I think they mean “the same forces that led to the grid collapsing every few years – prioritizing profit above all else, and the government giving zero fucks-- are the same forces which trigger new development to be in renewables with zero regulation or oversight”
Conservatives always write about their broken-clock-right-twice successes in a similar way.
Compared to California, where everything is done to increase customer rates, or most other states where long wait lines to connect power occur, you can measure effective corruption by how much energy additions are made, including home solar. You can be critical of their exposure to power system failures, but that doesn’t make the system corrupt.
Just that the lack of cheap energy built/connected is a function of all of the obstacles put in the way of those projects. They get done in Texas more than other places that “put out a better virtue vibe”, but behind the scenes put up obstacles.
Its interesting how you can only talk positively about Texas by comparing it to others.
Can you answer this question without comparing Texas to any other state or entity: How is charging hundreds of dollars per kWh during storms in the best interests of the “regular electricity consumers”?
I recognize that failing, but afaiu, it applied to a limited number of customers who “gambled on variable rates”. The political leadership there also shit talks renewables, putting false blame on them for grid failures, but the actual operational environment still permits a lot of renewable expansion: The basis for calling their system the least corrupt.
So their renewable expansion is so good that it out ways the fact Texas never joined the east or west interconnect?
That is the biggest corruption, and it is the whole reason their grid is so unreliable. But iteruptions in sevice can be good for the people making money from the sales if these goods. It’s like racketeering.
Do you genuinely think the folks who “gambled” really understood the implications? How many random mailers have you gotten asking to switch to a random third party provider because “it’s better for the env” or will “save money”?
I mean I’ll grant you California is a shitshow but it’s been a shitshow since republicans got on their knees for Enron in the 90s and literally hasn’t recovered. How about Florida, which has been a red state for 80% of the last 30 years, low regulation, but instead of building new power they are keeping nukes going well past their service life? Abundant sun. Abundant wave power. They have the fucking entire European heating system right off the coast.
“The least corrupt/utility sector” I must be thinking of the wrong Texas, which one are you referring too?
I think they mean “the same forces that led to the grid collapsing every few years – prioritizing profit above all else, and the government giving zero fucks-- are the same forces which trigger new development to be in renewables with zero regulation or oversight”
Conservatives always write about their broken-clock-right-twice successes in a similar way.
Compared to California, where everything is done to increase customer rates, or most other states where long wait lines to connect power occur, you can measure effective corruption by how much energy additions are made, including home solar. You can be critical of their exposure to power system failures, but that doesn’t make the system corrupt.
Your measure of corruption is what now? How many new things are built regardless of their need or what impacts they may have?
Very…unique standpoint.
Just that the lack of cheap energy built/connected is a function of all of the obstacles put in the way of those projects. They get done in Texas more than other places that “put out a better virtue vibe”, but behind the scenes put up obstacles.
Its interesting how you can only talk positively about Texas by comparing it to others.
Can you answer this question without comparing Texas to any other state or entity: How is charging hundreds of dollars per kWh during storms in the best interests of the “regular electricity consumers”?
I recognize that failing, but afaiu, it applied to a limited number of customers who “gambled on variable rates”. The political leadership there also shit talks renewables, putting false blame on them for grid failures, but the actual operational environment still permits a lot of renewable expansion: The basis for calling their system the least corrupt.
So their renewable expansion is so good that it out ways the fact Texas never joined the east or west interconnect?
That is the biggest corruption, and it is the whole reason their grid is so unreliable. But iteruptions in sevice can be good for the people making money from the sales if these goods. It’s like racketeering.
Do you genuinely think the folks who “gambled” really understood the implications? How many random mailers have you gotten asking to switch to a random third party provider because “it’s better for the env” or will “save money”?
I mean I’ll grant you California is a shitshow but it’s been a shitshow since republicans got on their knees for Enron in the 90s and literally hasn’t recovered. How about Florida, which has been a red state for 80% of the last 30 years, low regulation, but instead of building new power they are keeping nukes going well past their service life? Abundant sun. Abundant wave power. They have the fucking entire European heating system right off the coast.