Comments on: Energy efficiency, Part 4: How does California do it so consistently and cost-effectively?

By: Molly

Molly — Fri, 29 May 2009 18:22:34 +0000

I thought decoupling was thrown out with deregulation. Huh. I am so confused.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 19:35:06 +0000

I’ve never given this a try, but I think it’s about time I do.

By: Heartburn Home Remedy

Heartburn Home Remedy — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:41:18 +0000

Not that I’m impressed a lot, but this is more than I expected when I found a link on SU telling that the info here is awesome. Thanks.

By: alan george

alan george — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:38:07 +0000

"Where did the money come from that is paying for this attempt at perpetual motion? again the waste of dollars to save dimes will impoverish the state and lead to more net pollution. Pop quiz, why does less Kilo Watts cost the hornswoggled Cali-fornicators more then their lucky neighbors in the free states?" Sounds like free California Vacations for these lawmakers.

By: Jim Bullis

Jim Bullis — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 18:22:47 +0000

Joe and Earl,

I just heard that PGE rates are to be increased 5% due to shortage of rain.

Huh?

What this really means is that financial planning came up short on the assumed amount of “fall from the sky” energy. Thus it will be necessary to buy electricity on the spot market at relatively high prices, and of course coal will burn somewhere unknown to fill the order.

If real solutions are to be found, realism is the first order of the day.

And there is nothing free market about public utilities which by the nature of things are a monopoly that has to be controlled by government.

By: Sean

Sean — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 02:51:27 +0000

Hi Earl, could you post links to the data you looked at the last time you looked?

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:13:07 +0000

Last time I looked Californians used 46% less electricity per capita than the non-California US, and also their electricity produced less than half the CO2 per kWh. That suggests to me that they are emitting about 27% of the CO2 per capita as the US. Californians have not compromised their living standards in doing so; indeed they benefit from cleaner air and reduced water usage (which is critical in California).

By: Earl Killian

Earl Killian — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:06:12 +0000

Peter Foley said, “why does less Kilo Watts cost the hornswoggled Cali-fornicators more then their lucky neighbors in the free states?”

Yet more disinformation from Peter Foley. Don’t you ever look up any facts instead of making them up? In 2005 California used 7,032 kWh per capita. The average cost of electricity is 12.82 cents per kWh, which gives an annual bill of $901.50. The average for the US is 12,347 kWh per capita, and 8.90 cents per kWh, which gives an annual bill of $1098.88.

Peter Foley said, “I’d love to have a business like PG&L’s where the taxpayers paid ever more for less product.”

PG&E invests money to generate negawatts. The California Public Utilities Commission allows PG&E to earn a return on this investment. This is a perfectly legitimate, market-oriented policy solution to a classic economics failure of traditional practices.

By: Sean

Sean — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 02:20:12 +0000

Joe, you say that Californians emit 1/3 of the pollution per capita in their electricity consumption. I take it you mean that the total pollution generated by all of the electricity consumed in California, divided by the number of people in California is 1/3 of the same ratio for the US as a whole (minus Californian consumption and population). Is that correct?

By: Peter Foley

Peter Foley — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 03:03:35 +0000

Where did the money come from that is paying for this attempt at perpetual motion? again the waste of dollars to save dimes will impoverish the state and lead to more net pollution. Pop quiz, why does less Kilo Watts cost the hornswoggled Cali-fornicators more then their lucky neighbors in the free states?

I’d love to have a business like PG&L’s where the taxpayers paid ever more for less product.

This issue Demonstrates Joe’s leaps of illogic to arrive at an unsolution that reduces freedoms and cash flow for all in the future.

[JR: Energy efficiency pays for itself. And yes I agree with you, every time I go to California I see how impoverished the citizens are. But Californians emit one third the pollution per capita in their electricity consumption than the rest of America, so you may not be correct there. With this comment, Peter, you have officially nuked the fridge.]