Writing Just To Be Writing
October 30, 2008
Hello again,
As the nation moves toward the election, we see the gasoline and oil prices dropping. It’s not in the news other than that gasoline prices per gallon is going down. Normally I’d be happy about this. I am, but very suspicious about all the California ballot initiatives that are geared toward alternative energy. That’s fine if it really is the right solution, but my car does not run on wind or solar, so it’s hard to see the rationale.
Proposition 1A is the proposition that we build a high speed rail system… What will it solve? End gridlock, save energy by taking cars off the road. My problem with this solution is that it is a government solution rather than a private solution. The push is it will create many construction jobs and many more permanent jobs. Do you know how to read this? Government Union jobs. History shows us this. In the Bay Area, we have BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit – another rail system), Golden Gate Bridge District, Muni (Bus system), and on and on. Problem is, who will use it? We’ll see if it passes.
Proposition 7 is promoted as an environmental bill. It will probably pass. It promotes the use of alternative fuels to petroleum products. I have these questions. Will it cost more to produce these alternatives than it does to refine petroleum? Do we get better mileage from ethanol (for example) than gasoline or do we have to burn more to get the same miles? Do these fuels burn that much cleaner that it will make a difference? Afterall, they are still using the same internal combustion engine and catalytic converters, right?
California Proposition 7, would, if approved, require California utilities to procure half of their power from renewable resources by 2025. In order to make that goal, levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy resources will more than quadruple from their current output of 10.9%. It will also require California utilities to increase their purchase of electricity generated from renewable resources by 2% annually to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025. California’s current law governing the amount of fuel that utility companies must purchase from renewable resources requires an RPS of 20% by 2010.
Another question is this. These are mandates from government that may or may not have achievable results. What if it can’t be done? Then what happens?
All electric utilities (including municipally-owned utilities) will be required to provide half of their electricity from solar and clean energy facilities by 2025. Current law requires the state’s investor-owned utilities (Edison and PG&E, for example) to reach 20 percent renewable energy by 2010.
What is it with the term renewable energy? Either energy is renewable or it is not. If gasoline is not renewable, then neither is solar or wind. Once it’s used it’s converted and changes characteristics. All fuels do that. But “renewable” implies it can be reused and is better!
There are more, but you get the idea. California is lost. That’s why we are planning to leave the state in a couple of years. The state is losing jobs every day because of the restrictions being placed on them. Taxes are going up, and the politicians just keep spending without checks and balances. If you want to see modified socialism, come to California. There are probably other places, but I don’t want to speak beyond my experience.
Comments
Got something to say?
