Now that Duke-Progress are a merged monopoly in the state they are free raise a lot of folks power bills unchecked by competition. And with Governor who worked for them most of his adult life and a legislature that is firing all current members of the Utilities Commission (along with all members of all other oversight boards) to replace them with folks more friendly to their dispositions, there aren't many checks against significantly higher rates to enhance corporate profits for this government protected monopoly.

There is this coalition that's formed against the negative economic and environmental impacts they see this as having, and they're trying to get the word out about the public hearing in Raleigh on Monday the 11th just a few days from now. You're allowed as a citizen to go give an up to 3 minute-long statement about whether you think rates should go up, or about the environmental/health impact of various energy sources, or what have you.

http://www.consumersagainstratehikes.org/

Quote :

"Attend the public hearing on Duke and Progress Energy’s long-term Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs): Monday, February 11, 2013 at 7:00 PM NC Utilities Commission The Dobbs Building, Room 2115 430 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC"

More background on the aforementioned group:

Quote :

"CARH supports fair and equitable rates across all classes of customers, transparency and public involvement in the rate setting process, and programs that reduce energy demand and encourage energy efficiency as a means to reduce overall monthly costs for individuals and businesses. CARH is especially concerned about the impact of an Annual Rate Hike Bill that would, if passed by the NC legislature, give Duke and Progress Energy Corporations a blank check to raise our rates every year. Those rate hikes would dramatically drive up rates for our seniors, families, schools, towns and businesses. It would hurt our struggling economy and cost us jobs. Duke and Progress Energy Corporations want the legislature to pass an Annual Rate Hike Bill to shift the risk and cost burden from shareholders to consumers because they can’t get Wall Street to back their financially risky power plant construction plans."

Quote :

"Supporters: AARP North Carolina Action NC Alliance for NC SAVE$ ENERGY Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League Clean Water for NC NC Fair Share NC Housing Coalition NC Interfaith Power & Light (a program of the NC Council of Churches) NC Justice Center NC League of Conservation Voters NC WARN: Waste Awareness & Reduction Network Western NC Physicians for Social Responsibility"

[Edited on February 8, 2013 at 11:56 AM. Reason : .]

2/8/2013 11:55:41 AM

Not that I don't think the merger hasn't been a complete cluster, but how does the merger give them more monopoly control in areas than they already had? Did home owners around here get to choose who gave them their power because every place I've rented has always been one choice only so it always seemed like progress or duke could charge whatever they wanted.

2/8/2013 12:21:42 PM

^this.

Also, if you're gonna get pissed off about this then you should be equally upset at Duke being a supporter of the fed government's efforts to push through any kind of regulation of CO2, as any of the schemes out there help them make more money.

2/8/2013 12:27:59 PM

FYI utilities are a state granted monopoly. Therefore the state (Utilities Commission) gets to set their rates for electricity - usually allowing Duke and other stakeholders (including you and me) to petition and discuss the dis/advantages to changing the rate.

Obviously I'm gonna gripe about higher prices, and I'm also not a very big fan of a state-sanctioned businesses contributing to campaigns or being ultra friendly with regulators . . . . .


but I think with the rate increase we will still be paying slightly less than the national average and when adjusted for inflation we will paying about the same rate as in the 1990s (I'll go hunting for some evidence that this is true). Add on top that Duke recently closed down two of its ancient coal plants and replaced them with cleaner NG and modern coal units and have otherwise been reasonably progressive in regards to pollution and CO2 (still room for improvement though I admit).

Take all this into account and we as customers may be getting a decent deal. Hell it could cause people to do a better job at conserving energy. To me I just feel that this rate increase is inevitable, and rather than fight the increase we can use it to our advantage in fighting for better pollution controls/renewables. That is, if the state is ever considering better environmental rules (well no time soon but eventually?) for utilities, and Duke complains about expense we will easily be able to say "Bro, we just granted you a 10% rate increase, get your ass in gear."




[Edited on February 8, 2013 at 1:09 PM. Reason : .]

2/8/2013 1:07:20 PM

its all fun and games until you get a piece of shit heat pump

2/8/2013 1:36:16 PM

as long as they keep providing me with steady jobs by cutting me checks to replace fan and pump motors, I don't care

2/8/2013 1:55:48 PM

This IRP hearing isn't just about rate hikes, it's also about the long-term Integrated Resource Plan, which is to say this is also the public's opportunity to advocate for or against fracking becoming a central part of our energy portfolio.

http://charlottesierraclub.org/2012/09/23/duke-and-progress-energy-irp-filed/

Quote :

"The decisions made regarding the Duke and Progress Energy 2012 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) will shape the sources of energy production and greatly determine the costs and rates we pay in NC for the next 20 years."

From what the NC Warn folks are saying this long range plan virtually locks in future rate hikes with less public input or oversight:

http://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/NCW_2013-IRP-flyer.pdf

Quote :

"On Monday, February 11th in Raleigh, there will be a public hearing giving us the opportunity to speak out about Duke Energy's dirty and costly rate hikes business plan. The Duke-Progress plan will cause rates to at least double within the next 10 years to pay for dangerous nuclear, dirty coal and natural gas plants. There is a much cheaper and more environmentally responsible alternative – an aggressive ramping up of energy efficiency, wind and solar power."

The NC Conservation network is also calling for them not to fire everyone on these oversight boards and commissions:
https://secure3.convio.net/nccn/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=817

Quote :

"Senate Bill 10 would effectively fire all members of the Utilities Commission, Environmental Management Commission, Coastal Resources Commission, and Wildlife Resources Commission."

As is Greenpeace:
http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2013/02/07/a-blueprint-for-corporate-control-of-democracy/

Also, on the environmental front, NC ranks 3 times in the top 10 endangered environments in the southeast:
http://www.southernenvironment.org/top-10-2013

I'm not the biggest environmental advocate as you can tell by my posting history, but when I see oversight people kicked out in a powergrab, and rates being raised in a money grab for the people at the top of our state government, and a chance to speak out against something that will impact our health, environment, fracking, and our wallets for the next decade or two all happening at once, I think it's at least worth noting.

Anyways, that hearing is happening on Monday in Raleigh, and anyone can go, write their name down on the sign up sheet when they get there, and have their 3 minute statement entered into the record.

[Edited on February 8, 2013 at 2:38 PM. Reason : .]

2/8/2013 2:21:40 PM

Fracking is here to stay, there's no getting around that. Until there is strong, and I mean strong like people dropping dead by the dozens from drinking the same contaminated water there's not going to be any stop to it. The possibility of an energy independent US is too strong a drive for politicians and the profits to be made are too big for corporations to ignore. And, it may actually be environmentally safe. The jury is still out on it in terms of short and long term environmental impact.

2/8/2013 2:39:52 PM

I want cheap electricity. This is the fucking south, if people want to pay out the ass for everything they can move to California or the Northeast.

2/8/2013 2:45:09 PM

Quote :

"The jury is still out on it in terms of short and long term environmental impact."

And this is the one chance to tell the utilities commission that the public demands safety and oversight.

2/8/2013 2:47:19 PM

We want safety, oversight, environmental protection, green initiatives, administrators, a state-sanctioned monopoly, and low prices that never change. At what point do our expectations become unrealistic?

[Edited on February 8, 2013 at 2:51 PM. Reason : ]

2/8/2013 2:50:37 PM

I want more nuclear plants, for us to stop burning fucking coal for power, and more use of natural gas as a heating fuel.

Of course, since most people are terrified of nuclear that will never happen.

2/8/2013 2:57:30 PM

Wind farms are the stupidest "green energy" initiative ever. Fields full of dead, festering bird carcasses attracting disease and critters. They are also extremely unsightly, and require other sources of power since they do not always run.


Coal is plain dirty, but there is plenty of it.

Hydro-electric is good and consistent, but people bitch about damming up waterways because it blocks migratory fish.

Solar is not going to catch on with the current technology that we have.

People are just going to have to get over the fact that energy has an environmental cost and will have side effects no matter what type of energy we are dealing with.......

Nuclear is the cleanest and most efficient energy we have discovered. It is also the most dangerous, and requires a steady water supply to keep cool. If that gets interrupted for any reason it overheats, melts the concrete, and the public is at risk. Tsunamis, earthquakes, human error, and other mayhem make these types of plant a threat to the public when something goes wrong. When everything is going right they have zero emissions and the fuel takes forever to burn, such a small amount of waste is generated it can be stored in ponds or deposited deep in the earth out of harms way.

2/8/2013 3:19:49 PM

This is a nice theoretical discussion to have, but let's be honest. With the political structure that's in place currently, the one sector that you can guarantee will suffer will be the environment. Habitat can not advocate for itself, and there is no Lorax. Greed, profit and short-term gain is what drives the ambitions of those with the power now and are championed on by those, even in our midsts, who are blind to any sort of balance or respect that is required for sustaining ecosystems.

Are there prudent ways to have energy in a measured and meaningful manner? Sure, but the myopic inclinations of those with the power and ambition have no intentions of implementing, much less listening to, these ideas because it goes against their corporate overlords.

With that said, natural gas and nuclear are the clear winners when comes to transitional methods of energy. Fracking needs to have serious and meaningful oversight in regards to drilling well construction, but the overarching problem is how much fresh water is simply wastes which no one wants to address.

2/8/2013 3:22:57 PM

The damage to the bird population is massively overblown. It's hardly a real environmental impact.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm

I will say that I agree that they are not a great long term solution and at best can be supplemental. They're fine on a small scale, but on a large scale not that great. Still, if the people of Kansas, Nebraska, and west Texas want them up they can put them up.

2/8/2013 3:27:46 PM

Quote :

"I want cheap electricity. This is the fucking south"

You're in luck, there's a public rate hike hearing by the people who have some say in how much you pay happening in just a few days.

Quote :

"I want more nuclear plants, for us to stop burning fucking coal for power"

Statements like that can be made too. It doesn't have to be all hippie, lets eat plants until we can photosynthesize our own energy type statements.

Quote :

"Sure, but the myopic inclinations of those with the power and ambition have no intentions of implementing, much less listening to, these ideas because it goes against their corporate overlords."

That may be true, but the usually somewhat intransigent utilities commissioners are about to all lose their jobs and be replaced by even more corporately-aligned commissioners, so this time around at least they might be more inclined to do something if there is a large enough public outcry.

[Edited on February 8, 2013 at 3:36 PM. Reason : .]

2/8/2013 3:32:24 PM

Compared to what is likely to come if this passes, the current arrangements are substantially more beneficial for both sustainability as well as economic growth.

As a native North Carolinian, it just infuriates and saddens me that so many people could be apathetic and even supportive of such egregious rapes of the natural world. They won't acknowledge their disastrous policies on our coast until the tourism lobby steps up, and even then it will likely come in the form of hotels looking for seawall construction. Utterly unconscionable.

2/8/2013 10:06:40 PM

Quote :

"it just infuriates and saddens me that so many people could be apathetic and even supportive of such egregious rapes of the natural world. "

Honest question, given that we apparently are also opposed to increases in the energy rates, what are the alternatives? Even if we invested heavily in solar and wind and somehow found enough subsidies from somewhere to keep the rates the same, we'd still need our current energy systems to produce a base load right? It might slow down the growth of those systems a bit, but we're still using resources and still going to need to get them from somewhere. We could continue to import our energy, but that's not actually concern for the "rapes of the natural world" then, it's just NIMBY. Nuclear in this country is out until we get over our irrational fears of it. So as an honest question, what are the alternatives to our current path?

2/8/2013 10:25:23 PM

As an avid, some would say rabid, environmentalist, I fully endorse the use of nuclear and natural gas (just look how much is simply wasted in the Dakotas currently). Solar and Wind are not the full way of the future sadly. They can, however, provide an energy buffer. My chief advocacy remains for investment into fusion technology as the true path to energy freedom.

I'm not saying to end coal tomorrow, but the sooner, the better. Hell, I would also advocate for a balance of resource utilization in one area that was not environmentally sensitive, in trade for reforestation or habitat preservation in another.

2/8/2013 10:32:07 PM

y'all don't have a clue what you're talking about

2/8/2013 11:02:12 PM

I'm aware of the previous discussions about load capacities and such and how wind and solar are too intermittent to be viable large scale. We should continue to incentivize people to invest in solar and geothermal, where viable, for their home instead of punishing people who produce more of their own electricity than they take from the grid. Fusion isn't a pipe dream, it just needs serious encouragement.

2/9/2013 10:23:12 AM

You can see how people really live off teh grid on this show.

Satellite Phones, home accessible only by boat, single home electric source (hydroelectric or wind) home runs of batteries, wood heat.

2/9/2013 11:14:26 AM

my dead of winter electricity bill here in Shanghai was about $8. and my water bill was less than $4 I have a decent sized apartment considering I live smack in the middle of the city. I leave my shit running all the time. okok so my January bill went up to about $13

2/10/2013 1:52:20 AM

^Is the air quality like this?

2/10/2013 2:38:32 AM

every pound of coal we don't burn, china will burn

2/10/2013 8:50:07 AM

Well, that's just completely untrue.

I mean, their consumption of coal is going to increase, but not as a result of us using less. China and India seeing massive increase in coal use is just more of a reason for us to get away from it as increased demand will make it considerably more expensive for us to continue using.

2/10/2013 11:19:22 AM

In re: to fracking

Quote :

" The possibility of an energy independent US is too strong a drive for politicians and the profits to be made are too big for corporations to ignore."

2/10/2013 12:21:53 PM

Quote :

"On Monday, February 11th in Raleigh, there will be a public hearing giving us the opportunity to speak out about Duke Energy's dirty and costly rate hikes business plan. The Duke-Progress plan will cause rates to at least double within the next 10 years to pay for dangerous nuclear, dirty coal and natural gas plants. There is a much cheaper and more environmentally responsible alternative – an aggressive ramping up of energy efficiency, wind and solar power."

That seems like a completely unbiased source...

I love the fear mongering (dangerous nuclear), and half-truth (dirty coal) portrayals. Nuclear isn't dangerous and while burning unprocessed coal is dirty, burning gasified coal is far cleaner and environmentally friendly (not to mention the removed particulate matter does have value).

Portraying wind and solar as being cheap is fucking ludicrous. Solar panels are not cheap or practical everywhere, not to mention the manufacturing of them is far from environmentally or health friendly, and with lifetimes of 15-25 years, wtf will we do solar panels that contains harmful chemicals?

And wind? BUAHAHAHAHA. That's a joke in itself. It may be great in oceans as solar farms, but unless it's windy, they suck ass.

I'm all for solar and wind, but to see them as replacements that are cost effective is laughable at best. Not to mention that in order to replace coal/natural gas/nuclear with all this "clean" energy, it will require massive amounts of investments in new plants, more land and a host of NIMBY challenges, all of which will require a massive hike in rates that you are desperately trying to protest against. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Dickplanter, stop spreading your environmental propaganda in an attempt to try and leverage Duke/Progress into divulging their plans for renewable energy. The facts are that Duke and Progress have always had a monopoly on their respective areas of coverage, their rates are tightly regulated by the state. You environmentalists didn't protest to have this meeting out of interest for the rates we pay, and you know damn well that this isn't about their IRP at all (they submit 1 every 2 years, so this meeting isn't going to determine anything in regards to the next 20 years of rates). You're just trying to create and use a fear of rate hikes to justify having this meeting so that you guys can pry and their future plans in regards to renewable energy so that you can later try to introduce environmental legislation to shape their future or try and spur public outrage towards them.

The fact is, you're not hear over rate hikes, you're hear because you want us to get onboard your hippy bandwagon of faggotry. If you really do care about the rates, then you would know renewable energy is expensive to implement and that your very agenda would actually push rates up for all of us while still keeping us dependent on fossil fuels. The only source of energy that should appease the environmentalists and people for the use of fossil fuels is more nuclear power plants, as they are clean and an abundant source of power.

So fuck you and your train you rode in on.

2/10/2013 1:48:11 PM

Quote :

"burning gasified coal is far cleaner and environmentally friendly"

it's also still a damn science project pipe dream

2/10/2013 3:48:03 PM

No. It is not. Gasified fuels have been used for over 100 years.

There's a plant in Sweden that is powered by gasified biomas. The Great Plains Synfuels Plant has been in operation since 1984, and it pipes the fuel it produces from coal to Iowa and the surrounding states for use.

Gasification isn't new. It's just been recently been thought of in the push for clean energy.

2/10/2013 4:43:30 PM

Overreaction much? Just because the only information I could find about the hearings was on environmentalist websites doesn't mean I subscribe to every single thing said on the site. I just wanted to share about this opportunity for the public to input on policies that affect the environment and on how much you pay to have the lights on, that is happening in the city where must tdubbers live. No reason to resort to name calling.

2/10/2013 5:07:01 PM

Sweden burns trash for energy.

Quote :

"Currently, 20 percent of Sweden's heat supply is produced by incinerating garbage -- that's 810,000 homes -- with the remaining energy providing 250,000 homes with electricity. To make up for the lack of litter generated by its diligent citizens (the country's plants can process two million tonnes of household waste), Sweden will mainly be importing trash from Norway. Not only will Norway be paying Sweden to destroy its waste, the only thing it will get back in return will be a pile of ash, rich with heavy metals and harmful dioxins that will need to be deposited in landfills. Despite this added burden, it is still the most economical way for Norway to dispose of its household waste."

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-10/29/sweden-imports-garbage-for-energy

2/10/2013 11:12:52 PM

why would we possibly want to coke coal for use in generation instead of just burning the coal directly?

2/10/2013 11:18:11 PM

Quote :

"Attend the public hearing on Duke and Progress Energy’s long-term Integrated Resource Plans (IRPs): Monday, February 11, 2013 at 7:00 PM NC Utilities Commission The Dobbs Building, Room 2115 430 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC"

So today is the big day, and the main reason this thread was made. If you want to speak out at this public hearing, by going, signing in, and speaking when your name is called for 3 mins or less, today is the day. You can talk about rates, the environmental/health impacts, fracking, big money in politics as it relates to these decisions, fracking, against the firing of the environmental oversight personnel, or whatever else you want. Or you can even go say drill baby drill if you want. But this is the main chance for the public to speak.

2/11/2013 9:37:43 AM

Quote :

"I want cheap electricity. This is the fucking south, if people want to pay out the ass for everything they can move to California or the Northeast."

then you want goal and natural gas (and maybe hydro)

if you want green power that is reliable, you want nuclear.

if you want massively overpriced and unreliable green power you want wind and solar.

2/11/2013 10:36:02 AM

just out of curiosity what are rates in nc like these days?

here in maine im paying about 7.5c for delivery and 7.3c for the standard offering.

2/11/2013 10:45:14 AM

depends on the provider. I think Progress is somewhere around $0.10/kWh, with the cooperatives and municipals being anywhere in the $0.11-$0.18 range for residential customers.

2/11/2013 10:56:42 AM

is that just for supply or is that delivery included (or do they not separate that in NC, I honestly don't remember)

2/11/2013 11:00:16 AM

The rates can be found here:

http://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/NCScheduleRS.pdf

This is the only thing I can find that actually gives the calculation for one's electricity bill. I was disappointed in the transparency of the billing. The bills have, and continue to, give your kWh and then your charge with no indication of how the calculation was done.

Challenge: find me the previous versions of the above pdf. Or, just find me numbers that lets me calculate a bill at any given time in the last 10 years.

You may ask why I didn't seek out some kind of official response... like, say, a forum, hosted by the company. Well I did and they deleted the forum. I had not planned on being fussy until they did that. The company rep who replied to my question admitted that the information on how their bill was calculated isn't available aside from the pdf I linked to. So your only option is to go on a mission hunting the pdf for every period of time. And don't worry, they disabled web indexing in case you were going to try that.

The EIA does track this sort of thing. Or something like it. A funny distinction, they don't really report the electricity "price" in any honest definition. They report what the users are charged. The formula for how price is determined isn't really looked at. They're just considering average price.

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/7?agg=0,1&geo=g&endsec=vg&freq=M&start=200101&end=201211&ctype=linechart<ype=pin&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

You can see that nationally prices rose through the commodity bubble up to 2007. They didn't go back down for the recession, although utility stocks continued to do quite well. Your explanation for this is probably as good as mine. The divergence between residential and commercial/industrial in recent years is certainly interesting. Total electricity use is as constant as could be, and the price industry pays is also, but somehow residential just hasn't followed that same formula.

The elephant in the room is natural gas obviously. Exactly how that should impact prices isn't entirely clear, although the low price would seem to indicate that the prices would decrease. The reality is much more complicated since NG plants are significantly cheaper to build than the alternatives of coal, nuclear, or wind. The breakdown is about half the cheap combustion turbines and half the combine cycles.

Electricity prices are, however, not based on the price of fuel, they are supposed to be based on the marginal cost of addition of capacity. But this isn't a metric that makes sense in some cases because some capacity is simply cheaper than others, and it correspondingly shifts the cost to fuel. Utilities, with the shift to NG have predictably been asking for more flexibility in the fuel surcharge to customers - basically shifting the cost of fuel to consumers. That's not necessarily more or less fair to consumers, but obviously the consumers should have a voice in what capacity is built because that may determine their liabilities in the future.

Oh dear, I have said far too much.

[Edited on February 11, 2013 at 11:13 AM. Reason : ]

2/11/2013 11:09:10 AM

naw that's good stuff to talk about.

utility companies have far more leverage over residential customers than industrial customers. On the one side industrial customers are using their power and wealth to force utilities to give them more choice in supply, and on the other side the suppliers are trying to break into that utility's markets to go after those tasty industrial contracts. so you have industrials and suppliers who really really want to do business and utilities in the middle who eventually give in. this isn't anything new and industrial customers have enjoyed far more choices than residential in where the power comes from. this leads to more competition on price. whereas residential customers have only ever seen their bills go up over time because they don't have a choice. and as you've mentioned they cant even see how their bill is calculated in nc.

natural gas is an even bigger game changer because its just so fucking cheap. it pushes down the costs of all other energy sources (especially propane which has fucking rocked hardcore for me personally as I use it for heat). The biggest thing with ng is that its super useful for direct industrial applications, not just for power generation. personal anecdote: my dad does work for a large paper product manufacturer and he wants to build some on site natural gas generators for one of their plants that will both provide heat for their dryers and cut off a large chunk of their utility supplied power bill. saving a lot of money.

its pretty cool

[Edited on February 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM. Reason : .]

2/11/2013 11:27:53 AM

rates aren't decoupled in North Carolina yet, so our rates include wheeling and fuel costs together.

2/11/2013 11:44:08 AM

So in maine the law dictates that residential customers can pick from approved suppliers. traditionally this has been for retarded environmental reasons and all the other suppliers were more expensive than the standard offer (and sometimes hilariously less environmentally friendly). turns out there are new suppliers trying to get into the market like these guys: http://www.electricityme.com/

they're slightly cheaper than the standard offer and it looks like the reason is they're way way into natural gas. this is pretty fucking cool and I should probably switch suppliers. it would be rad if this became the norm in the US, but I don't see that happening between environazis and utility owned regulators.

2/11/2013 11:44:43 AM

In other news renewable energy is now becoming cheaper than fossil fuel energy (in australia at least, where they have carbon taxes)

Time to build those offshore wind farms you promised, McCrory.

http://www.alternet.org/environment/time-take-notice-how-renewable-energy-becoming-cheaper-fossil-fuels

2/11/2013 11:54:09 AM

Quote :

"The biggest thing with ng is that its super useful for direct industrial applications, not just for power generation. personal anecdote: my dad does work for a large paper product manufacturer and he wants to build some on site natural gas generators for one of their plants that will both provide heat for their dryers and cut off a large chunk of their utility supplied power bill. saving a lot of money. "

Such is the debate for NG these days. There really are a boatload of possibilities. Because of properties it has that other fossil fuels don't, it can be used more effectively than direct application to electricity, even though it has the highest efficiency at that. I hope that we realize more of its potential. I fall short of thinking it's a do-all industrial panacea. As the age of fossil fuels goes into overtime, one hopes that we can start to think about what comes after it... eventually.

Quote :

"rates aren't decoupled in North Carolina yet, so our rates include wheeling and fuel costs together."

And because of that the utility board has the obligation to consider both, as I understand it.

If you want cheap electricity, do you want it now or do you want it later? Honestly, SC is probably doing better about building new long-term capacity right now.

2/11/2013 11:56:04 AM

Quote :

" I fall short of thinking it's a do-all industrial panacea"

if this country was run by reasonably intelligent people we would see it as a stop gap while we poor loads of money into modern nuclear research.

Quote :

"where they have carbon taxes"

carbon taxes are a better idea than the hilariously stupid cap and trade system we have, but just like single payer healthcare they're a thing you do after the problem is fixed, not a fix by themselves.

making fossil fuels more expensive does not make us less dependent on them, it only jacks up prices and hurting the economy all around. nor does it make joke power like solar or wind more viable as they are still shitty and economically inefficient.

it would be smarter to focus on real solutions like nuclear and then use the taxes to phase out fossil fuels. if solar and wind ever become viable people they'll start popping up on their own. trying to force them into the system isn't going to work.

also, regardless of what the energy path we take is, home/business efficiency should be a critical part of the process.

2/11/2013 12:05:07 PM

Ultimately, we've missed the window for Carbon tax legislation.

The problem is that the idea is inherently consumer-focused. It sounds bad to make the cost of living more expensive, but it would be far far worse to make the cost of production more expensive. The entire climate problem will come down to China and then India. The idea of tariffs these days virtually threatens WWIII because the vapid mercantilism will immediately cause trade wars. Major exporter nations already push the law to its very limit in manipulation of currency and policy to favor production and discourage consumption. In that environment, these nations enjoy a competitive advantage due to less environmental controls. To eye your domestic market and think a "carbon tax" is viable is just not correct. Numerically, we would already be justified in imposing a "carbon tariff". But we don't, and we all understand the "free trade" reason for that.

Because of this, we can set aside the possibility of intelligent legislation.

On the other hand, we will export tech to exploit shale gas to the rest of the world. It only makes much sense in the higher price markets that we already see globally. Depletion economics will chase the economic point and eventually half of the world will be fracked. It might be a nice boon to see the profits of the development repatriated to the US, as it really is our multinationals leading the charge. At some point near the end of this we may actually build the hybrid, halfway sustainable, nuclear-wind-fossil hybrid infrastructure needed to limp into an aging demographic without collapse.

I have to stop, my future dystopian visions are getting too vivid.

2/11/2013 1:28:32 PM