likely to have a shutdown are these Santa Ana conditions when the sun is shining brightly during the day.

[88BuckeyeGrad]

That makes sense, Mikey. We only use propane for the back-up generator, which "exercises" every Wednesday morning at 8:00 a.m. for five minutes and runs when the power goes out here (which occurs with frequency in the "wet" season), our cooktop (used daily), an outdoor grill (used a couple of times a week) and a built-in outdoor fireplace (which we almost never use). There are so many people that have buried propane tanks for back-up generators in this part of the world that the gas delivery companies just drive around and top them off from time-to-time and send us a bill. It is about $4.76 a gallon right now. But we do not use much of it so the cost seems trivial, at least compared to electricity (~$450 per month). There is no natural gas option here. Some communities have it. But ours does not. And that makes sense since turning on the "heat" in SWFL happens about never.

[Left Seater]

That seems expensive for propane, but then I don’t know cause we have gas. Water heater, heat, dryer.

Gas and electric bill are the same company in SA and we pay $250 in the summer and $110 in the winter for both.

[Mikey]

I'm not sure what my electric bill would be without the PV system, since I've had it in some form since 2012. I've heard of people around here paying $1000 or more per month in the summer when the peak rates go up to $0.60/kWh or higher (between 4 pm and 9 pm). I did pay around $600 just for electricity back around 2000 when Enron was screwing California. I pay a true-up once a year in May, which combines all 12 months of billing. Last year it was about $250. This year it was about $700. It increased mostly because of a increased monthly charge to offset grid maintenance. I was paying about $3000 per year for propane before we had it removed.

I just did a quick calculation with data that I can easily come by.

My PV system produced 10,481 kWh in the past year
We used a net 5,640 kWh above that amount (from SDGE) so our total usage was the sum of those - 16,121 kWh

I looked up the average rate for SDGE residential customers over the past year and it was estimated to be $0.477/kWh.
If I multiply that number by the total kWh we used - 16,121 x .477 = $7690, or $641/month.
$700 per year works out to $58/month average, so the solar is saving me $582 per month or $6990 per year.

My average cost per kWh, including all utility charges, is $700 per year divided by 5640 kWh per year = $0.12 per kWh. That cost is so low because about 90% of the electricity I use from the grid happens between midnight and 6 am.

[Roux]

solar is saving me $582 per month or $6990 per year.

How much did it cost?

I was told there would be no math. /obligatory

[Mikey]

solar is saving me $582 per month or $6990 per year.

How much did it cost?

I was told there would be no math. /obligatory

One would think that that would be an easy question to answer, but there are a lot of moving parts if you want to really drill down. Here are some basics.

The first 5 kW of PV cost us about $45,000 in 2012. But that included the 9' high shade structure that it was built on, and that was something we really needed and probably would have put something like that in anyway. We were able roll the entire cost into the 30% tax credit, so total cost of $31,500 including the shade structure.

The second array, 2.5 kW on the roof cost about $8,000 or $5,600 net with the tax credit. Costs have come way down in the past 12 years.

The 20 kWh battery was about $30,000, but also had the tax credit, so $21,000 net. Adding up all three, about $58,000 total.

$58,000/$7000 per year = about 8 year payback.

That's not great but not too bad, and there are a lot of other things to consider. I charge my car from this system, so I buy no gas. We no longer use any propane, so that cost has gone away. We have a reliable backup system, which is a huge consideration that you can't really put a price on, unless you want to compare to a backup generator. Replacing the water heater, clothes dryer and space heating (which we use for probably four months early in the morning) came with a cost. Even though those would have been replaced anyway, the heat pump alternatives are somewhat more expensive than the conventional systems.

The only reason it works at as well as it does is because of our sky high electric rates. Equipment costs have come down so it could be done a lot cheaper today but, in areas with really cheap electricity, it doesn't pencil out nearly as well.

[88BuckeyeGrad]

That seems expensive for propane, but then I don’t know cause we have gas. Water heater, heat, dryer.

Gas and electric bill are the same company in SA and we pay $250 in the summer and $110 in the winter for both.

The main electricity expense we have is for heating the pool. Probably costs $150 to $200 per month. The rest is AC, I suspect.

[Left Seater]

$58K is way beyond most budgets.

Would you have done it without the tax credits?

[mvscal]

Oh....I thought you were calling a cat and not a wall of text on how to mitigate the catastrophically stupid energy policies in California. Please, tell me more about spending $60K to save a few shekels on electricity.

[smackaholic]

Cali's 3rd world grid reliability wasn't a thing before someone decided that having millions of grid generators was a good idea. Back then they actually put money into grid maintenance and improvement.

There is no excuse for having power lines running through tinderboxes. you just have to maintain the right aways.

Mikey lives in pretty much the best spot in the country for solar. He has close to no heating needs, way less AC than 88 or LS have and he is still not independent of the grid. I'm sure he could get to grid independence with another hundred grand or so in PV/batteries.

So, if anyone thinks we can run everything off PV, they're high. Even if we could generate enough, storage is the big problem. Some places could do it with gravity storage (hydro). I used to think that in places like West Tejas, wind made sense, but mother nature kinda showed us how easy it is to buttfukk those windmills in the mouf.

The answer is modular nukes. We figured out how to do it a very long time ago. Modular plants are inherently safe and if we start mass producing them, cost is manageable. A hell of a lot more manageable than wind, especially the ridiculous off shore shit they like building in the U&R.

As we go towards widespread EV use, overnight grid draw is gonna go through the roof. Solar doesn't stand a chance. Splitting atoms works at night and it doesn't require a redundant backup system like allegedly green energy does.

If we do this, we can stop wasting precious dino juice on things like heating houses and most cars. I think there will always be a need for ICE powered cars/trucks in rural areas.

[HighPlainsGrifter]

you just have to maintain the right aways.

Be sure to check the right of way at the same time.

[Mikey]

$58K is way beyond most budgets.

Would you have done it without the tax credits?

Maybe not. But that money was spent over a period of about ten years, and the first system was financed with a HELOC. So not quite as painful as you might think. It's an investment. Some was paid for with a bonus I got when the company I worked for was bought out in 2019. I've prolly made all of that back in savings, and still benefitting to the tune of $7,000+ per year.

[Mikey]

...how to mitigate the catastrophically stupid energy policies in California.

No doubt there has been some stupid policy here. Interesting to note, though, that the reliability of the grid in Texas (the Energy Capital of the World) has been substantially worse in the past few years than in California.

[Mikey]

Cali's 3rd world grid reliability wasn't a thing before someone decided that having millions of grid generators was a good idea. Back then they actually put money into grid maintenance and improvement.

See my previous comment comparing CA to TX.

You are displaying your rank ignorance of the subject here. A more distributed system serves to increase reliability, not decrease it. Think about it. If one small generator (or rooftop system) fails, how many people lose power? Then consider what happens if a 2,200 megawatt plant (Google: San Onofre) goes offline. Or maybe a 2,000 megawatt powerline (which can cost $billions to construct) goes down.

There is no excuse for having power lines running through tinderboxes. you just have to maintain the right aways.

Where else are you going to put them when you have to get the power from a 2,000 megawatt power plant to the customers?

Mikey lives in pretty much the best spot in the country for solar. He has close to no heating needs, way less AC than 88 or LS have and he is still not independent of the grid. I'm sure he could get to grid independence with another hundred grand or so in PV/batteries.

We're not on the coast. It's been in the high 30s/low 40s here in the mornings since the beginning of the month. It's not Cumducticut, but we definitely run the heat in the morning.

In the past summer we had a week straight of 100+ degree days, and most of the summer was mid to high 90s. We don't have the humidity of FL or TX but we definitely need our AC.

You seem to have some kind of fairy tale impression of what the weather is like here.

I have enough PV and storage to make it through a temporary outage. I'm not looking for "grid independence" but only to make living on the grid more affordable. Going "off-grid" is technically and financially not feasible, unless you're somewhere where you have no grid. The reasons are probably too complicated for me to explain you to wrap your head around, but think about varying seasonal production, and usage, in summer vs winter.

So, if anyone thinks we can run everything off PV, they're high. Even if we could generate enough, storage is the big problem. Some places could do it with gravity storage (hydro). I used to think that in places like West Tejas, wind made sense, but mother nature kinda showed us how easy it is to buttfukk those windmills in the mouf.

No one is proposing to run everything off PV. If you think they are, you're high.

The answer is modular nukes. We figured out how to do it a very long time ago. Modular plants are inherently safe and if we start mass producing them, cost is manageable. A hell of a lot more manageable than wind, especially the ridiculous off shore shit they like building in the U&R.

Show me where to get one. Or even show me one that's in use right now.

As we go towards widespread EV use, overnight grid draw is gonna go through the roof. Solar doesn't stand a chance. Splitting atoms works at night and it doesn't require a redundant backup system like allegedly green energy does.

You've been reading too much sci-fi. Get your head out of the clouds.

[Left Seater]

...how to mitigate the catastrophically stupid energy policies in California.

No doubt there has been some stupid policy here. Interesting to note, though, that the reliability of the grid in Texas (the Energy Capital of the World) has been substantially worse in the past few years than in California.

This is due in no small part to EPA policy and DC getting in the way.

For example during the great Freeze we lost power at a large number of natural gas pipeline pumping stations. This halted the flow of natural gas to gas fired power plants. This then put additional burden on other fossil fuel power plants.

The reason many of these natural gas pipeline pumping stations went off line was because the EPA required the pumping stations be electric powered when they had been powered by small gas generators for years. Had those generators been allowed to remain gas powered, the grid probably doesn’t go down like it did.

So yes, the energy capitol did suffer, but in no small part because DC put handcuffs on what was fine for decades. Going forward ERCOT has said screw DC when things get real.

[Mikey]

Why did they lose power there in the first place? Sounds like a pretty lame excuse to me.

Another problem was that a lot of wind turbines froze up because they had refused to spend the money for freeze protection. Was that someone else’s fault too? Was that why the compressors failed?

[Left Seater]

Why did they lose power there in the first place? Sounds like a pretty lame excuse to me.

Another problem was that a lot of wind turbines froze up because they had refused to spend the money for freeze protection. Was that someone else’s fault too? Was that why the compressors failed?

No, it’s not the reason. The storm started as ice and that caused major issues, including the loss of some transmission lines. With lines down pumping stations went down and the cascade continued. Having gas powered pump stations certainly would have helped keep gas flowing to gas plants.

And yes not all the wind turbines were “winterized” but wind turbines take wind and electricity to get started. During the coldest portion of the storm the wind was below generation speeds. Plus those turbines use electricity to get them initially turning.

Many of the larger solar installations were ice covered and their generating ability was greatly reduced. On top of that, they use electricity to move and follow the sun. So renewables were mostly useless during this storm.

So there were lots of factors, but having gas powered pump stations certainly would have helped.

[smackaholic]

Mikey, notice I didn't say THE best spot, but you're pretty damn close. I suppose someone with a beach house in low cal pretty much would be the idea spot as heat/cooling needs are about as low as it gets.

But the fact remains, solar is only feasible with massive production AND impossibly massive storage. If we are going to go all in on EVs, which believe it or not, I am warming up to, we are gonna need every fukking battery we can make for vehicles.

And when will they be charged?

Some can charge at work while the sun shines, but most will charge in driveways over night. And that's gonna need a lot of juice after your magic shade tree has checked out for the day.

What this comes down to is that for mikey, a retired fukk who can charge his car all day during his largely sunny days, this MIGHT make sense. Hell, it might even make sense if you're spending your own money. But would you have done it without subsidies?

I doubt it.

As for the modular nuke plants, you pretend they are some sort of fantasy like fusion currently is.

They aren't. We know how to make them. We've made hundreds of what you might call modular nuke plants over the years. They are in our Navy ships.

Nuke power plants are like any other product. Build a lot of them on a production line and they get much, much cheaper. Just like your PV cells.

Unlike your PV cells, they don't need redundant system.

[smackaholic]

you just have to maintain the right aways.

Be sure to check the right of way at the same time.

Yeah, that too!!!