California to get one-third of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020

DesiPower

Lifer
Nov 22, 2008
15,299
740
126
Nice! very noble goal.

Definitely over ambitious IMO. My question is where the EFF are they gonna get the money from??? I read somewhere, (cant find the source anymore) they will have to double the power grid and that the was just the tip of the iceberg.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,261
13,520
146
Yeah...costs be dammed...my public utility has already warned the ratepayers to expect large rate increases because of this.

Solar, geothermal, and other "renewable" sources end up costing more than "traditional" power sources...and we the ratepayers get stuck.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Solar - the environmentalists will be up in arms because it takes up too much real estate and they will protest and sue the state to prevent the construction of any large scale solar farms.

Wind energy - the environmentalists will be up in arms because of noise pollution and dangers to migratory birds. They will protest and sue the state to prevent any large scale wind farms.

All the while organizing the protests from a nice air conditioned location.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Ha pushing up cost of living in cali one law at a time.

I still vote for nucular.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Wind energy - the environmentalists will be up in arms because of noise pollution and dangers to migratory birds. They will protest and sue the state to prevent any large scale wind farms.

They put in some wind farms near me, the environmentalists went ape shit. Lawsuits and the whole 9.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
The first time I went to San Fran we came in from the east. My buddy lived in Stockton and we flew into Sacramento. I couldnt help but laugh at the hundreds of wind turbines that destroyed an otherwise picture perfect hillside. And of course only 1/3rd of them were actually running.

MN isnt much better. I think we passed a law that we have to produce 20-25% of our energy from renewable resources by 2020. Now at least the only thing they are destroying are corn fields down near Pipestone with these turbines. But it actually makes the place look nicer hehe. But costs be damned we are doing it!
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
I assume that when they say "get one-third of their energy from renewable sources" what they really mean is produce one-third of a megawatt from a windmill and buy the rest of their energy from Arizona (coal & nuclear).
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,261
13,520
146
The first time I went to San Fran we came in from the east. My buddy lived in Stockton and we flew into Sacramento. I couldnt help but laugh at the hundreds of wind turbines that destroyed an otherwise picture perfect hillside. And of course only 1/3rd of them were actually running.

MN isnt much better. I think we passed a law that we have to produce 20-25% of our energy from renewable resources by 2020. Now at least the only thing they are destroying are corn fields down near Pipestone with these turbines. But it actually makes the place look nicer hehe. But costs be damned we are doing it!

No one here really gives a shit about the windmill farms you saw. Unproductive land anyway...

Part of the reason you only saw about 1/3 of them running is because they're designed to work at different windspeeds for max efficiency, and many are just obsolete due to their age...and many get replaced every year.

I spent one summer on the Altamont Pass windfarms...building new wind turbines and replacing old ones.
 

ShawnD1

Lifer
May 24, 2003
15,987
2
81
They put in some wind farms near me, the environmentalists went ape shit. Lawsuits and the whole 9.
Environmentalists should just be killed. I'm serious. They do everything they can to ruin everything, so they might as well be classified as terrorists at this point.

We want to switch from coal to nuclear - can't because of environmentalist retards who dropped out of highschool (nuclear power and nuclear bombs were both very well explained in grade 11 and 12 physics).
We want wind farms - can't because environmentalists think it hurts birds or some other stupid shit. Apparently birds are more important than stopping global warming and acid rain; who would have guessed?


The good thing to look forward to is that wind power has shown itself to be an excellent source of power. It's actually a ridiculously cheap source of power. All of us know that the wind is sketchy as hell and is unpredictable, but when spread across a wide enough area (ie cover the entire state), the wind is actually somewhat steady and can provide a significant percentage of base load.

Here are 2 videos made by one of my favorite people on youtube, greenman3610, to explain wind power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llIbjC49Fjs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO3V2uXTM6k
 
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
CA has some ridiculous goals out there. $40 billion high speed rail, renewable energy like mad... I mean it's all spending. I think that both of these are all nice ideas in general, but you can't go spending on these things when your basic bread and butter is messed up. State has terrible education, our roads are broken. HSR isn't going to magically replace your highways. Unless you build me a real subway in the Bay Area, we're still going to drive. So seriously, people need to stop thinking that going solar/wind or going to high speed rail will end all of CA's troubles, because the basic things still need to work, and we already don't have money for road improvements.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Environmentalists should just be killed. I'm serious. They do everything they can to ruin everything, so they might as well be classified as terrorists at this point.

No, no, no, you have it all wrong! It's our fault, we just don't believe enough in renewable energy. We need to all come together and think enough happy thoughts and give all our money to the government, then and only then will this country for sure 100% guaranteed develop the miracle clean energy source to solve all our problems!
 

TridenT

Lifer
Sep 4, 2006
16,800
45
91
I heard something like a windmill barely makes net energy in its lifetime when compared to the energy that was taken to make it and get it operational. (And most of the energy spent on making it is from non-renewable resources)

Anyway, windmills are fine. Solar is fine. Nuclear is fine. They're way better than coal.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Of course, 20 percent of that will come from proper tire inflation, which is free . . .
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
The first time I went to San Fran we came in from the east. My buddy lived in Stockton and we flew into Sacramento. I couldnt help but laugh at the hundreds of wind turbines that destroyed an otherwise picture perfect hillside. And of course only 1/3rd of them were actually running.

MN isnt much better. I think we passed a law that we have to produce 20-25% of our energy from renewable resources by 2020. Now at least the only thing they are destroying are corn fields down near Pipestone with these turbines. But it actually makes the place look nicer hehe. But costs be damned we are doing it!

Uhhh how the hell do wind turbines destroy corn fields? The whole point of wind turbines is you can put them in a god damn agricultural field and still grow crops there.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
I heard something like a windmill barely makes net energy in its lifetime when compared to the energy that was taken to make it and get it operational. (And most of the energy spent on making it is from non-renewable resources)

Anyway, windmills are fine. Solar is fine. Nuclear is fine. They're way better than coal.

That's bullshit, just like the lies the oil lobby spreads about solar power EROI. Do you not have any idea how much energy a wind turbine makes?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Uhhh how the hell do wind turbines destroy corn fields? The whole point of wind turbines is you can put them in a god damn agricultural field and still grow crops there.

The look of the surrounding area??? It doesnt physically destroy them.
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_return_on_investment_%28EROI%29_for_wind_energy

The EROI for wind power is much higher than coal and nuclear
300px-EROI_electric_power.jpg
 
Last edited:

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
The look of the surrounding area??? It doesnt physically destroy them.

And a corn field is more beautiful than a wind turbine? Is that your expert aesthetic opinion? Sounds like yuppie "drive through the country", "not in my backyard of my hobby ranch" bullshit.
 
Last edited: