3 ms·
Yes, why wouldn't you? To the extent that you can remain solvent while trying to single handedly warm up the planet, it's in the interest of the rest of us to
by avar 6y ago
Yes, why wouldn't you?
To the extent that you can remain solvent while trying to single handedly warm up the planet, it's in the interest of the rest of us to give you an incentive to shift that energy consumption to a sustainable provider.
This is a perfect example of exactly the sort of case energy credits excel at, since you can shift the consumption to a different time and location.
- im3w1l 6y ago> you can remain solvent while trying to single handedly warm up the planet, I'm fairly sure we have some kind of misunderstanding, and I don't see exactly what you are getting at. Anyway the point of this whole scheme wouldn't be to warm the planet. It would be to put solar panels in a location with a lot of sun and cheap land, to produce certificates as cheaply as possible. Now having nothing useful to do with the resulting energy, since it's so far away from the grid, just flush it down the drain so to speak, by driving a resistor. The esoteric reader may notice a certain similarity to the practice of a sending a scapegoat to the desert for the purpose of purifying sin.
- avar 6y agoI realize what you meant, in practice there's a large amount of legislation around this sort of thing and the people writing it aren't morons and have heard of things like the cobra effect[1]. But maybe I'm wrong and there's lots of investors building power plants purely to waste energy and make a point. We just haven't heard much about them because the joke got tired within a week of operations and they decided they might as well connect it to the grid instead to recoup their investment. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_effect