Welcome to /c/California, an online haven that brings to life the unrivaled diversity and vibrancy of California! This engaging community offers a virtual exploration of the Golden State, taking you from the stunning Pacific coastline to the rugged Sierra Nevada, and every town, city, and landmark in between. Discover California's world-class wineries, stunning national parks, innovative tech scene, robust agricultural heartland, and culturally diverse metropolises.
Discussions span a wide range of topics—from travel tips and restaurant recommendations to local politics and environmental issues. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or planning your dream visit, /c/California is your one-stop place to share experiences, ask questions, and celebrate all the things that make California truly unique.
Related Communities:
Nearby Communities:
Because Newsom is a traitor who is more concerned with protecting the profits of the utility monopolies. When will people realize that we cannot trust these Corporatist Democrats? They merely wear the disguise of leftism to trick you into voting for them. Still better than MAGA, but not by much
I think the issue of too much solar is real, but I don’t think the answer is to punish people willing to invest in better energy production.
I also don’t think that it’s fair to charge people that don’t have solar more.
Is the answer increased baseline/transmission costs? Or maybe energy generation isnt profitable and should be handled like roads?
Why is too much solar real? I've never understood how too much consumer solar generation can be a bad thing for anyone or anything other than utility companies’ profits. The financial incentives that used to exist meant people generating more power than they needed could make a tidy profit by selling it back to the grid. I can see how that might have been unsustainable in the long term, but that’s irrelevant now that the subsidies have essentially been eliminated.
I have absolutely no sympathy for utility companies, especially here in CA, since all the ones I can think of are felonious companies responsible for countless deaths due to their terrible wildfire mitigation strategies and lack of investment in sustainability.
Because the business model is designed around everyone paying the utility for consumption of energy when the should be paying for the availability of a service.
When 50% of the people no longer pay, it’s not like the utility can deal with that. They still have poles to maintain and generation plants sized for peak load.
To fix this we would need to pay a baseline service fee for the size of the panel. A home might have a 200 amp panel while a laundromat might have something much larger.
Then, some nerds would need to figure out how to charge for consumption.
But like I said, it’s not designed like this today. It’s designed around consumption only.
Also because if more electricity goes in than comes out things break.
Ahh I see what you're saying, thanks for the explanation.
Because a solar home (without batteries) is producing excessive power during parts of the day, relying on the grid to accept it, while using power from the grid the rest of the day. While those times may balance, you’re still relying on that power grid for both. That’s hugely expensive infrastructure that you’re no longer paying for. If something happens to your solar, your home can still use grid power: that’s hugely expensive infrastructure for “just in case” that you’re no longer paying for
PG&E needs to be broken up and turned into small regional utilities owned by the communities they represent.
building too much solar infrastructure wouldn't be a problem if utility companies were owned by the government