Communist California to require Solar Panels on all new homes

[Toddsterpatriot]

The American Republican party is the only political party in the world that denies the reality of climate change.

Your belief is the outlier. Not mine.

Most of the rest of the world also willingly, or unwillingly gave up their legally owned guns, and embraced Socialism. Most Americans, especially Republicans aren't sheep like much of the world. The reasons we are Americans. We're different, and don't go along with every government power, and money grab.

A nonsensical response. More like your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels or are simply not smart enough to grasp the actual science.

your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels

Cheap, energy dense, convenient.
The entire country has a financial stake in fossil fuels.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The American Republican party is the only political party in the world that denies the reality of climate change.

Your belief is the outlier. Not mine.

Most of the rest of the world also willingly, or unwillingly gave up their legally owned guns, and embraced Socialism. Most Americans, especially Republicans aren't sheep like much of the world. The reasons we are Americans. We're different, and don't go along with every government power, and money grab.

A nonsensical response. More like your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels or are simply not smart enough to grasp the actual science.

your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels

Cheap, energy dense, convenient.
The entire country has a financial stake in fossil fuels.

Investments, dope.

 

[hjmick]

Will they also require the batteries to store the electricity? Without those, you're only off grid during daylight hours. You know, when everyone is at work or school...

There are no batteries. The solar panels feed right into the grid and you get your electricity the same way you always did. The difference is how the electricity is metered.

What do you mean? There are no batteries, or there are no batteries required? Because absolutely there are batteries for storing electricity generated by solar cells and absolutely without them, once the sun goes down you're back on the grid.

Agree, batteries are optional. I'm thinking about going with Tesla's powerwall, it's a little expensive now so waiting for the price to drop. In the meantime I use my solar during the day (when it's the most expensive and most in demand) and sell back at night and collect credits that will help me get through the hot summer.

Batteries for me don't save too much because I can sell back my unused energy, if that were not the case then they would be more cost effective.

Are you with SCE, SDG&E, or PG&E? I read a while back that they had all raised rates on solar owners, something like $9.00 more a month. Not terrible, but less than they wanted. I'd be concerned they will continue to push for more increases...

 

[HappyJoy]

Will they also require the batteries to store the electricity? Without those, you're only off grid during daylight hours. You know, when everyone is at work or school...

There are no batteries. The solar panels feed right into the grid and you get your electricity the same way you always did. The difference is how the electricity is metered.

That's not exactly correct. I mean other than you're wrong about the batteries, it's an option.

The electricity you get from solar goes to you as you are using it. What you don't use goes to the utility. You are not sending/selling all your energy directly to your utility only to buy/consume energy from the utility. What you sell is not worth as much as what you buy from your utility company. Think of it as the energy you send to the utility as being wholesale and what you buy above and beyond what you are generating is retail.

Here is a chart it sort of explains it.

 

[hjmick]

Will they also require the batteries to store the electricity? Without those, you're only off grid during daylight hours. You know, when everyone is at work or school...

There are no batteries. The solar panels feed right into the grid and you get your electricity the same way you always did. The difference is how the electricity is metered.

That's not exactly correct. I mean other than you're wrong about the batteries, it's an option.

The electricity you get from solar goes to you as you are using it. What you don't use goes to the utility. You are not sending/selling all your energy directly to your utility only to buy/consume energy from the utility. What you sell is not worth as much as what you buy from your utility company. Think of it as the energy you send to the utility as being wholesale and what you buy above and beyond what you are generating is retail.

Here is a chart it sort of explains it.

No no, I get all that. My mindset is to be off the grid completely, screw the utility companies.

 

[HappyJoy]

Will they also require the batteries to store the electricity? Without those, you're only off grid during daylight hours. You know, when everyone is at work or school...

There are no batteries. The solar panels feed right into the grid and you get your electricity the same way you always did. The difference is how the electricity is metered.

What do you mean? There are no batteries, or there are no batteries required? Because absolutely there are batteries for storing electricity generated by solar cells and absolutely without them, once the sun goes down you're back on the grid.

Agree, batteries are optional. I'm thinking about going with Tesla's powerwall, it's a little expensive now so waiting for the price to drop. In the meantime I use my solar during the day (when it's the most expensive and most in demand) and sell back at night and collect credits that will help me get through the hot summer.

Batteries for me don't save too much because I can sell back my unused energy, if that were not the case then they would be more cost effective.

Are you with SCE, SDG&E, or PG&E? I read a while back that they had all raised rates on solar owners, something like $9.00 more a month. Not terrible, but less than they wanted. I'd be concerned they will continue to push for more increases...

Not with any of those, but there is like a $10.00 surcharge I think for being a solar customer. So, about the same, I can understand it they have to maintain the lines and those who have solar aren't generating much income for them.

I guess they could push for more but they took a lot of heat for doing it this time. I think it's locked in for a couple decades. It's probably easier for them to raise their energy rates than this surcharge and that can happen at anytime, of course with approval from your local corporation commission or whatever agency is in charge of regulating rates.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As you know, the Social Security System is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Over the next five years, the Social Security trust fund could encounter deficits of up to $111 billion, and in the decades ahead its unfunded obligations could run well into the trillions.

That was Reagan, 35+ years ago.

Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that it's a wealth re-distribution program that's run inefficiently and is the one of the main drivers of our national debt.

NOPE, that's false.

SS is operationally VERY efficient with overhead at just 0.7% compared to about 8-10% if you look at any private insurance system.

SS trust fund balance is positive, which means public has paid more into the system than was paid out of it. And the reason why if nothing is done it will turn negative has nothing to do with inefficiency it has to do with there being more retired people that need to be covered.

that would be true if the dems in congress had not merged SS funds with the general fund under LBJ. Now, those working pay for those who are retired. There is no "fund" that was made up from our SS (FICA) deductions.

As far as budget effects it doesn't matter who merged with what. What matters is how much was paid into the program and how much was paid out.

you just don't get it. SS was set up as a forced retirement fund for American workers. What we paid in was supposed to be put away for our retirement years. Currently there is zero in the SS fund and those working are paying those who are retired. The democrats under LBJ changed it and merged the SS fund with the general fund and then spent it. The classic Ponzi scheme.

Currently there is zero in the SS fund and those working are paying those who are retired.

Currently there is about $2.8 trillion in the SS Trust Fund.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As you know, the Social Security System is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Over the next five years, the Social Security trust fund could encounter deficits of up to $111 billion, and in the decades ahead its unfunded obligations could run well into the trillions.

That was Reagan, 35+ years ago.

Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that it's a wealth re-distribution program that's run inefficiently and is the one of the main drivers of our national debt.

NOPE, that's false.

SS is operationally VERY efficient with overhead at just 0.7% compared to about 8-10% if you look at any private insurance system.

SS trust fund balance is positive, which means public has paid more into the system than was paid out of it. And the reason why if nothing is done it will turn negative has nothing to do with inefficiency it has to do with there being more retired people that need to be covered.

that would be true if the dems in congress had not merged SS funds with the general fund under LBJ. Now, those working pay for those who are retired. There is no "fund" that was made up from our SS (FICA) deductions.

Now, those working pay for those who are retired.

It was always designed that way.
It wasn't designed to support people for 20+ years in retirement.

actually it was designed that way. the problem is that modern medicine is keeping people alive longer and the actuaries who created the SS fund did not properly foresee that. But that's only part of the problem, when LBJ did away with the SS fund the only way to keep the contract with retired people was to take more from working people. that will continue.

when LBJ did away with the SS fund

What do you imagine he did?
Why do you imagine it matters?

 

[bripat9643]

The American Republican party is the only political party in the world that denies the reality of climate change.

Your belief is the outlier. Not mine.

Most of the rest of the world also willingly, or unwillingly gave up their legally owned guns, and embraced Socialism. Most Americans, especially Republicans aren't sheep like much of the world. The reasons we are Americans. We're different, and don't go along with every government power, and money grab.

A nonsensical response. More like your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels or are simply not smart enough to grasp the actual science.

your party tends to attract those who either have a financial stake in fossil fuels

Cheap, energy dense, convenient.
The entire country has a financial stake in fossil fuels.

The guy who is always whining about conspiricy theories claims we use fossil fuels because of a massive conspiricy.

 

[bripat9643]

Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that it's a wealth re-distribution program that's run inefficiently and is the one of the main drivers of our national debt.

NOPE, that's false.

SS is operationally VERY efficient with overhead at just 0.7% compared to about 8-10% if you look at any private insurance system.

SS trust fund balance is positive, which means public has paid more into the system than was paid out of it. And the reason why if nothing is done it will turn negative has nothing to do with inefficiency it has to do with there being more retired people that need to be covered.

that would be true if the dems in congress had not merged SS funds with the general fund under LBJ. Now, those working pay for those who are retired. There is no "fund" that was made up from our SS (FICA) deductions.

As far as budget effects it doesn't matter who merged with what. What matters is how much was paid into the program and how much was paid out.

you just don't get it. SS was set up as a forced retirement fund for American workers. What we paid in was supposed to be put away for our retirement years. Currently there is zero in the SS fund and those working are paying those who are retired. The democrats under LBJ changed it and merged the SS fund with the general fund and then spent it. The classic Ponzi scheme.

Currently there is zero in the SS fund and those working are paying those who are retired.

Currently there is about $2.8 trillion in the SS Trust Fund.

$2.8 trillion of worthless I.O.U.s

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They have for decades by keeping wages artificially low.

Really, do explain. What policies have the Republicans administered that had anything to do with what a private business pays their employees.

You worked multiple jobs because your employer didn't pay you a livable wage.

At times yes, at other times, no, I just got a second job to get ahead. This is the horse and carrot theory. If you feed a horse carrots, you're not going to get the work out of him as you can dangling a carrot in front of a horse.

As liberalism progressed, less and less people wanted to pull the cart. They just went to government for their daily allowance of carrots. Then complain that they aren't getting enough.

I'm only left in I feel that employees are a businesses greatest asset. The fact is that business owners and investors are grossly over-paid.

No, business people and investors don't get paid. They create their own money.

Of course, non-rich people can do the same, it's just they'd rater work for somebody else and bitch instead. But anybody not happy with the wage they make are welcome to open their own business and pay their workers whatever they like.

Businesses produce products or services. To sell their products or service, price is the main factor. Ss if you and I had widget factories, and I paid my employees what they were worth, and you overpaid all your employees, I'm going to steal all of your customers and put you out of business, because I can sell my widgets two dollars less than you can.

Don't be obtuse. They have blocked a living wage and have broken the unions etc etc. Anything to save their greedy idiot brainwashing Mega rich Heroes and Masters, Super Dupe.

A so-called Living Wage is government forcing businesses to pay their employees what government wants. This isn't Nazi Germany. The Republicans didn't touch the unions. That's an old wives tale that started when Reagan fired the air traffic controllers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes, we are trying to ignore the effects of GW. Would you believe it's 75 degrees here right now? Two months ago it was snowing. That never happens.

That's weather. The intelligent are discussing climate.

The intelligent are????

Okay, so let's say I'm a rich guy, and I'm offering you (or anybody else) a billion dollars to raise the temperature of the earth by four degrees, how would you do it? Do you really think you could do it?

Where is this on the scale between reality and blowing fantasy bubbles out of your butt?

Oh, so you can't answer either. How surprising.

They have for decades by keeping wages artificially low.

Really, do explain. What policies have the Republicans administered that had anything to do with what a private business pays their employees.

You worked multiple jobs because your employer didn't pay you a livable wage.

At times yes, at other times, no, I just got a second job to get ahead. This is the horse and carrot theory. If you feed a horse carrots, you're not going to get the work out of him as you can dangling a carrot in front of a horse.

As liberalism progressed, less and less people wanted to pull the cart. They just went to government for their daily allowance of carrots. Then complain that they aren't getting enough.

I'm only left in I feel that employees are a businesses greatest asset. The fact is that business owners and investors are grossly over-paid.

No, business people and investors don't get paid. They create their own money.

Of course, non-rich people can do the same, it's just they'd rater work for somebody else and bitch instead. But anybody not happy with the wage they make are welcome to open their own business and pay their workers whatever they like.

Businesses produce products or services. To sell their products or service, price is the main factor. Ss if you and I had widget factories, and I paid my employees what they were worth, and you overpaid all your employees, I'm going to steal all of your customers and put you out of business, because I can sell my widgets two dollars less than you can.

Which is why we need Democrats running the government and policy again. Unions have been broken and the greatest generation died so there is no one else to protect the non rich.

Then why didn't DumBama and the rest of the crooks bring back unions when they had the chance? Go ahead, bring back unions. It will only have the same result it did as last time, and that is businesses moving out of the country or otherwise investing in automation.

 

[HappyJoy]

That's weather. The intelligent are discussing climate.

The intelligent are????

Okay, so let's say I'm a rich guy, and I'm offering you (or anybody else) a billion dollars to raise the temperature of the earth by four degrees, how would you do it? Do you really think you could do it?

Where is this on the scale between reality and blowing fantasy bubbles out of your butt?

Oh, so you can't answer either. How surprising.

They have for decades by keeping wages artificially low.

Really, do explain. What policies have the Republicans administered that had anything to do with what a private business pays their employees.

You worked multiple jobs because your employer didn't pay you a livable wage.

At times yes, at other times, no, I just got a second job to get ahead. This is the horse and carrot theory. If you feed a horse carrots, you're not going to get the work out of him as you can dangling a carrot in front of a horse.

As liberalism progressed, less and less people wanted to pull the cart. They just went to government for their daily allowance of carrots. Then complain that they aren't getting enough.

I'm only left in I feel that employees are a businesses greatest asset. The fact is that business owners and investors are grossly over-paid.

No, business people and investors don't get paid. They create their own money.

Of course, non-rich people can do the same, it's just they'd rater work for somebody else and bitch instead. But anybody not happy with the wage they make are welcome to open their own business and pay their workers whatever they like.

Businesses produce products or services. To sell their products or service, price is the main factor. Ss if you and I had widget factories, and I paid my employees what they were worth, and you overpaid all your employees, I'm going to steal all of your customers and put you out of business, because I can sell my widgets two dollars less than you can.

Which is why we need Democrats running the government and policy again. Unions have been broken and the greatest generation died so there is no one else to protect the non rich.

Then why didn't DumBama and the rest of the crooks bring back unions when they had the chance? Go ahead, bring back unions. It will only have the same result it did as last time, and that is businesses moving out of the country or otherwise investing in automation.

That's happening regardless. If you're so interested in saving American jobs then why don't you take a pay cut?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The intelligent are????

Okay, so let's say I'm a rich guy, and I'm offering you (or anybody else) a billion dollars to raise the temperature of the earth by four degrees, how would you do it? Do you really think you could do it?

Where is this on the scale between reality and blowing fantasy bubbles out of your butt?

Oh, so you can't answer either. How surprising.

They have for decades by keeping wages artificially low.

Really, do explain. What policies have the Republicans administered that had anything to do with what a private business pays their employees.

You worked multiple jobs because your employer didn't pay you a livable wage.

At times yes, at other times, no, I just got a second job to get ahead. This is the horse and carrot theory. If you feed a horse carrots, you're not going to get the work out of him as you can dangling a carrot in front of a horse.

As liberalism progressed, less and less people wanted to pull the cart. They just went to government for their daily allowance of carrots. Then complain that they aren't getting enough.

I'm only left in I feel that employees are a businesses greatest asset. The fact is that business owners and investors are grossly over-paid.

No, business people and investors don't get paid. They create their own money.

Of course, non-rich people can do the same, it's just they'd rater work for somebody else and bitch instead. But anybody not happy with the wage they make are welcome to open their own business and pay their workers whatever they like.

Businesses produce products or services. To sell their products or service, price is the main factor. Ss if you and I had widget factories, and I paid my employees what they were worth, and you overpaid all your employees, I'm going to steal all of your customers and put you out of business, because I can sell my widgets two dollars less than you can.

Which is why we need Democrats running the government and policy again. Unions have been broken and the greatest generation died so there is no one else to protect the non rich.

Then why didn't DumBama and the rest of the crooks bring back unions when they had the chance? Go ahead, bring back unions. It will only have the same result it did as last time, and that is businesses moving out of the country or otherwise investing in automation.

That's happening regardless. If you're so interested in saving American jobs then why don't you take a pay cut?

Yes it is happening, but will happen even faster than it is now if that's what you want. How would me taking a pay cut save an American job? If you want to save American jobs, support Republicans and their quest to eliminate illegals and build a wall so they stop coming here and taking American jobs.

 

[Flopper]

When it comes to climate change the overwhelming belief is that it is real. Do you really not know this?

Nobody questions that the climate changes. We have had ice ages, and tropical periods. The question is whether Man is affecting climate, and if there is any man made "fix". All the solutions are more taxes, and fees on energy, and anything that uses energy. It is a government money grab.

The most compelling evidence that climate change we see happening is not natural is the time factor of change and the concurrence of different scientific disciplines.

Natural global changes in climate takes time and lots of it. This's why the changes we are seeing today are so disturbing. The polar ice caps have melted faster in last 20 years than in the last 10,000 years. CO2 levels have been relatively constant for millions of years until the 20th century. In less than a century they have risen to the highest level in 15 million years. Ocean temperatures are rising faster than anytime in last 10,000 years. Changes occurring this fast are not natural and point strongly to human activity.

Discoveries by biologists, paleontologists, geologists, and oceanologists, have confirmed the work of climatologist. When we see evidence of global warming we should have confirmation which is exactly what the science community has given us.

 

[HappyJoy]

When it comes to climate change the overwhelming belief is that it is real. Do you really not know this?

Nobody questions that the climate changes. We have had ice ages, and tropical periods. The question is whether Man is affecting climate, and if there is any man made "fix". All the solutions are more taxes, and fees on energy, and anything that uses energy. It is a government money grab.

The most compelling evidence that climate change we see happening is not natural is the time factor of change and the concurrence of different scientific disciplines.

Natural global changes in climate takes time and lots of it. This's why the changes we are seeing today are so disturbing. The polar ice caps have melted faster in last 20 years than in the last 10,000 years. CO2 levels have been relatively constant for millions of years until the 20th century. In less than a century they have risen to the highest level in 15 million years. Ocean temperatures are rising faster than anytime in last 10,000 years. Changes occurring this fast are not natural and point strongly to human activity.

Discoveries by biologists, paleontologists, geologists, and oceanologists, have confirmed the work of climatologist. When we see evidence of global warming we should have confirmation which is exactly what the science community has given us.

Yeah, but it was 75 in Cleveland.

 

[Flopper]

Not on Fox Rush Etc LOL. Just Google evidence oceans are warming...
First evidence of surprising ocean warming around Galápagos corals ...
Science Daily › releases › 2018/02
Feb 21, 2018 · A new analysis of the natural temperature archives stored in coral reefs shows the ocean around the Galápagos ...
New Evidence on Warming Ocean | NOAA Climate.gov
NOAA Climate.gov › featured-images
Jul 28, 2010 · Recent studies show the world's ocean is heating up as it absorbs most of the extra heat being added to the climate ...
Our Globally Changing Climate - Climate Science Special Report
GlobalChange.gov › science2017 › chapter
Evidence for a changing climate abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans. Thousands of studies conducted ...

Then why aren't there more hurricanes as the GW people predicted years ago?

Where do you goofs get this belief that the earth is constant? The water stays the same temperature, the air stays at the same temperature, the ground stays at the same temperature? And if anything drifts away from what you consider normal, it must be global warming.

The earth (and climate) have been changing since God made the place. Nothing is constant. It was changing 10,000 years ago and it will continue to change 10,000 years from now. There is nothing you can do to control it.

That's your opinion which is not shared by 70% of all Americans, 90% of all scientist, 97% of all climatologist.

Every time this discussion comes up, I drift away to a classroom about 100 years or so from today. The teacher tells her students that back in the early 2000's, people thought they could control the climate. The kids burst out in laughter the way we did when our teacher told us that people years ago thought the earth was flat, and if you walk too far, you'll fall off.

It seems pretty unlikely that children in a hundred years would be laughing at our failure to control global warming. I think the question that kids are going to be asking is why we did so little when we knew so much.

And what do we know? We know climate and temperatures change. I think one of the things they'll be laughing at is that we believe that never happened until the industrial age.

Climatologist are not concerned about the fact we have global climate change. Climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years. It is the rate of that change that is disturbing.

 

[Flopper]

This is different. People are being forced to buy something that has a twenty year payback. They aren't doing anything wrong, yet are penalized to buy solar panel systems. It only makes sense if you can afford it, and are going to stay in the home for more than twenty years, which most people don't do.

They were forced several times to buy higher cost construction to lessen damage due to earthquakes which was a lot more expense, had no estimated payback, and was met with more opposition than adding solar panels.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When it comes to climate change the overwhelming belief is that it is real. Do you really not know this?

Nobody questions that the climate changes. We have had ice ages, and tropical periods. The question is whether Man is affecting climate, and if there is any man made "fix". All the solutions are more taxes, and fees on energy, and anything that uses energy. It is a government money grab.

The most compelling evidence that climate change we see happening is not natural is the time factor of change and the concurrence of different scientific disciplines.

Natural global changes in climate takes time and lots of it. This's why the changes we are seeing today are so disturbing. The polar ice caps have melted faster in last 20 years than in the last 10,000 years. CO2 levels have been relatively constant for millions of years until the 20th century. In less than a century they have risen to the highest level in 15 million years. Ocean temperatures are rising faster than anytime in last 10,000 years. Changes occurring this fast are not natural and point strongly to human activity.

Discoveries by biologists, paleontologists, geologists, and oceanologists, have confirmed the work of climatologist. When we see evidence of global warming we should have confirmation which is exactly what the science community has given us.

Well I never bought this thousands of years crap. It's just estimations. We've only been keeping temperature records for about 200 years.

Back in the 70's, the newest fright was global cooling. That's right, we were headed back to the ice age as far as these so-called experts were concerned.

I keep a folder for sites I frequently discuss, so I'm going to post some recent predictions of global warming I kept that you might find interesting if not humorous:

DAVID ROSE: The mini ice age starts here | Daily Mail Online

And That’s the Way It Was: In 1972, Cronkite Warned of ‘New Ice Age’

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

FLASHBACK: ABC News Warns NYC Will Be Under Water by 2015 Due to Global Warming and Polar Bears Will Fall From Sky

You ask, I provide. November 2nd, 1922. Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They have for decades by keeping wages artificially low.

Really, do explain. What policies have the Republicans administered that had anything to do with what a private business pays their employees.

You worked multiple jobs because your employer didn't pay you a livable wage.

At times yes, at other times, no, I just got a second job to get ahead. This is the horse and carrot theory. If you feed a horse carrots, you're not going to get the work out of him as you can dangling a carrot in front of a horse.

As liberalism progressed, less and less people wanted to pull the cart. They just went to government for their daily allowance of carrots. Then complain that they aren't getting enough.

I'm only left in I feel that employees are a businesses greatest asset. The fact is that business owners and investors are grossly over-paid.

No, business people and investors don't get paid. They create their own money.

Of course, non-rich people can do the same, it's just they'd rater work for somebody else and bitch instead. But anybody not happy with the wage they make are welcome to open their own business and pay their workers whatever they like.

Businesses produce products or services. To sell their products or service, price is the main factor. Ss if you and I had widget factories, and I paid my employees what they were worth, and you overpaid all your employees, I'm going to steal all of your customers and put you out of business, because I can sell my widgets two dollars less than you can.

Don't be obtuse. They have blocked a living wage and have broken the unions etc etc. Anything to save their greedy idiot brainwashing Mega rich Heroes and Masters, Super Dupe.

They have blocked a living wage

Yes, they've blocked lots of stupid liberal schemes.

and have broken the unions

Good. Unions suck.