Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banned in California

bannedincalifornia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 749 posts

Re: Banned in California

#481

Post by atestu »

tstrimple wrote: post #441
atestu wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do pay more for the iPhone, they have the highest state sales tax in the US.

This is easily demonstrated to be wrong. California isn't in the top 5 highest. The top 5 being: 1. Louisiana 10.11% 2. Tennessee 9.61% 3. Washington 9.51% 4. Arkansas 9.46% 5. Alabama 9.46% Crazy how we never hear pithy drops about sales tax in Louisiana. I wonder why that is literally never a talking point in these discussions? Probably a very similarly motivated reason as to why people rant about murder in Chicago…

You're combining state and local sales tax. State sales tax in Louisiana is 4.45%. Some municipalities add nothing on top of that, some add more. I said California's state sales tax is the highest and that's true.

Re: Banned in California

#483

Post by chaostheory »

amrocha wrote: post #446
chaostheory wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big reasons we have no universal healthcare is because we socialized defense for other countries like your country. You guys are years if not decades away from being able to defense yourselves.

Do you think that if europe had tripled its defence spending over the last century the US would have spent more or less?

Less, which is implied by my first comment

Re: Banned in California

#484

Post by api »

Fischgericht wrote: post #243

There is a reason these kind of things are no longer possible in much of the western world and especially Europe-like US states like California: After the deindustrialization people started to enjoy healthy air and clear water. As always when it comes to "the good old times" or "make great again", your brain will remember very selectively. I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forb…

All these things can be done with healthy air and clean water, but the cost goes up, and people don't want to pay that cost. So we send them elsewhere instead.

The same is true re: data center water use. Evaporative cooling is cheaper. You can build a DC that uses little or no water but it costs more.

Re: Banned in California

#485

Post by ta9000 »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #436
chaboud wrote: post #412

When I was a kid growing up in Texas, our ocean visits were to the Gulf of Mexico, off the Texas coast, and you would grab little alcohol wipes for when you got out of the ocean, to wipe the oil off. Years later, swimming in Hawaii, I found myself looking for wipes. I mentioned it to a snorkel-outfit operator, and she looked at me like I was insane. They didn't even put damaging sunscreen in the water, and there was…

Crude oil floating in the ocean used to be a big nuisance in parts of California. It is a natural phenomenon, created by oil deposits on the ocean floor leaking into the environment. Santa Barbara was particularly famous for it. Extraction of that oil via commercial wells greatly reduced the natural seepage, which is why there is so little crude oil floating in that ocean water today. Oil drilling actually made the w…

So you’re saying drilling destroyed crude oil’s natural habitat?

Re: Banned in California

#486

Post by zdp7 »

no-dr-onboard wrote: post #106
burkaman wrote: post #63

The Grandfatherd-in section is incredibly misleading. Look at the Semiconductor Fabrication section, for example. The implication is that these are the only fabs in the state, they wouldn't be able to get new permits today, and the red dots indicate that it would be "effectively impossible" to open any other ones. In fact (according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_semiconductor_fabricat... ) there are at lea…

A lot of these are actually grandfathered in. Vulcanization, electrolysis, auto painting, etc. I think the emphasis is that CA has effectively made it difficult to get regulatory authorities to agree to issue new permits. That was the part that stood out to me.

The site is wrong though. I believe it's more of a it's hard and I shouldn't have to do it. I found a company called statevolt (founded August 2021) that plans to build a lithium ion cell factory the Imperial Valley (Southern California). I did see a press release saying it is delayed, but the company maintains that it plans on building it. On the banned website, it's claimed lithium battery cells are impossible to manufacture in California. That doesn't appear to be factual. With no references, it's just a California bashing site based on easily disproven falsehoods.

Re: Banned in California

#487

Post by coryrc »

cogman10 wrote: post #353
mattmaroon wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn’t what it says. Read again.

> Tesla's Fremont factory was the former NUMMI plant (GM/Toyota, operating since 1962). It was grandfathered in. When Tesla needed to expand battery production, they built the Gigafactory in Reno, Nevada — not California — because the permitting for battery cell manufacturing was effectively impossible. The Cybertruck factory went to Austin, Texas. What part am I misreading? How is it that tesla expanded their cell m…

> How is it that tesla expanded their cell manufacturing in 2023 in California

They didn't, they built it in Reno.

Re: Banned in California

#488

Post by epistasis »

There's an important distinction here, between "banned" and "has far cheaper alternatives".

Things can appear banned even when they aren't merely because there is a new technology that's better and cheaper and it's a big investment so people go with the cheaper option.

Nobody is building new coal in the US because it's so expensive, not because there's an outright ban. Now, part of the reason it's more expensive than in the past is that using once-through water for cooling raises the cost of disposing of waste heat. And now, modern and much more efficient natural gas combined cycle plant is the obvious choice because not only is the fuel cheaper per kWh, but you also need to spend a lot less on waste heat disposal.

So is coal banned? No. Did some environmental regulations have an impact on just how bad of an idea coal is these days? Sure, but let's talk about the tradeoffs here, it's not a ban and framing it is a ban leads to bad solutions to real regulatory problems.

Re: Banned in California

#489

Post by onlypassingthru »

You can thank the fine people who figured it was cheaper/easier/faster to just dump the toxic waste out back (or offshore [0]) for many of these processes being outlawed. If I'm not mistaken, CA has the 2nd most Superfund sites in the US.[1]

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_ocean_dumps_off_Southern...

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites_in_Cal...

Re: Banned in California

#490

Post by cogman10 »

coryrc wrote: post #487
cogman10 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tesla's Fremont factory was the former NUMMI plant (GM/Toyota, operating since 1962). It was grandfathered in. When Tesla needed to expand battery production, they built the Gigafactory in Reno, Nevada — not California — because the permitting for battery cell manufacturing was effectively impossible. The Cybertruck factory went to Austin, Texas. What part am I misreading? How is it that tesla expanded their cell m…

> How is it that tesla expanded their cell manufacturing in 2023 in California They didn't, they built it in Reno.

https://electrek.co/2023/06/09/tesla-snaps-new-location-frem...
Post reply on HN