Live data from Hacker News

California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

bloomberg.com

211–220 of 397 posts

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#211
"California would need to install more than 200 times as much energy-storage capacity than it has now to make up for the loss of gas plants,"

They wouldn't need near as much if they abandoned the silly fixed 24/7 consumer electric rates in favor of rates that vary based on the supply.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I can really say is I want one because from the moment I saw one on the road, I just knew I had to drive it. I really love the appearance. I've never been interested in cars, but I can't help myself looking at pickups on the road driving by -- especially RAMs. Maybe I'm just a big kid, I've always liked big stuff. Still... I know they aren't good for the environment, which means I wouldn't be able to live with my…

Rent one every few months, drive it for the weekend. Cheaper on every front, scratches that itch, and minimal effect on the environment. I do that with my wife for convertibles. She loves them, so any time we're on vacation and need a car I try to get one. It's just a couple hundred more for a week's vacation, at the time we'd get the most enjoyment out of it.

I never thought of doing that, thank you!

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carburetors have nothing to do with lead emissions. Lead emissions come from lead being added to gas to raise its octane, and hasn't been added for years.

I might be wrong but as far as i know they were added while there were still lead in the gazoline. Anyway it didn't hurt the normal person it helped them because techonology.

The first gasoline engines used carburetors, they weren't added after lead was added.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the topic of large cars, what is the solution here? I can imagine forcing people to replace A/C units won’t be so objectionable, especially if it’s free to do so, but there may be some real opposition to requiring people to drive different cars. Nobody gets attached to an A/C. I don’t drive right now - I take public transport everywhere - but I’d love a large car (a Dodge RAM). If I try to buy something small to b…

The way Europe deals with cars is they tax the bejezus out of them, and gasoline also. In some countries, half the price of a new car is tax. That is why people drive little toy cars there. Everyone would like a nice big comfortable car but they are unaffordable for most.

Well that and then, in some places, you can literally get stuck between houses with the larger ones.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#216
post #88

I think another great move would be to start dealing with excessive energy consumption. Compared to what I'm used to in Europe, California is wasting crazy amounts of energy. Poorly insulated homes, old and inefficient AC/heating units, vertical-drum washing machines (!!!), poorly designed gas stoves, oversized cars, monstrous gas-guzzling trucks, energy waste is all over the place. People behave just as if energy we…

> vertical-drum washing machines (!!!) There are a number of issues with front-loading washers. While they use less water, they are also worse at cleaning clothes and much worse at sanitizing them. There was a recent post here on HN where a biologist did several experiments in her own washer to show how poorly they sanitized things compared to her older one. They also tend to trap water in the bottom and it gets must…

This sort of thing is why I sort of hate energy star everything. Take dishwashers, for example. You can regulate the energy and water usage all you want, but it long ago got to the point where dishwashers that meet regulations basically fail to clean the dishes. Which is fine, it just causes the consumer to wash the dishes by hand either instead of or in addition to using the dishwasher. So now the dishwasher uses less energy/water, but the whole process uses net more water and takes more time.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#217
post #207
post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like we buy a lot of power from Intermountain Power, who are in Utah: https://www.ipautah.com

Intermountain will be converted from coal to gas: http://www.ladwpnews.com/information-regarding-proposal-to-r...

That is true, but I believe there are more than one coal powered plant in the Intermountain system. My main point is that California will just switch to purchasing power from other areas and claim that they are using all clean energy. I 'm assuming they don't consider natural gas as clean energy.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rent one every few months, drive it for the weekend. Cheaper on every front, scratches that itch, and minimal effect on the environment. I do that with my wife for convertibles. She loves them, so any time we're on vacation and need a car I try to get one. It's just a couple hundred more for a week's vacation, at the time we'd get the most enjoyment out of it.

I never thought of doing that, thank you!

You can also check whether your area has carsharing. I have access to lots of standard cars of different sizes (some hybrids too), a convertible, an upper-standard BMW and a couple of vans all within walking distance.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#219
post #88

I think another great move would be to start dealing with excessive energy consumption. Compared to what I'm used to in Europe, California is wasting crazy amounts of energy. Poorly insulated homes, old and inefficient AC/heating units, vertical-drum washing machines (!!!), poorly designed gas stoves, oversized cars, monstrous gas-guzzling trucks, energy waste is all over the place. People behave just as if energy we…

On the topic of large cars, what is the solution here? I can imagine forcing people to replace A/C units won’t be so objectionable, especially if it’s free to do so, but there may be some real opposition to requiring people to drive different cars. Nobody gets attached to an A/C. I don’t drive right now - I take public transport everywhere - but I’d love a large car (a Dodge RAM). If I try to buy something small to b…

"I can imagine forcing people to replace A/C units won’t be so objectionable..."

> I'd say quite the opposite. We paid 3.5k to have A/C changed in our house this year. Many people don't have that kind of money.

"...especially if it’s free to do so"

> would be the only way IMO.

Re: California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

#220
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sooner it shuts down the better, given the design and risks of the plant[1] 1 - https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-power/nuclear-power-accidents...

Absolute bullshit. Its one of the best run and safest nuclear plants in the world. Union of concerned scientists is nothing but an anti-nuclear lobbying group the same as Greenpeace and others. All they do is spread FUD or outright lies.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN