Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > newAndCurious888 > My Blog |
|
The cause of your high electric bills  Blue State Blue State Blue State Blue State (I sense a trend) Blue State Blue State Blue State Red State (Finally) Blue State (Back on the trend) Blue State Blue State (why is there 11 in the top 10?)  Blue State (Really?) Red State (That is better) Red State Red State Red State Red State Red State Red State Red State Red State Red State (Again, 11. Journalism really is dead nowadays) This is not a coincidence. It is by design. |
|||
10/6/2023 12:53 am |
Trump 47
| ||
|
Uhmmm, no it isn't by design. Well, not the design you're thinking about anyway. As a nuclear engineer, we had to study this stuff. First, look at geography of the states in question. Look at their weather. Look at there power sources. Look at who OWNS the power sources. Look at their population centers and density. Look at their histories of power and who built them. Look at their distribution networks. Look at the states that aren't on the list, their population centers, their geography, etc.... Look at the resilience of their power networks (think TX). Most times, you get what you pay for. Cheap power means more problems not related to capacity. If the federal government built their power systems for other reasons or to upgrade the area so that people would move there, then their power costs less. You are also just looking a part of the charge for electrical power. This does not include distribution, new power sources needed to feed the growing population, regulatory fees, etc..... Also look at the environmental degradation in the state. Plus, the cost in a population center is VERY much different and of different quality than a rural area. How were these averages taken? How was power quality accounted for? What sources were there for the data. So again, your knowledge does not allow you to understand the underlying complex reasons for these costs. A political party does not have control of the lever of power costs. The government is there to do its regulatory thing, but what drives the cost of electrical power in the US? Fuel costs. Period. 75% of the cost is for fuel. Well, except for nuclear power, but that's a different story and why some of the cheap states are there. Why would you think this way? Corporations would suck as corporations if they allowed a political party to set their prices. Not government but a political party. Sheer willful ignorance.
| ||
10/6/2023 3:38 am |
OH, you mean like the USPS, and how EFFICIENTLY the Federal Government runs THAT "CORPORATION"? I think they should make 'nuclear engineers' (and ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES that make decisions on Capitol Hill) study MODERN Economics as a REQUIREMENT for the jobs. As Milton Friedman said "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." Not to mention that the cost of things the Federal Government meddles in SKYROCKETS to new heights not long after they take it over! Think "STUDENT LOANS" when pondering this last statement, and how that smooth talking Maxine Waters called heads of the Banking industry into congress to get an explanation as to WHY student loans were so 'out of control'. Calling on each one of the Bank executives SHE dragged into the House Chamber, and asking why and what they intended to do about it, she was met with the same answer from EACH CEO, "UM, we got out of the 'Student Loan' business when the Federal Government took it over, Miss Chairwoman, in 2010, so there's nothing I can do about what's happened." Uncle Sam has proved a poor accountant, and this is just a SMALL example of the inept actions of Government meddling in affairs that it's NOT set up to overtake. WHY, one sane individual might ask? Well, because they don't HAVE to be FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE for their actions, they just RAISE taxes if they need more money (read the stories of the different departments of the Federal Bureaucracy are IMPLORED by higher ups to willfully spend ever DIME of their Fiscal budget to the point of WASTE, at the end of the year so that they can ask for an increase for the following year's budget, and READ ABOUT how and what that WASTE is spent on...TOO MANY CROOKS in Politics in this Nation to leave ANY major project in the hands of the Federal Government to run/handle...
| ||
|
But wait.. how are they gonna run to those cheap..lol ..evs
| ||
|
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand."/COLOR] I'm skeptical it would take that long ..... Perhaps Friedman was an optimist. Make Women Female Again
| ||
|
OH, you mean like the USPS, and how EFFICIENTLY the Federal Government runs THAT "CORPORATION"? I think they should make 'nuclear engineers' (and ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES that make decisions on Capitol Hill) study MODERN Economics as a REQUIREMENT for the jobs. As Milton Friedman said "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." Not to mention that the cost of things the Federal Government meddles in SKYROCKETS to new heights not long after they take it over! Think "STUDENT LOANS" when pondering this last statement, and how that smooth talking Maxine Waters called heads of the Banking industry into congress to get an explanation as to WHY student loans were so 'out of control'. Calling on each one of the Bank executives SHE dragged into the House Chamber, and asking why and what they intended to do about it, she was met with the same answer from EACH CEO, "UM, we got out of the 'Student Loan' business when the Federal Government took it over, Miss Chairwoman, in 2010, so there's nothing I can do about what's happened." Uncle Sam has proved a poor accountant, and this is just a SMALL example of the inept actions of Government meddling in affairs that it's NOT set up to overtake. WHY, one sane individual might ask? Well, because they don't HAVE to be FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE for their actions, they just RAISE taxes if they need more money (read the stories of the different departments of the Federal Bureaucracy are IMPLORED by higher ups to willfully spend ever DIME of their Fiscal budget to the point of WASTE, at the end of the year so that they can ask for an increase for the following year's budget, and READ ABOUT how and what that WASTE is spent on...TOO MANY CROOKS in Politics in this Nation to leave ANY major project in the hands of the Federal Government to run/handle... USPS? What does that have to do with what I am talking about. I actually think we agree here, but you can't see that. The mandate of the postal service back when they were civil servants under Franklin was to enable mail delivery TO EVERY ADDRESS IN THE US. UPS and FedEx don't have that mandate. That's why they can be cheaper but they don't service the hard and expensive addresses. When USPS became a quadi-corporation (directly from Milton's theories), they had to cover their costs. A letter can take anywhere from 5 cents to deliver to 400$. USPS has to deliver all the mail it gets everywhere. UPS and FedEx do not. They only do the easy and cheap ones. So USPS is out competed easily. The place where USPS kills itself is fully funding their retirement system. No corporation has to. But USPS does. That's another topic. We are talking about power costs. So, I don't see your connections? Power companies are not owned by the government - well, most have no connection but some have a connection. The Bonneville and Tennessee Valley authorities for example. Their original aim was to reduce flooding. They built dams. Those dams generated power. There were no capital costs to the power company so they could sell the power cheaply. High head and low head dams are all over those two regions and why those states are on the lowest cost lists. Because of the Authorities. Those state's power are subsidized by our tax money. Sorry, that's the way it is. Those power companies are not owned by the federal government but the government acts as a middle man between the owner of the power source and the power company that sells the power to the public. The federal government does own some of the power sources like the larger dams, but most like nuclear power plant in those areas are owned by corporations. So, your comment has nothing to do with what I said. I was stating that power companies are not owned by the government so whether you are in a blue state or red state (what happened to just the united states?), the government does not directly cause high or low prices. Other factors do. Cost of fuel is the overwhelming cost of power - well, the numbers that were quoted which are about 75% of your total power bills. Distribution, regulations, new power sources, etc..... Please try again to insult my profession. Either do it directly or talk about power cost. Also remember, milton was a civil servant. Just to make a broad stroke that we are just horrible folks shows that your just willfully ignorant. I do everything I can to achieve my task at the lowest cost. Is there bullshit in my job? Yes. I am sorry you do not understand that and find that offending to you. Look at any corporation (and I have worked for them too), they waste more money than the government does. It just appears you don't know what your talking about. Again, this is my profession. I have plenty of post high school education in these areas. Of course, that makes me an expert and you cannot appreciate experts because Trump knows everything.
| ||
|
But wait.. how are they gonna run to those cheap..lol ..evs
| ||
|
More power plants. How would you do it? I'd choose nuclear, but I know more about power than you do. I hate to agree with you on anything LOL BUT you are correct on the only way to go is nuclear power plants.....don't let it go to your ass   
| ||
10/6/2023 1:06 pm |
So, what I had to say was SO below 'your highness's' sensibiliities that you just think I think it sucks? Typical mentality of an ELITIST, and one TIED directly to the Federal Government (and my comment had NOTHING to do with TRUMP, 'your highness', much to your chagrin). You said, and i quote;"The government is there to do its regulatory thing, but what drives the cost of electrical power in the US? Fuel costs. Period. 75% of the cost is for fuel. Well, except for nuclear power, but that's a different story and why some of the cheap states are there." end QUOTE. So, 'your highness, if the Federal Government controls the price of, say, natural gas, including the means to extract it from where it is KNOWN to be accessible, then they can and DO drive the cost of electrical power in the US, even in YOUR profession, 'your highness', as the control the means of production, selling , and so forth of plutonium and thereby the supply and who can use it (in that case, not a HUGE problem, as the SAFETY concerns for that fuel are FAR ABOVE most folks pay grade, and who would want that to get into the wrong hands, say, like IRAN). I said what I said based on the Federal Government's track record of misappropriations of funds using the examples of the ALWAYS BROKE Post Office, the Student Loan fiasco, and ENCOURAGING over spending/wasteful spending throughout the departments of the Federal Government as an examples of Government over reach. They control the cost (through regulations) of Natural gas and oil (and of coal, when it was an alternative fuel for electrical production) and the gas and oil industries receive LESS for their fuels from the Electrical producing companies then they get from 'Harry Homeowner', OH YEAH, and let's NOT FORGET, we have to pay a FEDERAL TAX on the fuel we purchase for home use for heat, light, or cooking, on every MONTHLY bill. A major Natural Gas company here on the East coast asked the Federal Government for a RATE DECREASE, a LOWERING of the cost of their fuel to the consumers that utilize their fuel, and were turned down, the Government wouldn't allow them to reduce their costs to homeowners, so DON'T tell ME, 'your highness' that they don't 'directly cause high or low prices'. I wouldn't EXPECT someone of your ENORMOUS STATURE of HIERARCHY to have all the information about everything, after all, I just a willfully ignorant nobody that doesn't know what I'm talking about, right? "“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”...have a GLORIOUS day, 'your highness'.
| ||
|
You and old jimmy cartier..... I hate to agree with you on anything LOL BUT you are correct on the only way to go is nuclear power plants.....don't let it go to your ass Thank you for agreeing with me. I could spend 20,000 words on why nuclear and not anything else. But, I am the dreaded expert..... fucking know-it-all experts. They don't live in the real world. Or so I've been accused......
| ||
|
So, what I had to say was SO below 'your highness's' sensibiliities that you just think I think it sucks? Typical mentality of an ELITIST, and one TIED directly to the Federal Government (and my comment had NOTHING to do with TRUMP, 'your highness', much to your chagrin). You said, and i quote;"The government is there to do its regulatory thing, but what drives the cost of electrical power in the US? Fuel costs. Period. 75% of the cost is for fuel. Well, except for nuclear power, but that's a different story and why some of the cheap states are there." end QUOTE. So, 'your highness, if the Federal Government controls the price of, say, natural gas, including the means to extract it from where it is KNOWN to be accessible, then they can and DO drive the cost of electrical power in the US, even in YOUR profession, 'your highness', as the control the means of production, selling , and so forth of plutonium and thereby the supply and who can use it (in that case, not a HUGE problem, as the SAFETY concerns for that fuel are FAR ABOVE most folks pay grade, and who would want that to get into the wrong hands, say, like IRAN). I said what I said based on the Federal Government's track record of misappropriations of funds using the examples of the ALWAYS BROKE Post Office, the Student Loan fiasco, and ENCOURAGING over spending/wasteful spending throughout the departments of the Federal Government as an examples of Government over reach. They control the cost (through regulations) of Natural gas and oil (and of coal, when it was an alternative fuel for electrical production) and the gas and oil industries receive LESS for their fuels from the Electrical producing companies then they get from 'Harry Homeowner', OH YEAH, and let's NOT FORGET, we have to pay a FEDERAL TAX on the fuel we purchase for home use for heat, light, or cooking, on every MONTHLY bill. A major Natural Gas company here on the East coast asked the Federal Government for a RATE DECREASE, a LOWERING of the cost of their fuel to the consumers that utilize their fuel, and were turned down, the Government wouldn't allow them to reduce their costs to homeowners, so DON'T tell ME, 'your highness' that they don't 'directly cause high or low prices'. I wouldn't EXPECT someone of your ENORMOUS STATURE of HIERARCHY to have all the information about everything, after all, I just a willfully ignorant nobody that doesn't know what I'm talking about, right? "“I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.”...have a GLORIOUS day, 'your highness'. What data do you have that fuel prices are controlled by the federal government? Your argument does not show that. What reasoning you use is just plain wrong. I NEVER said government controls fuel prices. Why would I? Prices are not controlled by the government. Well, not our government anyway. Your argument has so many holes in it. Here we go! Your understanding of how fuel is controlled by the market is just wrong. The federal government can control where NEW wells are drilled on federal land (with years long lead time before that fuel reaches a market) but not where drilling is occurring (with a lead time of weeks and already approve if federal lands are involved - of course, if federal land is NOT involved - most of the wells, then the federal government simply ISN'T involved). The number of new wells on federal land is a drop in the bucket of existing wells. The price is not controlled by the federal government. Plain and simple. You argument (and I TRUELY appreciate you putting forward an argument!!!l) does not comport to the facts. The federal government has a minor, if not inconsequential, influence on fuel prices. Except for nuclear fuel which must be purchased from a quasi-government corporation. However, in nuclear power, fuel prices are not the main driver of cost (another discussion for another time). BTW, plutonium is not used in nuclear power except in 1 reactor in the US. 22 in France. A few in other counties. Not a high level of usage around the world. So, your conclusion isn't supported by the data. Yes, plutonium is controlled by federal governments around the world, but again, the use of plutonium isn't 0.01% the cost of nuclear fuel which is 0.1% the cost of nuclear power. So, you're wrong again. Another fact, Iran is mot enriching plutonium but uranium. I am not sure where you get your data, but it's simply wrong. I understand that a 5 sec Google search won't help here, but I've read the journal articles, I understand the math, I understand the technical aspects of this. You are simply wrong. I can build a nuclear gadget with uranium and it will be very effective. I did it in high school. I couldn't get the SNM and that's why I only got 99/100 points on the paper. You also fell into the fallacy of anecdotes. The USPS might be broken at certain levels, but all the federal government does it appoint its CEO. The rules are set by congress. The USPS is between a rock and a hard place. They are very successful in certain adpects of what they do. That's the problem with a QUASI-GOVERNMEMT corporation. Making it a corporation would make it just like UPS or FedEx. If you live in a place where it cost 400$ to deliver a letter. You'll NEVER get mail. But USPS can spread that cost around, guarantee delivery to all addresses and lose money. I'll ask you a question. Can you get a sheet of paper with sometning written on it from point A to point B in the US for 0.66$ through UPS or FedEx? No. Maybe for 10 times that amount. So, your conclusion that USPS is broken is just wrong. Broken says that no mail is delivered. I got mail today. I'll get mail tomorrow. Doesn't appear to be broken to me. Is it efficient? No, but what is. UPS and FedEx are certainly not! This then calls into question your conclusion that the US government is broken as your example is just wrong. I got paid last week. We still have astronauts on the ISS. Numerous corporations are designing space vehicles to get to the moon and other plants. NASA isn't broken. My mother got her social security check last month. A section of the border wall is being built even through the current administration disagrees with it, has shown its a waste of money, etc... but congress said the administrative branch MUST spend that money on the wall, so it's being spent as appropriated. Soldiers are getting paid and have the proper equipment. Research is being conducted on new batteries. Regulations are being enforced. Planes are not falling out of the sky or running into each other. What is your definition of broken? Like I said before, is there waste in government? Yes. Is there waste in private industry? Yes and WAY more than the public sector. The data simple does not support your conclusions. The student loan "fiasco". How is it a fiasco? Student loans went from the predatory private sector to the public sector. Again, driven by CONGRESS and not the administrative branch. Rhey just do what they are ytoldvyo do by congress for a dpecific amoint of money. Interest rates are lower than in the private sector. Are you blaming the government that a person wanted to teach children, got 100,000$ worth of student loans and makes 40,000$ per year as a teacher? God damn Biden. I believe Biden or Trump had nothing to do with that. Look in the mirror for who to blame. BTW, an engineer and other professional post graduate students do not have an issue paying back their loans. Take a deep dive into the data. It is enlightening what we value as a society. When I went to college, a semester cost 750$ (2000$ in today's money). Yet at my school today, tuition is 25,000$. What the fuck? Well, it's the I got mine, FUCK YOU mentality. States stopped picking up the tab for college. Even though it is the best investment in government (and anywhere else) 6 to 1 on average. You decided not to pay taxes as they were too high. That's why we have a student loan crisis. Government spending? Not even sure what the fuck you are talking about??? You apparently have no clue how your government works. Let me educate you. Follow along in the constitution. The house starts a revenue bill (now called an appropriation bill). A subcommittee looks at what they want that agency to do. They then set out the spending plan for that administrative secretary and it's employees. The subcommittee votes to advance or kill it. If it advances, the speaker (and why who is important) allows discussions and amendments etc.... the final bill is brought to a vote on the house floor. If it passes it goes to the senate. The same process occurs there. If it passes and is the same as the house, it goes to the president. If a different bill passes, the house and senate hammer it out until both chambers pass the same bill. Then it goes to the president. They either sign it, veto it, or do nothing. Usually the ways the bills are written, if the president does nothing, it is signed. So, a cabinet secretary now has money to spend. If they are smart, they already worked with congress and can start Oct 1 spending that money on what congress wants them to do. If the secretary is incompetent, then they have to figure out how to spend that money on what congress wants them to do and are behind. Here is apparently a little know fact. You give the administrative branch 100$ to spend on X task. They have to spend 100$ on X task. Not 99$ and not 101$. There are no provisions to "give back money". If the administrative branch can do the task for 80$, they now have 20$ to spend to anticipate next year's tasks. We just don't "go out and spend it on anything". Thats illegal. Your knowledge on how your government works is quite disturbing. By the way. Government over reach does not mean what you think it means. It has nothing to do with spending but with regulation. So, again, you got that wrong. I am not sure you understand regulation either. The government does not regulate fuel. Oil, coal, and nat gas prices are not set by the government. If you want to use say coal or nuclear power, your plant and emissions must meet certain regulations. That again, does not control the price (except for nuclear and most large hydro, but again, another discussion for another time). Most of the price is controlled by the world market of fossil fuels. Again, 75% of the cost of power is controlled by the fuel cost. Biden does not have a lever to jump prices or lower prices. Yes, the government does tax the fuel. However, that cost is just passed along to the consumer. Is this the way to do things? No. It's regressive. But these taxes do not control the price. Regulations do not control the price either. That cost is also just passed along to the consumer. I will also say that profits of corporations do not control the price but they are a MUCH larger part of the total cost then regulation and taxes combined by an order of magnitude but these are all a fraction of the 25% that is not controlled by the cost of the fuel. You are mixing up the federal government and the state utilities board. A fuel company did not, cannot ask the federal government to lower its cost to the consumer. Which federal agency would they ask? FERC? They just regulate pipelines and not consumers. So again, you got that wrong. Your condescension towards me is simply uncalled for. Thank you. Very little of what you said was true or your interruption of the data was just wrong. I have point by pointvshowed you that. I believed I used the term willfully ignorant correctly as most of this data is easily obtained and you didn't. That's the willful part. On a positive note, I appreciate you trying to make an argument. You fell into a few logical fallacies and either didn't get the data right or didn't understand how to interpret the data. I am sorry about that. I hope I have educated you in a respectful manner and would appreciate the same treatment from you in the future.
| ||
|
Again. Jimmy Carter was a navy nuke. I have a PhD. A world of difference. I have knowledge and he can run a boat. Thank you for agreeing with me. I could spend 20,000 words on why nuclear and not anything else. But, I am the dreaded expert..... fucking know-it-all experts. They don't live in the real world. Or so I've been accused...... politicians and government employees are like dirty diapers and need to be changed out often for the same reason.... most could care less that you have a phd or a ged. And it does not take a dreaded expert..... fucking know-it-all expert to know nuclear is the only way for the foreseeable future.
|
 |
 |
 |
| Become a member to comment on this blog | ||
 |
×
×