5 ms·

Exactly. In San Diego the peak electricity price is $0.75/kWH, the highest in the continental USA. There is literally a functional nuclear reactor sitting idle

Exactly. In San Diego the peak electricity price is $0.75/kWH, the highest in the continental USA. There is literally a functional nuclear reactor sitting idle a few miles north at San Onofre, and NIMBYs oppose nearly everything all new construction and upzoning. California is not a good model for almost anything these days, just look at the high speed rail project. Cost of living is worsening for the middle and lower classes who are emigrating to other states. The government is corrupt and inefficient, spending vast sums on homelessness while achieving effectively nothing. Progressives can't blame anyone but themselves since California is a one party state with no real opposition.

pfdietz 2y ago
A nuclear plant will earn money based on wholesale prices, not retail prices, and certainly not one-time peak retail prices. Wholesale prices are much lower. Note that for much of the day it's around $0.04/kWh. Batteries will reduce the evening peak. https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/california-electricity-prices-by-hour/ https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/california-electrici... Calling SONGS-2 or 3 functional is a stretch given their steam generator problems.
beembeem 2y ago
It would be worth looking at your investor-owned utility which has had an energy monopoly for half a century and has little incentive to innovate.
robotbikes 2y ago
One party rule is almost never a good thing over the long run as politicians tend to become more self-serving and corrupt the longer they don't have to worry about being held accountable to voters. Instead they worry more about being accountable to their party leaders and funders who try to maintain the status-quo. Not sure the duopoly we have in the USA is preferable compared to say a robust democracy with smaller parties forming coalitions.
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  Take 30-60 minutes and read up on ranked choice voting, if you aren't familiar. I talk to a lot of people about it and the idea that we can vote any other way seems foreign to most. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting A more laymans' terms comic that explains it with some FAQ built in: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/ https://www.chickennation.com/voting/ It won't instantly change the world, but it will allow people to vote their true conscience vs. strategic voting, and allows smaller parties a chance at real power.
  - hackernewds 2y ago
    circular argument since the 2 party system will never implement it
    - unethical_ban 2y ago
      False since it's already implemented in several states and cities. Florida Republicans have banned it in the state, though.
vkou 2y ago
> The government is corrupt and inefficient, spending vast sums on homelessness while achieving effectively nothing. Progressives can't blame anyone but themselves since California is a one party state with no real opposition. Seattle voted the two progressives on city council out (and Sawant retired) some time ago, homelessness has gone nowhere but worse since then. Like clockwork, we're adding another ~1000 street homeless/year. As it turns out, the opposite-of-progressives don't have a solution for it either. Which isn't surprising, since they've held most of the council seats and the mayor's office for decades, it's just that now they don't have a progressive boogieman to blame for their failures. Meanwhile, Broadway and Pike and Denny and Pine look worse than they ever have, and so do the streets surrounding them. It's almost like homelessness is an emergent property of a housing shortage.
- crackercrews 2y ago
  What is the current composition of the city council? Are any of the members actually conservative, or just not-progressive? Why do you think things are so bad in the PNW compared to other places, if not the governance?
  - vkou 2y ago
    The council shifted hard-right last election, and Bruce Harrell (former council chairman and career politician who has blamed everyone but himself for the city's failures in years past) has a full slate supporting him. The slate's politics seems to be pro-out-of-state-business/landlord/police, anti-density, anti-pedestrian, anti-homeless NIMBYism. Politically positioned as the common-sense solution to the insane progressive politics that have been ruining the city. The metrics aren't exactly on their side. SPD continues to be an incredible combination of overpaid, unaccountable, incapable of hiring, useless, and actively dangerous to the public, the homeless numbers keep growing, rents and cost of living are rising, and the council is doing everything it can to stonewall the state's efforts to solving the housing crisis in the city. > Why do you think things are so bad in the PNW compared to other places, if not the governance? It might have something to do with the hundreds of thousands of highly paid people moving into an area which didn't build enough housing units to support them, thus displacing tens of thousands of people out of the margins and onto the street. It probably didn't have as much to do with (a loud) minority of progressives that were on the council as we've been told. I've only got a child's grasp of free market economics (and of musical chairs), but this seems to be the most predictable outcome of that sort of thing. When the number of people in an area exceeds the number of beds, some of those people will eventually be sleeping in tents.
amanaplanacanal 2y ago
I don’t think California is ruled by progressives, unless your definition of progressive is anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan.
- crackercrews 2y ago
  Please name someone who is remotely close to Ronald Reagan's politics and who is in charge in California. The left is in charge. They have a supermajority.
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    Richard Nixon was more liberal than today's CA Left on very many things. These comparisons are silly.
    - hackernewds 2y ago
      Nixon loved big government -- two of the federal programs most despised -- the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Nixon signed the Clean Air Act and Title which guaranteed equal educational opportunities for women. Nixon increased Social Security Benefits, proposed making more people eligible for welfare, and offered a plan for universal health care. Nixon's Detente sought to scale back or arms race with the Soviets. Nixon was quite liberal by current standards.

pfdietz 2y ago

A nuclear plant will earn money based on wholesale prices, not retail prices, and certainly not one-time peak retail prices. Wholesale prices are much lower. Note that for much of the day it's around $0.04/kWh. Batteries will reduce the evening peak. https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/california-electricity-prices-by-hour/ https://thundersaidenergy.com/downloads/california-electrici... Calling SONGS-2 or 3 functional is a stretch given their steam generator problems.

beembeem 2y ago

It would be worth looking at your investor-owned utility which has had an energy monopoly for half a century and has little incentive to innovate.

robotbikes 2y ago

One party rule is almost never a good thing over the long run as politicians tend to become more self-serving and corrupt the longer they don't have to worry about being held accountable to voters. Instead they worry more about being accountable to their party leaders and funders who try to maintain the status-quo. Not sure the duopoly we have in the USA is preferable compared to say a robust democracy with smaller parties forming coalitions.

unethical_ban 2y ago
Take 30-60 minutes and read up on ranked choice voting, if you aren't familiar. I talk to a lot of people about it and the idea that we can vote any other way seems foreign to most. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting A more laymans' terms comic that explains it with some FAQ built in: https://www.chickennation.com/voting/ https://www.chickennation.com/voting/ It won't instantly change the world, but it will allow people to vote their true conscience vs. strategic voting, and allows smaller parties a chance at real power.
- hackernewds 2y ago
  circular argument since the 2 party system will never implement it
  - unethical_ban 2y ago
    False since it's already implemented in several states and cities. Florida Republicans have banned it in the state, though.

vkou 2y ago

> The government is corrupt and inefficient, spending vast sums on homelessness while achieving effectively nothing. Progressives can't blame anyone but themselves since California is a one party state with no real opposition. Seattle voted the two progressives on city council out (and Sawant retired) some time ago, homelessness has gone nowhere but worse since then. Like clockwork, we're adding another ~1000 street homeless/year. As it turns out, the opposite-of-progressives don't have a solution for it either. Which isn't surprising, since they've held most of the council seats and the mayor's office for decades, it's just that now they don't have a progressive boogieman to blame for their failures. Meanwhile, Broadway and Pike and Denny and Pine look worse than they ever have, and so do the streets surrounding them. It's almost like homelessness is an emergent property of a housing shortage.

crackercrews 2y ago
What is the current composition of the city council? Are any of the members actually conservative, or just not-progressive? Why do you think things are so bad in the PNW compared to other places, if not the governance?
- vkou 2y ago
  The council shifted hard-right last election, and Bruce Harrell (former council chairman and career politician who has blamed everyone but himself for the city's failures in years past) has a full slate supporting him. The slate's politics seems to be pro-out-of-state-business/landlord/police, anti-density, anti-pedestrian, anti-homeless NIMBYism. Politically positioned as the common-sense solution to the insane progressive politics that have been ruining the city. The metrics aren't exactly on their side. SPD continues to be an incredible combination of overpaid, unaccountable, incapable of hiring, useless, and actively dangerous to the public, the homeless numbers keep growing, rents and cost of living are rising, and the council is doing everything it can to stonewall the state's efforts to solving the housing crisis in the city. > Why do you think things are so bad in the PNW compared to other places, if not the governance? It might have something to do with the hundreds of thousands of highly paid people moving into an area which didn't build enough housing units to support them, thus displacing tens of thousands of people out of the margins and onto the street. It probably didn't have as much to do with (a loud) minority of progressives that were on the council as we've been told. I've only got a child's grasp of free market economics (and of musical chairs), but this seems to be the most predictable outcome of that sort of thing. When the number of people in an area exceeds the number of beds, some of those people will eventually be sleeping in tents.

amanaplanacanal 2y ago

I don’t think California is ruled by progressives, unless your definition of progressive is anyone to the left of Ronald Reagan.

crackercrews 2y ago
Please name someone who is remotely close to Ronald Reagan's politics and who is in charge in California. The left is in charge. They have a supermajority.
- asadotzler 2y ago
  Richard Nixon was more liberal than today's CA Left on very many things. These comparisons are silly.
  - hackernewds 2y ago
    Nixon loved big government -- two of the federal programs most despised -- the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Nixon signed the Clean Air Act and Title which guaranteed equal educational opportunities for women. Nixon increased Social Security Benefits, proposed making more people eligible for welfare, and offered a plan for universal health care. Nixon's Detente sought to scale back or arms race with the Soviets. Nixon was quite liberal by current standards.