[air_ogi]

[quote=no_such_reality]
SMA America manufactures Solar Power systems based in the Bay Area, where are they building their new $200 Million plant? Denver.

Power One, a Camarillo manufacture of Solar Power systems is building in Phoenix, 350 jobs to Phoenix instead of California.[/quote]

Both Colorado and Arizona have strong clean energy programs. These companies are not moving out because AB32 is too strong, it is because other places have better AB32s.

But should Prop 23 pass, then you will see mass exodus of clean tech companies out of California.

[air_ogi]

[quote=no_such_reality]
SMA America manufactures Solar Power systems based in the Bay Area, where are they building their new $200 Million plant? Denver.

Power One, a Camarillo manufacture of Solar Power systems is building in Phoenix, 350 jobs to Phoenix instead of California.[/quote]

Both Colorado and Arizona have strong clean energy programs. These companies are not moving out because AB32 is too strong, it is because other places have better AB32s.

But should Prop 23 pass, then you will see mass exodus of clean tech companies out of California.

[air_ogi]

[quote=no_such_reality]
SMA America manufactures Solar Power systems based in the Bay Area, where are they building their new $200 Million plant? Denver.

Power One, a Camarillo manufacture of Solar Power systems is building in Phoenix, 350 jobs to Phoenix instead of California.[/quote]

Both Colorado and Arizona have strong clean energy programs. These companies are not moving out because AB32 is too strong, it is because other places have better AB32s.

But should Prop 23 pass, then you will see mass exodus of clean tech companies out of California.

[air_ogi]

[quote=no_such_reality]
SMA America manufactures Solar Power systems based in the Bay Area, where are they building their new $200 Million plant? Denver.

Power One, a Camarillo manufacture of Solar Power systems is building in Phoenix, 350 jobs to Phoenix instead of California.[/quote]

Both Colorado and Arizona have strong clean energy programs. These companies are not moving out because AB32 is too strong, it is because other places have better AB32s.

But should Prop 23 pass, then you will see mass exodus of clean tech companies out of California.

[air_ogi]

[quote=no_such_reality]
SMA America manufactures Solar Power systems based in the Bay Area, where are they building their new $200 Million plant? Denver.

Power One, a Camarillo manufacture of Solar Power systems is building in Phoenix, 350 jobs to Phoenix instead of California.[/quote]

Both Colorado and Arizona have strong clean energy programs. These companies are not moving out because AB32 is too strong, it is because other places have better AB32s.

But should Prop 23 pass, then you will see mass exodus of clean tech companies out of California.

[air_ogi]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Air: I do? I choose to ignore it? Given that you don’t know me, how do you know that? [/quote]

Based on the fact that you took one mistake and decided that all data that disagrees with your conclusion is bogus.

Go to IPCC’s site, the provide a ton of data. Or go to NASA’s site, they provide a ton of data (for example on Greenland melting) as well.

[air_ogi]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Air: I do? I choose to ignore it? Given that you don’t know me, how do you know that? [/quote]

Based on the fact that you took one mistake and decided that all data that disagrees with your conclusion is bogus.

Go to IPCC’s site, the provide a ton of data. Or go to NASA’s site, they provide a ton of data (for example on Greenland melting) as well.

[air_ogi]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Air: I do? I choose to ignore it? Given that you don’t know me, how do you know that? [/quote]

Based on the fact that you took one mistake and decided that all data that disagrees with your conclusion is bogus.

Go to IPCC’s site, the provide a ton of data. Or go to NASA’s site, they provide a ton of data (for example on Greenland melting) as well.

[air_ogi]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Air: I do? I choose to ignore it? Given that you don’t know me, how do you know that? [/quote]

Based on the fact that you took one mistake and decided that all data that disagrees with your conclusion is bogus.

Go to IPCC’s site, the provide a ton of data. Or go to NASA’s site, they provide a ton of data (for example on Greenland melting) as well.

[air_ogi]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Air: I do? I choose to ignore it? Given that you don’t know me, how do you know that? [/quote]

Based on the fact that you took one mistake and decided that all data that disagrees with your conclusion is bogus.

Go to IPCC’s site, the provide a ton of data. Or go to NASA’s site, they provide a ton of data (for example on Greenland melting) as well.

[air_ogi]

[quote=jstoesz]
We have had solar for 40+ years, and scientist have always said it will reach parity with oil in 10 years. Have we underfunded out investment in solar, or is it just not here yet? Things that are truly economically viable even in 10 years are subsidized by private investors. The government is only required when a scientists claim of adequacy is clearly a fantasy to those with capital. The government is the sucker.
[/quote]

Prices of solar panels declined by 50% in last 2 years. How much did the price of nuclear plants and coal decline by?

[quote=jstoesz]
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” And I mean this in all mocking. If our goal is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which I am for), let us tax the crap out of it, and open up our own reserves. This backdoor way of getting there is ripe with unintended consequences, which ends up shipping our GHG’s to china (with our jobs).
[/quote]
So you have a problem with AB32 as an economy destroying tax, but no problem with tax on foreign oil? Riiight.
And China produces 1/4 of carbon emissions per capita as does US. Chian will shortly become the largest consumer of wind power and 2nd largest consumer of solar power (after Germany) by 2020. So if you want to scapegoat, find someone else.

[quote=jstoesz]
Instant and severe scarcity does not happen organically. It happens over time, and as fuel gets more expensive, other means of reducing oil consumption will happen organically. Free markets can fix it…notice the prius requires a tax refund and a special carpool lane sticker. Prior to all of this bullshit subsidy, we had the CR-X (better gas mileage than the prius with a standard gas engine) which happened organically from the high gas years of the 70’s.
[/quote]
Oil went from $25/b to $140/b in less that one automotive design cycle. Prius rebate was cut in 2007 and HOV access in January. And if you are in CR-X and collide with a scooter, scooter rider had a better chance of surviving than you.

[quote=jstoesz]
How does AB32 get us less dependent on PG&E and more to a decentralized grid (which I am also for BTW).
[/quote]
It does.

[quote=jstoesz]
What if I said there is a .01% chance that if you get in your car tomorrow you could DIE!!! Would you drive to work tomorrow? This is no argument. If you want to deal with the merits of scientific argument fine, but to dismiss dessent with scare tactics is pointless.
[/quote]
If you knew there was a 30% chance of getting into a car accident tomorrow, would you do anything different? Would you write your will? Or make sure you have first aid kit in the car?
Or would you close your eyes and keep going.

I am not sure where you see scare tactics in my post. East California was turned into agricultural land by Sierra Nevada water. If that water is reduced, as climate change models predict, what do you think is going to happen?

[air_ogi]

[quote=jstoesz]
We have had solar for 40+ years, and scientist have always said it will reach parity with oil in 10 years. Have we underfunded out investment in solar, or is it just not here yet? Things that are truly economically viable even in 10 years are subsidized by private investors. The government is only required when a scientists claim of adequacy is clearly a fantasy to those with capital. The government is the sucker.
[/quote]

Prices of solar panels declined by 50% in last 2 years. How much did the price of nuclear plants and coal decline by?

[quote=jstoesz]
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” And I mean this in all mocking. If our goal is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which I am for), let us tax the crap out of it, and open up our own reserves. This backdoor way of getting there is ripe with unintended consequences, which ends up shipping our GHG’s to china (with our jobs).
[/quote]
So you have a problem with AB32 as an economy destroying tax, but no problem with tax on foreign oil? Riiight.
And China produces 1/4 of carbon emissions per capita as does US. Chian will shortly become the largest consumer of wind power and 2nd largest consumer of solar power (after Germany) by 2020. So if you want to scapegoat, find someone else.

[quote=jstoesz]
Instant and severe scarcity does not happen organically. It happens over time, and as fuel gets more expensive, other means of reducing oil consumption will happen organically. Free markets can fix it…notice the prius requires a tax refund and a special carpool lane sticker. Prior to all of this bullshit subsidy, we had the CR-X (better gas mileage than the prius with a standard gas engine) which happened organically from the high gas years of the 70’s.
[/quote]
Oil went from $25/b to $140/b in less that one automotive design cycle. Prius rebate was cut in 2007 and HOV access in January. And if you are in CR-X and collide with a scooter, scooter rider had a better chance of surviving than you.

[quote=jstoesz]
How does AB32 get us less dependent on PG&E and more to a decentralized grid (which I am also for BTW).
[/quote]
It does.

[quote=jstoesz]
What if I said there is a .01% chance that if you get in your car tomorrow you could DIE!!! Would you drive to work tomorrow? This is no argument. If you want to deal with the merits of scientific argument fine, but to dismiss dessent with scare tactics is pointless.
[/quote]
If you knew there was a 30% chance of getting into a car accident tomorrow, would you do anything different? Would you write your will? Or make sure you have first aid kit in the car?
Or would you close your eyes and keep going.

I am not sure where you see scare tactics in my post. East California was turned into agricultural land by Sierra Nevada water. If that water is reduced, as climate change models predict, what do you think is going to happen?

[air_ogi]

[quote=jstoesz]
We have had solar for 40+ years, and scientist have always said it will reach parity with oil in 10 years. Have we underfunded out investment in solar, or is it just not here yet? Things that are truly economically viable even in 10 years are subsidized by private investors. The government is only required when a scientists claim of adequacy is clearly a fantasy to those with capital. The government is the sucker.
[/quote]

Prices of solar panels declined by 50% in last 2 years. How much did the price of nuclear plants and coal decline by?

[quote=jstoesz]
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” And I mean this in all mocking. If our goal is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which I am for), let us tax the crap out of it, and open up our own reserves. This backdoor way of getting there is ripe with unintended consequences, which ends up shipping our GHG’s to china (with our jobs).
[/quote]
So you have a problem with AB32 as an economy destroying tax, but no problem with tax on foreign oil? Riiight.
And China produces 1/4 of carbon emissions per capita as does US. Chian will shortly become the largest consumer of wind power and 2nd largest consumer of solar power (after Germany) by 2020. So if you want to scapegoat, find someone else.

[quote=jstoesz]
Instant and severe scarcity does not happen organically. It happens over time, and as fuel gets more expensive, other means of reducing oil consumption will happen organically. Free markets can fix it…notice the prius requires a tax refund and a special carpool lane sticker. Prior to all of this bullshit subsidy, we had the CR-X (better gas mileage than the prius with a standard gas engine) which happened organically from the high gas years of the 70’s.
[/quote]
Oil went from $25/b to $140/b in less that one automotive design cycle. Prius rebate was cut in 2007 and HOV access in January. And if you are in CR-X and collide with a scooter, scooter rider had a better chance of surviving than you.

[quote=jstoesz]
How does AB32 get us less dependent on PG&E and more to a decentralized grid (which I am also for BTW).
[/quote]
It does.

[quote=jstoesz]
What if I said there is a .01% chance that if you get in your car tomorrow you could DIE!!! Would you drive to work tomorrow? This is no argument. If you want to deal with the merits of scientific argument fine, but to dismiss dessent with scare tactics is pointless.
[/quote]
If you knew there was a 30% chance of getting into a car accident tomorrow, would you do anything different? Would you write your will? Or make sure you have first aid kit in the car?
Or would you close your eyes and keep going.

I am not sure where you see scare tactics in my post. East California was turned into agricultural land by Sierra Nevada water. If that water is reduced, as climate change models predict, what do you think is going to happen?

[air_ogi]

[quote=jstoesz]
We have had solar for 40+ years, and scientist have always said it will reach parity with oil in 10 years. Have we underfunded out investment in solar, or is it just not here yet? Things that are truly economically viable even in 10 years are subsidized by private investors. The government is only required when a scientists claim of adequacy is clearly a fantasy to those with capital. The government is the sucker.
[/quote]

Prices of solar panels declined by 50% in last 2 years. How much did the price of nuclear plants and coal decline by?

[quote=jstoesz]
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” And I mean this in all mocking. If our goal is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which I am for), let us tax the crap out of it, and open up our own reserves. This backdoor way of getting there is ripe with unintended consequences, which ends up shipping our GHG’s to china (with our jobs).
[/quote]
So you have a problem with AB32 as an economy destroying tax, but no problem with tax on foreign oil? Riiight.
And China produces 1/4 of carbon emissions per capita as does US. Chian will shortly become the largest consumer of wind power and 2nd largest consumer of solar power (after Germany) by 2020. So if you want to scapegoat, find someone else.

[quote=jstoesz]
Instant and severe scarcity does not happen organically. It happens over time, and as fuel gets more expensive, other means of reducing oil consumption will happen organically. Free markets can fix it…notice the prius requires a tax refund and a special carpool lane sticker. Prior to all of this bullshit subsidy, we had the CR-X (better gas mileage than the prius with a standard gas engine) which happened organically from the high gas years of the 70’s.
[/quote]
Oil went from $25/b to $140/b in less that one automotive design cycle. Prius rebate was cut in 2007 and HOV access in January. And if you are in CR-X and collide with a scooter, scooter rider had a better chance of surviving than you.

[quote=jstoesz]
How does AB32 get us less dependent on PG&E and more to a decentralized grid (which I am also for BTW).
[/quote]
It does.

[quote=jstoesz]
What if I said there is a .01% chance that if you get in your car tomorrow you could DIE!!! Would you drive to work tomorrow? This is no argument. If you want to deal with the merits of scientific argument fine, but to dismiss dessent with scare tactics is pointless.
[/quote]
If you knew there was a 30% chance of getting into a car accident tomorrow, would you do anything different? Would you write your will? Or make sure you have first aid kit in the car?
Or would you close your eyes and keep going.

I am not sure where you see scare tactics in my post. East California was turned into agricultural land by Sierra Nevada water. If that water is reduced, as climate change models predict, what do you think is going to happen?

[air_ogi]

[quote=jstoesz]
We have had solar for 40+ years, and scientist have always said it will reach parity with oil in 10 years. Have we underfunded out investment in solar, or is it just not here yet? Things that are truly economically viable even in 10 years are subsidized by private investors. The government is only required when a scientists claim of adequacy is clearly a fantasy to those with capital. The government is the sucker.
[/quote]

Prices of solar panels declined by 50% in last 2 years. How much did the price of nuclear plants and coal decline by?

[quote=jstoesz]
“There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask why? I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?” And I mean this in all mocking. If our goal is to reduce our dependence on foreign oil (which I am for), let us tax the crap out of it, and open up our own reserves. This backdoor way of getting there is ripe with unintended consequences, which ends up shipping our GHG’s to china (with our jobs).
[/quote]
So you have a problem with AB32 as an economy destroying tax, but no problem with tax on foreign oil? Riiight.
And China produces 1/4 of carbon emissions per capita as does US. Chian will shortly become the largest consumer of wind power and 2nd largest consumer of solar power (after Germany) by 2020. So if you want to scapegoat, find someone else.

[quote=jstoesz]
Instant and severe scarcity does not happen organically. It happens over time, and as fuel gets more expensive, other means of reducing oil consumption will happen organically. Free markets can fix it…notice the prius requires a tax refund and a special carpool lane sticker. Prior to all of this bullshit subsidy, we had the CR-X (better gas mileage than the prius with a standard gas engine) which happened organically from the high gas years of the 70’s.
[/quote]
Oil went from $25/b to $140/b in less that one automotive design cycle. Prius rebate was cut in 2007 and HOV access in January. And if you are in CR-X and collide with a scooter, scooter rider had a better chance of surviving than you.

[quote=jstoesz]
How does AB32 get us less dependent on PG&E and more to a decentralized grid (which I am also for BTW).
[/quote]
It does.

[quote=jstoesz]
What if I said there is a .01% chance that if you get in your car tomorrow you could DIE!!! Would you drive to work tomorrow? This is no argument. If you want to deal with the merits of scientific argument fine, but to dismiss dessent with scare tactics is pointless.
[/quote]
If you knew there was a 30% chance of getting into a car accident tomorrow, would you do anything different? Would you write your will? Or make sure you have first aid kit in the car?
Or would you close your eyes and keep going.

I am not sure where you see scare tactics in my post. East California was turned into agricultural land by Sierra Nevada water. If that water is reduced, as climate change models predict, what do you think is going to happen?

[Author]

Posts