CA's new tax on solar
- Thread starter G20
- Start date
timselectric
If I can do it, you can do it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 19,076
Lmao
Last year I put in a radiant barrier in one wing of my house as an experiment. I also pulled up all the insulation and fire caulked every seam, wiring access or opening to stop any airflow between the living spaces and attic. I then put in R50 Rockwool insulation which is very dense, further blocking convective currents. I also made improvements to my A/C cooling system to further lower electrical consumption.
This year was hotter than last year. With all the above changes, my electrical consumption for the same summer months was significantly lower than the previous year while my electric bills were significantly higher for the same summer month-2-month comparison.
Going "$$$_green_$$$" in CA is getting increasingly expensive.
Zwy
Emperor Of Solar
Just like Prohibition, there will be plenty of people who will get around government socialism. In the case of Prohibition, people went underground. Same will happen with excessive taxation.
Many people will simply "reduce their income".
Those parasites who only earned an income off the backs of the working class by government salaries have absolutely no idea how things work in the real world.
The Giant Sucking Sound leaving CA is getting louder.
hwy17
Anti-Solar Enthusiast
California's lack of substantial base charges is a problem and it distorts our volumetric rates, unfairly penalizing high consumption.
Unfortunately it's difficult now to implement realistic flat rate base charges without creating politically problematic losers - the proverbial little old lady on a fixed income with $40 bill who has basically received subsidized service due to volumetric rate distortion but who would be financially ruined by a more realistic base charge.
Since a flat rate is unworkable, an income based base charge is the best way forward.
Unfortunately it's difficult now to implement realistic flat rate base charges without creating politically problematic losers - the proverbial little old lady on a fixed income with $40 bill who has basically received subsidized service due to volumetric rate distortion but who would be financially ruined by a more realistic base charge.
Since a flat rate is unworkable, an income based base charge is the best way forward.
n2aws
Solar Addict
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2022
- Messages
- 685
"Income based" anything, is a non-starter, honestly. You're essentially penalizing people for striving to improve their situation, and rewarding those who don't. I'll pass. flat rates don't work, consumption based rates do. you use more, you pay more. you use less, you pay less.
hwy17
Anti-Solar Enthusiast
California has had income based discounts on electric charges for over 30 years. Do you oppose those as well and do you oppose the same sort of programs in your region? Do you oppose the federal LIHEAP energy assistance? Do you oppose income based progressive taxation schemes?
n2aws
Solar Addict
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2022
- Messages
- 685
pretty much, yes to all of these.
hwy17
Anti-Solar Enthusiast
Well at least you're consistent. Just a difference of opinion then.
n2aws
Solar Addict
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2022
- Messages
- 685
Agreed, and differences of opinion are ok (and I'd say, even encouraged which isn't a popular opinion these days)
Yes
timselectric
If I can do it, you can do it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 19,076
Me too.
I figured that was coming, thats why I kept my responses apolitical
Placing a monthly SIN-TAX based on the size of your solar system is counter productive to the voluntary adoption of "green" energy.
timselectric
If I can do it, you can do it.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 19,076
I'm confused.
But that's not out of the ordinary. lol
But that's not out of the ordinary. lol
