I don't think the author of this article understands what he wrote about, or purposely omitting key things about grid balancing. The problem with rooftop solar incentives is they encourage solar production during the day when the sun is out, but do nothing when the sun settles. California has to switch to other types of energy such as batteries, natural gas plants, etc. for the evening. The grid is already saturated with energy during the day, even into negative prices. Utilities are paying into these rooftops, perhaps at retail prices, for something that does not address the energy gaps through the 24-hour timeline of power generation. In simple terms, California's rooftop solar does not balance out the system over a timescale, with diminishing returns. At least, the article was stamped as an opinion piece, increasing the likelihood of it being a biased article that delves into conspiracy theories that California, and its regulated utility companies just want to screw people. There you go.
Mexico has nothing else better to do.
What does that have to do with this article?
That's your problem, not mine, and what is the fairy tale behind human rights? I didn't know that AI could be consciously racist.
You need to pay up for your speed racing.
Nuclear power is federally regulated. Nuclear power could always be private, and government entities could own them too.
One example is municipalities having a stake in nuclear energy: Nuclear power is obtained for our customers via the South Texas Project (STP) located in Bay City, Texas. CPS Energy owns a 40 percent stake in STP (NRG Energy of Texas owns 44 percent, while Austin Energy owns 16 percent). STP units 1 and 2 generate 1,029 megawatts of power for our customers.
Human rights aren't Chinese culture. Humanos derechos is a Christian concept that lead to ending slavery. Confucianism is about the relationship between the superior, and the inferior, or father/son relationship, and that is paralleled throughout Chinese society, including government. Christian cultures are egalitarian, Confucian culture is not egalitarian.
Marriage wasn't a sacred union. Christianity made marriage sacred. By making the sex partners exclusive to each other according to the teachings of Apostle Paul. Marriage was used as a political tool to bind with other clans or tribes. Marriages were arranged based on political and economical expediency, not based on love. Christianity by way of controlling who can marry dismantled the clan system by denying arranged marriages. As a result, it created the nuclear family that is seen today. The clan-based system was controlled by a powerful patriarch that could decide the fate of life and death of all those under his household, or property. Even today, the elders of the family control marriages according to what they believe is best in some parts of the world. Christianity gave young people the freedom to marry who they want. Nobody is forcing them to marry.
I fail to see how Yahoo will make Chrome better. I guess in the name of competition.
Solar and wind have lower direct cost. When the wind does not blow, you get no electricity. When the sun does not shine, you get no energy. Nuclear power has the best capacity factor. It is the most reliable energy source. The indirect costs of solar and wind are their intermittency. Their intermittent issues cost money. For a company that promises to deliver electricity, and the wind does not blow? That cost money. If you have an abundance of electricity produced, and nowhere to send it, you lose money. In the case of California, they desperately jettison energy across to Arizona, while Californians pay for the expensive portion of solar energy. California has expensive electricity rates, on average double that of Texas, and has a greater percentage of energy produced from renewable sources than Texas, despite Texas consuming the most energy. That is an example of an indirect cost. To want more distribution paths for wind and solar, you need to build costly transmission lines that need to be replaced every 40 years. You need batteries to store oversupply for times of low supply, just to smooth out the price level across time. If you don't have batteries for them, you need natural gas plants as back up. Nuclear energy has stability and reliability. With solar and wind, you get what you pay for, which is cheap, unpredictable, and unreliable energy.
The Hill tries to make backup energy as something that brings volatility and rolling blackouts, which makes no sense. Implying they believe that wind and solar should go without backup, and consistent generation at night, which is basically extra capacity. If you are going to need to roll out back up generation in the future, might as well do it now, instead of later. This does a couple of things for the Texas GOP goal of increasing reliability, it increases the responsibility on solar and wind producers to address their own volatility, instead of dumping the volatility on ancillary services, which get less revenue, because of their off-time, accommodating wind and solar. By forcing solar, and wind producers to buy capacity from what would most think as only backup generation, the Legislature wants to force wind, and solar to participate in 24 hour production. A mandate like this makes room for reliable energy rollout, basically more support for natural gas, and presumably batteries, instead of just crowding out the preferred energy types.