Live data from Hacker News

California Moves to Require 100% Clean Electricity by 2045

bloomberg.com

331–340 of 397 posts

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

#331
post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you say you support something, but don't want to take actions that demonstrably promote what you are supporting, you are virtue signalling. It's quite simple, and it's maddening.

But they are taking actions. You're trying to complain that they're not doing enough to satisfy you.

Not quite. The complaint is that they are taking anti-action too, enough that their net action might be less than zero.

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

#332
post #128

Writing as a person that's recently built some PV: The problem of building enough photovoltaics to meet demand is solved . High quality 60 and 72-cell PV modules at sub $0.50/watt and massive scale cheap ground mount and roof mount systems are not rocket science. With sufficient zoning and regulatory incentives it's possible for roof mount PV in California to entirely meet the state's energy needs in megawatt-hours p…

Or you could realize that natural gas is a far superior energy storage mechanism, and the cleanest fuel available. Fracking, and the consequent reduction in natural gas prices, is directly responsible for the US dropping its CO2 production faster than any other major country...

How do we use natural gas to store energy?

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

#333
post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're ever in the Austin Texas area look me up and you can drive my Ram 2500 diesel around. It's a highly over-rated experience, IMHO.

I might have to take you up on that offer. It's been too long since I visited Texas.

Look me up when you make to Austin. I live and work about 25 miles east at the place that runs the power grid for Texas.

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

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably been the main driver over time

The effects are felt elsewhere, too. Most manufacturers aren't going to design two versions of a model for two regions, the energy efficient one, and the less energy efficient one. They'll just work to make one that fits the more stringent one. California has been one of the biggest drivers of EE nationwide because of that. It's interesting to see it in practice too; if you move to California and bring a car, part of…

Title 24 itself is broken into 16 climate zones [1], each comes with its' own table of acceptable parameters. The deviation in parameters allows for a wide range of equipment at varying standards.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zon...

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

#335
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 le…

Im doing my washing today. Run it once with detergent, then again without. The first cycle doesnt use enough water to rinse out the soap. I am running off a solar-powered well. I have a literally unlimited green water supply, but must still suffer a watersaving washing machine. Im tempted to crack it open and disable the relevant sensor.

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

#336
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever I ride around Berkeley, CA I see a sea of "nuclear-free zone" signs on roads filled with Prius traffic. It's not so easy to understand the real agendas here.

> It's not so easy to understand the real agendas here. The real agenda has a lot more to do with impressing your neighbors with how eco-conscious you are (ideally via cheap signals like signs and bumper stickers) than it does with costly and difficult initiatives like figuring out how to meet the world's energy requirements in a sustainable way.

Nobody is chaining themselves to the equipment and preventing energy companies from building more nuclear plants. Heck, judging by the Dakota Access Line protests, that doesn't work anyways in the long run.

The reason why more plants aren't being built is because they are not cost effective compared to other options. You can argue that maybe the government or whoever could do more research to change this, but every company that wants a nuclear plant in the U.S. has one already. Until the engineering and regulatory situation changes so that it's easier to build a nuclear plant than it is to build a solar one, they're going to keep building the latter instead of the former.

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

#337
post #318

Politicians giving themselves a ~ 30-year runway is a farce. Promise you'll reduce it by 10% in 3 years, and I'll take you seriously. This is garbage. Just like the return to the Moon promised by Regan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump ... always "15 to 20 years from now" ... and NEVER happens. By the way - 10% in 3 years would be a perfect milestone to 100% in 30 years.

> By the way - 10% in 3 years would be a perfect milestone to 100% in 30 years. That would be a reduction to about 35% of the original after 30 years.

Keep the basis level constant, and 10% every three years fine :)

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

#338
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…

There is no doubt room for improvement, but California is already among the most energy efficient states. https://database.aceee.org/state/california

Yep. And I salute them for their results. According to the US EIA,

"California's total energy consumption ranks among the highest in the nation, but, in 2015, the state's per capita energy consumption ranked 49th, due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs."

That per-capita figure results from action. Instead of just talking the talk, they've been actively building green capacity for decades.

"In 2016, California ranked ... first as a producer of electricity from solar, geothermal, and biomass resources."

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA

Energy consumed per-capita across the US in 2016: https://www.eia.gov/state/rankings/#/series/12

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

#339
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 le…

That hasn't been my experience at all. Our new Bosch dishwasher is exceedingly more effective than the water-guzzler it replaced.

my experience with going from a late-90s model dishwasher to a relatively fancy brand new one last year is that it cleans better, but is slower and simply doesn't dry the dishes at all, and the standing water can leave residues on the dishes if I don't take them all out and towel dry them right away

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

#340
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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, Are you living in a particularly new region? Every time I've seen this come up, the data actually says the opposite: the median US home is better insulated, more recently built and more efficiently climate-controlled. Which is unsurprising, because they're newer, basic…

What fraction of apartment buildings in California have double-pane windows? What fraction of commercial buildings in SF/East Bay have operable windows to take advantage of natural ventilation?

Most houses in the bay area do not even have AC, and may turn on the heater for 3 months of the year. It's climate alone is a big household energy saver.
Post reply on HN