Bad News For EVs in California

Status
Not open for further replies.
Article points out yet another hidden inequity with “renewable” energy: the placement of these systems (mostly solar and wind) are in rural areas. The massive footprint and in-situ environmental damage takes place away from the major population centers and becomes out of sight, out of mind.

Good to see rural areas fighting back and stopping these types of projects.

Maybe when coastal California allows wind turbines offshore, rural California will allow wind in their backyards.
 
JeffKeryk said:
Now you know why I got solar. Having said that, this editorial is a political hit job.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he should visit TX to check.
But, there is also the truth that regardless EV's electricity issues are going to have to be addressed and eventually nuclear will have to be accepted.
 
JeffKeryk said:
Now you know why I got solar. Having said that, this editorial is a political hit job.
Click to expand...

LOL I forgot: political hit jobs are only ok if they align with your preferred politics. What is the point of even saying that if you’ve already admitted to buying solar as a result of the issues highlighted by the article?

That’s like saying “that’s TOTALLY true but because someone I don’t like said it, it’s different.”
 
BLND1 said:
Article points out yet another hidden inequity with “renewable” energy: the placement of these systems (mostly solar and wind) are in rural areas. The massive footprint and in-situ environmental damage takes place away from the major population centers and becomes out of sight, out of mind.

Good to see rural areas fighting back and stopping these types of projects.

Maybe when coastal California allows wind turbines offshore, rural California will allow wind in their backyards.
Click to expand...
Perhaps inland Californians will gladly exchange solar energy from their back yard for desalinated ocean water from the coastal Californians? ;)
 
supton said:
In the end, what is the cost per mile, be it EV or gas? IIRC they did not have cheap gasoline either.
Click to expand...
Doesn't help that they have the highest taxes on gas out of any state in the union. State taxes and fees total 63.05 cents per gallon and will increase even further on 1 July. Add in Federal taxes and Californians are paying 83.06 cents/gallon in taxes. Diesel taxes are even more out of control there. On the other end of the scale, Oklahoma charges 19 cents per gallon in tax, both for gas and diesel.
 
JustN89 said:
Doesn't help that they have the highest taxes on gas out of any state in the union. State taxes and fees total 63.05 cents per gallon and will increase even further on 1 July. Add in Federal taxes and Californians are paying 83.06 cents/gallon in taxes. Diesel taxes are even more out of control there. On the other end of the scale, Oklahoma charges 19 cents per gallon in tax, both for gas and diesel.
Click to expand...
Right.

my thinking is, ev might still be cheaper, per mile, even if electricity costs go up.
 
BLND1 said:
LOL I forgot: political hit jobs are only ok if they align with your preferred politics. What is the point of even saying that if you’ve already admitted to buying solar as a result of the issues highlighted by the article?

That’s like saying “that’s TOTALLY true but because someone I don’t like said it, it’s different.”
Click to expand...
What I am saying is, the editorial correctly mentioned the high electricity energy costs in CA, but was one sided because it did not mention the high costs of other energy; particularly natural gas.
The article also cherry picked the worst affected areas such as San Diego. Areas of San Diego are very poorly regulated as the article says, I can tell you that.
There is no doubt CA has high energy costs across the board and that burdon affects the lower incomes disporportionally.
I agree with almost all of the editorial comments; it is hard to dispute the facts.
It is simply incomplete.
 
Last edited:
JeffKeryk said:
What I am saying is, the editorial correctly mentioned the high electricity energy costs in CA, but was one sided because it did not mention the high costs of other energy; particularly natural gas.
The article also cherry picked the worst affected areas such as San Diego. Areas of San Diego are very poorly regulated as the article says, I can tell you that.
There is no doubt CA has high energy costs across the board and that burdon affects the lower incomes disporportionally.
I agree with almost all of the editorial comments; it is hard to dispute the facts.
It is simply incomplete.
Click to expand...

Fair - but an editorial titled “California sucks and energy prices are stupid high” would probably get a “well, yeah” reaction from readers.
 
PA is right up there with CA in gas tax, used to be higher in PA, now CA has forged ahead a few cents. There has to be tax for roads, and these states have a lot.
What is the answer to why Santa Clara and Palo Alto are able to charge about 1/2 the electric rate of the surrounding PGE with their city owned utilities? One reason may be they have just relatively uniform and flat infrastructure to maintain. But where are they getting the power so cheap? It almost has to come from PGE. Maybe the people in difficult areas to maintain are getting subsidized by the flatlanders I don’t know. My daughter has PGE and the rate hasn’t gone up, don’t know where this article gets their info from, probably where it looks best for what they want to say. Welcome to the age of baloney, I mean information.
More solar needed. Solar everywhere.
 
BMWTurboDzl said:
Yep. It's what happens when you have a mixture of historically poorly run public utilities combined with inept policymakers.
Click to expand...
PGE is a publicly traded company. Palo Alto and Santa Clara, probably others, are public utilities and the electric rate is half PGE.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

OVERKILL
After 11 years the massive Ivanpah CSP plant is being phased out
Replies
15
Views
895
gfh77665
Back
Top Bottom