Message from @say
Discord ID: 322076001616134156
who, heartiste?
The 2005 EPAct I mentioned is an expansion of a 1978 statute called PURPA, which was implemented following the oil crises of the late 70s
for national security reasons
Fartiste
Congress on a bipartisan basis decided that it would be sensible to expand our energy portfolio into small-scale and decentralized renewable generation to avoid what happened under Carter during the OPEC crises
At that time, small-scale renewable generation was MUCH more expensive that fossil fuel generated power, but the national security reasons for having it (at least on a small scale) were important enough to both subsidize it through tax credits and to force utilities to buy from small generators under PURPA
Who cares? Tell him that on his blog. Damn..
fallot asked
Was this post made in relation to Trump and Paris Agreement?
The other part of the story is that prices on renewables have dropped significantly in the intervening time thanks to the incentivized investment, and the possibility exists going forward that renewables might become not only a good national security bet but also a reasonably cheap source of power, which would allow them to expand their role in our national energy portfolio.
I am interested too
a debateable proposition
Definitely
thank you
As we discussed before, renewables face several currently unsolved problems
can burning gays for energy qualify for a subsidy
Jevons paradox
I'm not sure about the tax credit availability on that, but you can definitely force a utility to purchase power from your gay-burning plant under PURPA since it would be a "bio-mass fuel"
by 2050 africa population will be 2.5billion. How much fuel would you create by burning 2.5 billion bodies?
Another important consideration related to the "energy portfolio" concept is that renewables function as a hedge against price uncertainty. Both for reasons that any diversified portfolio is generally more stable, and because the fundamental shifts that affect market price of fossil fuels are different than the fundamental shifts that affect renewable production.
Would it be better to put them in "human batteries" were them by simply moving in distress would create energy like a hamster?
What is all this energy spent on? IIRC far less of it was by private households than by industry, although household expenditure is easily double what it should be
Industry and infrastructure. Household expenditure is high, but efficiency solutions applied there can't solve the problem
if a problem exists
I unplug appliances/electronics/lamps when not in use
my da thinks it saves money
but it's a pain in the ass when youre only gonna be busy for half an hour tops
I barely own anything and have no electronics but phone and computer
It does over time but it depends on the draw of the appliance. It's probably not worth your effort for an hour and a half. But if I leave town I unplug my amp and stuff because that draws a lot of power.
probably a couple dollars
My musical stuff is all acoustic
Yeah, but we unplug pretty much everything except the wifi, fridge, security system, and our deep freezer lmao
Security system lol
Cameras and junk
we have a lot of tweaker okies in my neighborhood that steal copper and mail and junk
What is an okie
so we have a recording system in case da shoots anyone
like super white trash
like, on an unbearable level