Comments on: Proposition 7: Big Solar’s Baby?

By: Carolina

Carolina — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 23:55:45 +0000

Prop. 7 will require that by 2025 50% of all the electricity in the state comes from renewable sources like solar and wind.
Prop. 7 does not raise taxes or issue any bonds and includes a consumer protection clause that ensures your bill will never go up more than 3% by 2025. Prop. 7 will also create 370,000 high wage construction jobs right here in California.
Over 40% of global warming pollution comes from electricity generation and by voting Yes on Prop. 7 we can do something real about global warming by requiring the Big Utility Companies to use more clean renewable energy.

By: The Sietch Blog » California’s Renewable Energy Propositions 7 And 10 Hotly Contested

Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:54:03 +0000

[...] Proposition 7, or the California Solar and Clean Energy Initiative, would dramatically beef up California’s renewable energy standards. It would require all the state’s utilities to get at least half their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. In order to facilitate this, the measure would also speed up the permit process for large renewable power plants and eliminate caps on penalties for utilities who do not comply. [...]

By: Kelly

Kelly — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:57:09 +0000

It’s my understanding that it will take many more years for rooftop solar to become prevalent enough to meet the urgency of climate change, cost competitive enough for consumers to adopt wide spread, and in demand enough for corporate retail sellers of electricity to actually pay consumers for the excess energy they provide back to the grid. They currently credit accounts but will pay nothing back.

It’s also my understanding that rather than “no idea”, experts have decided using renewable energy will drive down electricity costs in the long run. The only cost for these technologies is the capture aspect of the energy, whether that be wind, solar, geothermal, etc. With these technologies developing in new more efficient and inexpensive ways and without having to pay for a fossil fuel resource, costs for rate-payers will lessen over time and in my opinion, stabilize.

PG&E and it’s partners in opposition recognize that natural gas prices are volatile right now. That’s currently the price that sets the entire market referent price and determines rates and increases. I’d rather pay a rate increase I know would decline and stabilize over time rather than one that is volatile and will rise with the increased scarcity of fossil fuels. I also think we’ve procrastinated too long on switching to renewables, whether intentionally or not, and it’s high time we make the change. Climate scientists agree if we can’t address this global warming problem in the next decade, we’re in for serious consequences.

Might I remind everyone that we get nearly all of our water from slow melting snowpack? We’re facing serious problems in the near future when temperatures rise and water is just the beginning.

I recommend a vote of YES. Photovoltaics and small renewable projects aren’t going anywhere. It’s the large coal and natural gas plants we need to replace.