A map sure to anger conservatives

At the state level, powerful conservative organizations like ALEC, the Heartland Institute, and Americans for Prosperity are waging an aggressive fight against green energy, pushing forward model legislation to repeal renewable energy standards and cut state subsidies for solar power.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115582/solar-power-fight-raging-gop

To be fair, those groups do not really object to solar power per se, they object to decentralized energy production. The power company could care less how the electricity they sell you is generated, as long as they are the ones selling it to you.

Want to buy power from a corporate-owned five megawatt solar array? No problem.

Want to put a solar panel or windmill on your roof? Now you've got a fight on your hands.

They are trying to dress up the argument as one where people with home solar arrays are not paying their fair share of the infrastructure, but the real point is trying to stop the decentralized energy production model from taking hold. If the power companies really cared about infrastructure, they could charge a flat rate for the infrastructure hooking your house up to the power grid, and a separate rate for the amount of power you actually use.
 
The only thing worse than renewable energy is a light rail system.

Well that is something we do know they hate. They just killed an initiative for first a light rail system then a monorail in Fresno. Either would have been excellent for the city moving into the future but they insisted on just spending more money on freeways and the broken paradigm of single family housing suburbs.
 
They are trying to dress up the argument as one where people with home solar arrays are not paying their fair share of the infrastructure

What? I thought not paying your fair share is one of the core tenets of conservatism - except that, when it´s them who are supposed to pay, they call it "socialism".
 
Actually, no. I'm having a hard time with that.

I was sure I would. I might have to eat crow on this.

(Just to save you from a Crow Feast)


A War Over Solar Power Is Raging Within the GOP (New Republic) - http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115582/solar-power-fight-raging-gop

China Gains New Ground as Conservatives Try to Stop U.S. Solar Production - http://www.care2.com/causes/china-g...-stop-u-s-solar-production.html#ixzz2tVj8V1B7

Conservatives carp on solar project at Boulder's Movement climbing gym: Fox's Sean Hannity follows John McCain's lead - http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_14681952

Speaking of Faux News:

Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute - http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2011/09/02/19814/fbn-fw-20110901-hornersolyndra

Fox's Cavuto interviewing Steve Milloy - http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2011/09/02/19815/fbn-cavuto-20110831-economicsense

(many more available, just consider this a sampler)
 
(Just to save you from a Crow Feast)


A War Over Solar Power Is Raging Within the GOP (New Republic) - http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115582/solar-power-fight-raging-gop

China Gains New Ground as Conservatives Try to Stop U.S. Solar Production - http://www.care2.com/causes/china-g...-stop-u-s-solar-production.html#ixzz2tVj8V1B7

Conservatives carp on solar project at Boulder's Movement climbing gym: Fox's Sean Hannity follows John McCain's lead - http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_14681952

Speaking of Faux News:

Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute - http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2011/09/02/19814/fbn-fw-20110901-hornersolyndra

Fox's Cavuto interviewing Steve Milloy - http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2011/09/02/19815/fbn-cavuto-20110831-economicsense

(many more available, just consider this a sampler)

Is this a sampler of conservatives who are angry about this map?
 
Is this a sampler of conservatives who are angry about this map?

The map is recent, until its import is explained in dubious terms by those who generally incite conservatives to an opinion on such, we are unlikely to find that direct a link. They are however, links to examples of conservatives and conservative statements regarding their general dislike and disapproval of alternative energy sources in general and Solar power specifically.
 
To be fair, those groups do not really object to solar power per se, they object to decentralized energy production. The power company could care less how the electricity they sell you is generated, as long as they are the ones selling it to you.

Want to buy power from a corporate-owned five megawatt solar array? No problem.

Want to put a solar panel or windmill on your roof? Now you've got a fight on your hands.

They are trying to dress up the argument as one where people with home solar arrays are not paying their fair share of the infrastructure, but the real point is trying to stop the decentralized energy production model from taking hold. If the power companies really cared about infrastructure, they could charge a flat rate for the infrastructure hooking your house up to the power grid, and a separate rate for the amount of power you actually use.

Excellent points!
 
The Ivanpah facility:
Installed capacity 126 MW Maximum capacity 392 MW Annual generation 1,079,232 MW·h http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility#cite_note-nrel-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanpah_Solar_Power_Facility

Ginna Facility (nearest to me):
Installed capacity 610 MW Annual generation 4,930 GW·hhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginna_Nuclear_Generating_Station

Giga is bigger than mega.

Now cite the construction costs, the fuel costs, and the storage costs for the used fuel, please. Be sure to amortize the construction cost over the life of the facility in per-watt fashion, too.
 
At the state level, powerful conservative organizations like ALEC, the Heartland Institute, and Americans for Prosperity are waging an aggressive fight against green energy, pushing forward model legislation to repeal renewable energy standards and cut state subsidies for solar power.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115582/solar-power-fight-raging-gop

And while doing this, manage to not point to the subsidies and costs of fossil fuel production (i.e. the debacle in Charleston, which is going to be fully paid for by government or nobody), and tell outright lies to astroturfing groups like "wind power kills all the birds" groups, as well as create myths about how "low frequency sound will kill you". (Funny the weather hasn't killed most of us and that's a lot of dB higher powered.)

We see claims like "wind power will raise the temperature" based on the fact that there may be a slightly warmer area directly behind a wind generator simply because the wind speed is reduced, but stated to imply that wind power causes global warming.

There is similar disinformation in regard to tidal power.

At the same time, ALEC and others push restrictive laws that, for instance, force you to sell your power to the grid, and then buy all of the power you generate back at a higher price (even though they have formalized connection fees as well), deliberately making it uneconomic for the private owner, we see electrical codes that are years behind the technology, and the change there is resisted by insurance companies who don't understand the technology at all.

We have electrical and plumbing codes that disallow using methane-fueled fuel cells (yes, they exist), require the power be sold back to the utility rather than be used in the home, and also disallow reuse of the 50% heat waste as cogeneration for hot water, domestic heat, and thermal cycle A/C, never mind that the generation efficiency of those fuel cells is better than any standard engine cycle efficiency.

There are a host of deliberate, obviously intentional handicaps build into the laws, tariffs, and codes in the USA intended to prevent a safe, reliable, efficient and diffuse grid from being created.

What we have, rather, is inefficient power plants, heavily centralized, in precarious places, with hideously vulnerable transmission and distribution facilities, supplied with fuel (often) over long distances, on a grid of 1930's construction and technology that is just now moving to 1980's era control, sensing, regulation, and control.

You choose why this is. It doesn't matter, our electrical supply in the USA is a pathetic, incompetent, horrid mess, and one that is going to fail more and more and more until people finally move it into the last quarter of the 20th century. (yes, batman, I know it's the 21st now)
 
Although "conservatives" in general may not be against renewable energy, the petroleum corporations surely are.
Perhaps some petroleum companies are, but I work for a petroleum company that happens to be one of the biggest producers of solar energy in the world. Remember that "Oil" companies are actually energy companies, and they try to stay abreast of the latest energy technology.

Oh, and we heavily subsidize wind power too.
 
Perhaps some petroleum companies are, but I work for a petroleum company that happens to be one of the biggest producers of solar energy in the world. Remember that "Oil" companies are actually energy companies, and they try to stay abreast of the latest energy technology.

Oh, and we heavily subsidize wind power too.

I think it depends a great deal on who you're working for.

There has been a great deal of anti-wind and anti-solar astroturfing here in Washington State, for sure. I can't speak for other areas recently.

This is compared to the fracking processes and fracking propaganda in Ohio and Pa that has been shown to run directly counter to testable evidence.
 
Last edited:
They spend millions in campaigns of disinformation and propaganda against renewables and rail against the possibility of government subsidy while taking advantage of massive tax breaks and subsidies themselves.
Are we going with the tortured definition of "subsidy" again, where tax laws and principles that apply to all industries (such as depreciating equipment and deducting expenses from revenue to calculate profit) are suddenly "subsidies" when oil companies use them?
 
Didn't see him saying "oil companies only."
Did you see him mention "petroleum corporations"?

If you define "subsidies" to include the "subsidies" oil companies get then every company in the country is subsidized and the word loses all meaning.
 
Did you see him mention "petroleum corporations"?

If you define "subsidies" to include the "subsidies" oil companies get then every company in the country is subsidized and the word loses all meaning.

Please show your work and provide CREDIBLE outside resources that confirm your statement.
 
Please show your work and provide CREDIBLE outside resources that confirm your statement.
It's up to the people making the positive claim to provide the evidence.

Do you have evidence of petroleum subsidies jj? Ethanol excepted, I think we all agree that ethanol is subsidized and we don't have to be creative with definitions to show that.
 
Do you have evidence of petroleum subsidies jj? Ethanol excepted, I think we all agree that ethanol is subsidized and we don't have to be creative with definitions to show that.

So, do you think a depletion allowance is reasonable?
 

Back
Top Bottom