261–270 of 353 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a) China is third to US and EU in terms of GDP. And their economy is on a downwards trajectory. b) Majority of the early R&D in solar, EVs etc came from the US. China has been vital in driving unit economics.
a) China is third to US and EU in terms of GDP. And their economy is on a downwards trajectory. what about population? as that's the main driving factor for pollution - especially if you couple that with energy needs.
The rate shown is 29p which comes to 36 cents. It is substantially less than PG&E California prices, which average around 50-55 cents.
According to the EIA Monthly, average California residential prices were 30¢ in October. Your statement is closer to being correct if you say "PG&E prices" instead of "California prices". PG&E has ~6 million accounts in a state of 40 million people.
PG&E has ~6 million accounts in a state of 40 million people.
The rate shown is 29p which comes to 36 cents. It is substantially less than PG&E California prices, which average around 50-55 cents.
I've had cheaper, more reliable, higher quality power every place I've lived with a population over a few dozen people. Why is PG&E like this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heat pumps are something like 5-6x as efficient as resistive electric heaters. So no surprise that your bill would be lower. Of course, heating an entire house with (non-heat-pump) electric heat in a cold climate is kind of crazy. Natural gas is way way cheaper. But I've seen it in old houses here in the Upper Midwest, so it's not _too_ out of the ordinary.
Heat pumps are so affordable now, that just feels like a poor decision-making rather than an economic hardship. You could finance a heat pump and the savings would pay itself off in a year.
Last time I did the math, even with a 60% efficient furnace natural gas was cheaper than an electric heat pump. PG&E's electric rates are simply that much more expensive than their natural gas rates. Currently that's up to $0.49/kWh on the most popular rate plan vs $2.49/therm. Keep in mind that the fifth and sixth electric rate hikes of 2024 were just approved today by Newsom's regulatory body and don't factor into the price I quoted.
29p / kWh doesn't hold a candle to PG&E costs in the San Francisco Bay Area. It's ironic that it's quite a bit cheaper to use natural gas here, since we're supposed to convert to electricity to save the planet.
The cost of bailing out owners of burnt down homes in Paradise, CA worth $0 for $700k is rolled into every San Francisco PG&E bill.
Buying off the guy doing research into hexavalent chromium wasn't cheap either. Nor was keeping Willie Brown on their payroll.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree PGE was negligent, but it also doesn't make sense to assign the entire cost of the resulting fire to PGE. The scale of the fire damage was a result of many factors, only some of which are due to PGE. A huge destructive fire was a matter of time. Whether it was caused by PGE, lightning, or an RV tire blowout was a matter of chance. Or another way to put it, how much liability would you give the RV drivers in t…
> . A huge destructive fire was a matter of time. You can't avoid legal ramifications by saying _something_ was bound to happen
Legally, maybe you are right. I honestly don't know. It doesn't seem right to me though.
The rate shown is 29p which comes to 36 cents. It is substantially less than PG&E California prices, which average around 50-55 cents.
In 2021, it was 22p/kWh and in 2022, it went to 44p/kWh.
It's come down 6-7p each year since but doubling in one year is crazy.