Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
Kinda like the one requiring the performers acting in adult films to use condoms. The professionals have a better grasp of the risks than politicians do and the only thing that law did was relocate studio locations.
Which might have been the intent from the start. Not really the case here. I'd actually bet that this is designed to allow prosecutors to either stack on another charge, or to have at least something to prosecute in a #MeToo case. Naturally, the woman's accusation will be all the evidence needed. ;)
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
Ah yes, let's make it so our state that is already having issues with keeping everyone powered, go full electric.
I can see nothing wrong with this.
The same state that has people sitting on thier streets in some cities
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
Ah yes, let's make it so our state that is already having issues with keeping everyone powered, go full electric.
I can see nothing wrong with this.
The same state that has people sitting on thier streets in some cities
Isn't it fluctuations in power draw that are usually the problem, not increases in base load? I'd think that people would be on average more likely to be charging their cars in off-peak hours, but that's just a gut feeling; I'm certainly open to evidence to the contrary.

Or do you mean a completely different type of grid issue
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Isn't it fluctuations in power draw that are usually the problem, not increases in base load? I'd think that people would be on average more likely to be charging their cars in off-peak hours, but that's just a gut feeling; I'm certainly open to evidence to the contrary.

Or do you mean a completely different type of grid issue

In most places, it's the fluctuations that are problems.

But in 'we haven't built a new power plant in half a century' California, the base load is also the problem.

Because when you let the Democrats control your government, before long everything is a problem.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
California is plain underpowered for its requirements. Artificially forcing an increase in demand on the grid only makes it more frail.

the pain will get worse until the pain of innaction is worse then the pain of action.

Until the normie values having the lights on more then he values what a liberal professor says while sipping her latte things will not get better.
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
But in 'we haven't built a new power plant in half a century' California, the base load is also the problem.
Well, the first part isn't true, but apparently California does import more than a quarter of its electricity, so base load increases increase this dependency accordingly. Despite this, it plans to close its one remaining nuclear power plant (two reactors), which according to Wikipedia is due to a truly mind-boggling own goal on the part of environmentalist bureaucracy:
In 2016, PG&E announced that it plans to close the two Diablo Canyon reactors in 2024 and 2025, stating that because California's energy regulations give renewables priority over nuclear, the plant would likely only run half-time, making it uneconomical. (Nuclear plants are used for base load in order to spread their large fixed costs over as many kWh of generation as possible.) In 2020, experts at the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) warned that when the plant closes the state will reach a "critical inflection point", which will create a significant challenge to ensure reliability of the grid without resorting to more fossil fuel usage, and could jeopardize California's greenhouse gas reduction targets.
Regardless of one's position on the environmentalist agenda, and even regardless of one's opinion of nuclear power*, "We want more green energy --> torpedo nuclear power --> more fossil fuels get burned at greater expense" is self-destructive.

*Aside from a small minority of truly delusional views.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Well, the first part isn't true, but apparently California does import more than a quarter of its electricity, so base load increases increase this dependency accordingly. Despite this, it plans to close its one remaining nuclear power plant (two reactors), which according to Wikipedia is due to a truly mind-boggling own goal on the part of environmentalist bureaucracy:

Regardless of one's position on the environmentalist agenda, "We want more green energy --> torpedo nuclear power --> more fossil fuels get burned at greater expense" is self-destructive.

California's policies have been self destructive for awhile.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top