Kasich vs SB221 « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics

Kasich vs SB221

[118 posts] [18 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 11 months ago by Red Sun Rising
Latest reply from rus

Tags:

12…6 Next »

Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Oh Goodie. Look at this transparent beauty Kasich commissioned to make his case to keep Ohio in the coal mining dark ages and clarify how he's corporate owned:
Major Highlights: The Effects of OhioÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Alternative Energy Portfolio
Standard Law on the State Economy
A Project of American Tradition Institute,Prepared by Beacon Hill Institute (Don't you just love the patriotism, the light, in these organization's titles? Excuse me while I gag.)

http://www.atinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/ATI_OH_RPS_Study_Quick_Findings.pdf

The complete study is here:
http://www.atinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/ATI_OH_RPS_study.pdf

Here's a bit about who issued that laughable document:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Beacon_Hill_Institute
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Tradition_Institute
This front of a "charity" has barely been in business for 2 years, and has already sewed the State of Colorado for their Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard.

Reeks like Rick Berman:

Get the Video Widget

Get the Video Widget

Get the Video Widget

In addition to the potential significant numbers of jobs that were lost when the 3C vision was killed, these new jobs might be thwarted if Kasick gets his way.
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2011/06/16/thousand-solar-jobs-coming-to-mansfield-area.html?sid=101

As if this assault wasn't enough, other things thwarting progress are energy company/distributor tariffs called non-by-passable charges in the 35% to 45% range- so if you pay to have renewable energy installed, the energy company still wants to charge you 35 to 45% of the bill for the energy going by your home that you are no longer using, just in case you might need to use it again someday, or on days your system might not produce enough. Nor does this state yet have feed-in tariffs to ensure you get paid competitive rates for over production of energy you share on the grid. Ohio Edison/First Energy is the worst and most of the smaller outlying energy brokers are not regulated by the PUC. Nope, only the big boys can profit from energy investment, heck with the little people trying to vote with their dollar. Now we have AEP attempting to do the same shenanigans:

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2011/06/15/aep-rate-proposal-a-blank-check-critic-says.html

I encountered a button recently that read: "I heart Ohio, even though my governor is a douchebag".

Posted 11 months ago #
Jimbo Jones
German Village
Login to Send PM

You might not like him, but Rick Berman makes some good points. People attack him because they don't like his message.

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Jimbo Jones wrote >>
You might not like him, but Rick Berman makes some good points. People attack him because they don't like his message.

What he makes is a lot of spin. The sole purpose of which is misinformation that engenders a culture of apathy and confusion and people making decisions that are not only against their best interests, they negatively impact everyone. We don't live on an island. We are a world.

Posted 11 months ago #
michaelcoyote
!seabus
Login to Send PM

I liked Berman's work on Big Blue Marble, but I was never a MacGyver fan.

Posted 11 months ago #
Snarf
Dystopia
Login to Send PM

Get the Video Widget

Posted 11 months ago #
Jimbo Jones
German Village
Login to Send PM

I do agree with his take on obesity not being a disease. At some point, people need to take accountability for being fat. We don't need the government telling us what not to eat. Use common sense.

Posted 11 months ago #
Jimbo Jones
German Village
Login to Send PM

I hope you don't seriously believe that the left does not have its own PR groups (or spin doctors, whatever term you prefer) trying to get their message out and divide us with misinformation.

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Jimbo Jones wrote >>
I do agree with his take on obesity not being a disease. At some point, people need to take accountability for being fat. We don't need the government telling us what not to eat. Use common sense.

We agree on the issue of people being responsible for their health. I have another thread to that effect. Can we please can we stay on topic, this is about the present administration's attempt to dismantle progress and options for those who want renewable energy options. Thank you :-)

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Jimbo Jones wrote >>
I hope you don't seriously believe that the left does not have its own PR groups (or spin doctors, whatever term you prefer) trying to get their message out and divide us with misinformation.

While I'm sure they exist, lets keep our eye on the ball for this issue.

Posted 11 months ago #
Jimbo Jones
German Village
Login to Send PM

I'm sorry. You're right about staying on topic. I don't like Kasich either.

Posted 11 months ago #
irishred
Clintonville
Login to Send PM

I'm with you on this. Whats going to be effective action to preserve our alt energy portfolio?

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Hmm. I wish I was an expert strategist on such a thing IrishRed. Ideas from people here are definitely welcome. I suspect Gramercy might have some good insight. There are a number of issues to address. My thoughts:

1) Get real people we can trust as our representatives. I think there are plans to oust Kasick already, but it needs to be a clean sweep of many more.

2) Inform as many people as possible about the source of spin doctors for this smarmy garbage so people don't buy the lies.

3) Revoke/repeal the laws that give corporations personhood.

4) Every single person who wants to see renewable energy be the source of energy we consume, and those in the renewable industry needs to organize and put some serious pressure on the PUC, the consumer's council, the present Governor and writing letters to the editor.

Jane Ann Morris wrote an interesting piece:
Ã¢â‚¬Å“HELP! IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢VE BEEN COLONIZED AND CANÃ¢â‚¬â„¢T GET UPÃ¢â‚¬Â¦.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Take a Lawyer and an Expert To a Hearing and Call Me In a Decade
http://www.thedailycrock.com/?p=580

Here is an excerpt with a plan:

"Here is one cluster of ideas for rewriting the Defining Law of corporations. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not a 3-point plan, and itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not the beginning of a twenty point plan Ã¢â‚¬â€ just some ideas to think about.

1. Prohibit corporations from owning stock in other corporations. Owning stock in other corporations enables corporations to control huge markets and shift responsibility, liability, resources, assets and taxes back and forth among parent corporations, subsidiaries and other members of their unholy families. By defining corporations in such a way to prohibit such ownership, much of the anti-trust regulatory law becomes unnecessary and superfluous.

2. Prohibit corporations from being able to choose when to go out of business (in legalese, no voluntary dissolution). This would prevent corporations from dissolving themselves when it came time to pay taxes, repay government loans, pay creditors, pay pensions, pay for health care, and pay for toxic cleanups.

3. Make stockholders liable for a corporationÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s debts. People who want to be stockholders would reallocate their resources to corporations that they knew something about, that werenÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t engaged in risky, toxic projects. (This would encourage local, sustainable businesses and healthy local economies. Imagine that.)

These three measures might seem Ã¢â‚¬Å“unrealisticÃ¢â‚¬Â to some, but it beats the heck out of a voluntary code of conduct, or a wasted decade at a regulatory agency. All three of these provisions were once common features of state corporation codes. No wonder corporate apologists prefer that we hang around in the regulatory agencies with our heads spinning with parts per million and habitat conservation plans.

These three measures were quite effective, which is why corporation lawyers worked so hard to get rid of them. But they address only a tiny portion of what needs to be done.

HereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s another cluster of ideas for ways to shape a democratic process that is about people. (The idea that corporations have Ã¢â‚¬Å“rightsÃ¢â‚¬Â would seem nonsensical to any but a colonized mind.)

1. No corporate participation in the democratic process. Democracy is for and about human beings. Corporations should be prohibited from paying for any political advertisements, making any campaign contributions, or seeking to influence the democratic process in any way.

2. Corporations have no constitutional rights.

A corporation is an artificial creation set up to serve a public need, not an independent entity with intrinsic Ã¢â‚¬Å“rights.Ã¢â‚¬Â

3. Corporations should be prohibited from making any civic, charitable, or educational donations. Such donations are used to warp the entire social and economic fabric of society, and make people afraid to speak out against corporations.

These probably seem even more Ã¢â‚¬Å“unrealisticÃ¢â‚¬Â than the first batch. Imagine how good it is for corporate executives that we find these ideas Ã¢â‚¬Å“impractical.Ã¢â‚¬Â And by the way, these were all once law, too.

The final objection to be raised is that weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ll never get anywhere as long as the Ã¢â‚¬Å“news mediaÃ¢â‚¬Â are against us, refuse to cover our issues, and distort our views. Agreed.

But the Ã¢â‚¬Å“news mediaÃ¢â‚¬Â are corporations, key players in a system of propaganda that encompasses not only television, radio and newspapers, but also the entire educational system. The Ã¢â‚¬Å“airwavesÃ¢â‚¬Â belong to the public."

*****End of excerpt****

note: I meant "sued", not "sewed" as is written in the initial post but I cannot edit it at this point.

Posted 11 months ago #
Crispus3000

Login to Send PM

Back to the Non-bypassable charges - The REAL reason AEP wants non-bypassable charges in their tariff is to attempt to prevent the implementation of solar, wind and other types of renewable energy systems into their grid. Their reasoning is disputed by almost everyone who hears it because it is illogical. Investor owned utilities (IOUs) like AEP and FirstEnergy, who already has non-bypassable charges, want to be able to charge like a telephone company. Their logic says that if their wires are used to transmit electricity, then they should get paid for the use of those wires. That logic might hold but for the fact that the property generating electricity from their alternative energy system is NOT transmitting over their wires. Most (99%) of all alternative energy systems installed do not produce excess electricity on an annualized basis. During those days when more electricity is being produced than the property uses, usually weekends, the electricity is transmitted on the IOUs grid during the peak usage times, which helps balance their grid and helps eliminate spikes, brownouts, etc. It also helps the IOUs make money.

Solar, wind and other alternative energy systems STABLIZE THE COST OF FUEL. Sunlight is free. The IOUs justify most rate increases based on ever-increasing costs for fuel (coal, natural gas, nuclear) and the ever-increasing demand for more profits by their investors. If you take the cost of fuel out of the equation, how else can they charge and satisfy their investors? How about a "Distribution charge" for phantom electricity delivery to the customer that the IOU WOULD have made IF the customer was not making their own electricity on site? Genius! How about a "Demand" charge that kicks in when a certain piece of equipment turns on and the consumption temporarily spikes, e.g. a large commercial exhaust fan turns on AND that charge determines you rate for the MONTH for all consumption! Genius! How about a "Cost Recovery" charge that allows the IOU to collect advanced interest payments on debt they have not incurred? Payments that would normally be a cost of business for other industries? Genius! The IOUs call this crap "Non-bypassable" charges and shovel it to the regulators and public but tell everyone it's "fertilizer" that "helps avoid" future worst crap (rate increases). Genius!

From a money making perspective, why would they not fight like hell to keep using equipment built in 1930 to make money in 2011? To hell with you and your offspring's stupid lungs. The constitution guarantees you no right to clean air, just life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (as long as you don't have to breathe to be alive or happy).

In FirstEnergy territories, the non-bypassable charges are 25%-53% of the customer's total electric bill. In the world, we call that the "vig". They get paid no matter who actually makes the electricity. Genius!

Posted 11 months ago #
ColumbusTime

Login to Send PM

Crispus3000 wrote >>
From a money making perspective, why would they not fight like hell to keep using equipment built in 1930 to make money in 2011?

Maybe its because the 1930s equipment works to produce the electricity we need, something that can't be said of alternatives (yet).

Posted 11 months ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

ColumbusTime wrote >>

Crispus3000 wrote >>
From a money making perspective, why would they not fight like hell to keep using equipment built in 1930 to make money in 2011?

Maybe its because the 1930s equipment works to produce the electricity we need, something that can't be said of alternatives (yet).

True enough. I do have hopes that solar becomes more effective / cheaper. Windpower looks like it will never get there, though.

Posted 11 months ago #
Twixlen
Westgate, Columbus
Login to Send PM

rus wrote >>

ColumbusTime wrote >>

Crispus3000 wrote >>
From a money making perspective, why would they not fight like hell to keep using equipment built in 1930 to make money in 2011?

Maybe its because the 1930s equipment works to produce the electricity we need, something that can't be said of alternatives (yet).

True enough. I do have hopes that solar becomes more effective / cheaper. Windpower looks like it will never get there, though.

Without major improvements in electric storage (ie: battery farms), wind power will never, can never, be anything but a feel-good-ancillary power source. Useful, sure... effective, not always.

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

The only reason alternatives are not fully implemented is due to the stunts those in power pull to manipulate the market to remain entrenched with their solution. 40 years they have stifled the alternative/renewable energy's progress here. While we languish in land annihilation OH, in California and countries like Germany, they are rapidly developing a sustainable future.

"Columbus time" perhaps you might want to investigate land, family or friends that have been negatively impacted by coal mining to know or really grasp how that energy option is really working for us.

On a local level, The Ohio EPA and The Ohio Environmental Council has some white papers on Air Quality, Water Quality, and Land degradation from coal production methods of doing business.
There are several studies within this link:

http://www.theoec.org/AirPowerPlants.htm

Here's an excerpt:
"Several studies have been made on the effects of power plant pollution on human health. For example, the OEC's Ohio Valley-Ozone Alley study examined the notion that these rural communities were unaffected by ozone pollution. the Ohio ValleyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s air is clean of ozone-smog. Ohio Valley-Ozone Alley. (PDF)

The Death, Disease and Dirty Power (PDF) report by the Clean Air Task Force examines the effect of fine particulate matter from power plants on the respiratory system.

A study by the Hubbard Brook Research Foundation (PDF) disproves the myth that acid rain is no longer a problem any more with the passage of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The Hubbard Brook Research Foundation explores this issue.

OhioÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s power plants contribute to numerous illness and pollution. Read an overview of OhioÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s power plants in OECÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s report: http://www.theoec.org/PDFs/Air/cage_reports_dirtysecret.pdf. (PDF)

Promoting Integrated Gasification and Combined Cycle power generation and Carbon Capture and Storage (PDF) is a report from the Clean Air Task Force and the OEC that outlines the advantages of IGCC energy production and the best steps in pursuit of its adoption.

The Wisconsin IGCC Report focuses on the strengths, weakness, and barriers to IGCC in the marketplace."

It's a problem that isn't working for many of us, plenty of young people who have never smoked a day in their lives are dying of lung cancer. Their seems to be a myopic view point that fails to recognize that eventually, we run out of mountains to blow up. I love nature and the beauty of the land intact. I don't want to live on a moon scape, do you?

And here's another smarmy organization Kasich is involved in- Koch Brother's American's for Prosperity (they are so good at their double speak):
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/27/6956747-ohio-governor-tiptoes-over-to-afp-koch-is-everywhere-part-ii

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_For_Prosperity

Posted 11 months ago #
LBDD

Login to Send PM

I very rarely post on here, but I'm a peon for a local utility and thought I would try to clear up what non-bypassable charges. I speak for myself and may or may not have the same views as my employer. I just think that many people come to sites like this to get facts and both sides of the story shouuld be told.

First I should clarify why non-bypassable exist. On your electric bill, youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ll generally see 3 line-items for your electric service; Generation, Transmission, and Distribution. Generation represents the production of the electricity. Transmission represents getting the electricity that is produced at power plants to load centers (Cities). Distribution gets the electricity from the load center to the actual end users. In Ohio, consumers have the right to shop for their electric generation. Non-bypassable charges are in place to allow the utility which is transmitting or distributing the power to your house to recover the costs associated with this service if you are purchasing your generation from a third party. An example is when you purchase your natural gas from Direct Energy, Columbia Gas is still delivering the gas to your house, and you receive a bill for their services.

The notion that non-bypassable charges are created to prevent renewable development is false. IOUs in Ohio have no incentive to prevent solar, wind and other types of renewable energy systems. In fact, in Ohio IOUs must meet a mandated renewable portfolio standard, which requires them to procure a substantial amount of their energy from renewables.

I have no direct knowledge of this, but I would think that when considering what is or isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t a non-bypassable charge, alternative energy sources installed at individual homes would be extremely low on the list of things considered by the utility, as they represent a very small fraction of the total Ã¢â‚¬Å“shoppersÃ¢â‚¬Â of energy. The vast majority of Ã¢â‚¬Å“shoppersÃ¢â‚¬Â are purchasing power from a market provider like Direct Energy (gas) or FirstEnergy Solutions (Electric). These providers purchase power from the market and sell to retail customers.

The truth is, environmentalists should really favor non-bypassable charges, especially associated with the transmission system. If you want to scale up wind and solar energy, chances are you need to build large facilities that are far away from load centers. You need a strong transmission system to transfer power from the dessert to Los Angeles, or Iowa to Ohio. If transmission charges were non-bypassable, IOUs would have more incentive to increase investment in the transmission system.

Posted 11 months ago #
LBDD

Login to Send PM

I suppose I should also address the notion fuel costs are lining the pockets of shareholders. Fuel is treated as an expense. If this expense is prudently incurred, the IOU may recover this dollar for dollar. They do not make profit on fuel.

The IOU makes money by investing captial in its system. An example is if FirstEnergy installs a transformer that costs $100 and the PUCO allows a 10% return, FirstEnergy makes $10 profit. It is always in a regulated Utility's best interest to invest in new capital. The problem is that it is not necessarily in the consumer's best interest. The PUCO must decide how much each investment should be reflected in rates to the consumer.

Posted 11 months ago #
Red Sun Rising

Login to Send PM

Regarding choice- you now get several suppliers peddling the same product- from coal, nuclear and drilling for gas, but you have no choice under those subsets that specifically allow you to specify power exclusively derived from solar, waste to energy, wind etc. or a percentage mix from those options.
http://www.puco.ohio.gov/puco/index.cfm/consumer-information/consumer-topics/choosing-an-electric-supplier/

That is a false idea of choice when important and available alternatives are omitted from that choice. Especially when the companies we have to choose from are balking and stalling the implementation of the mandate for solar and having the PUCO waiving the heavy penalties associated with not adopting the mandate.

http://www.environmentohio.org/uploads/ee/75/ee758efc7c57740d7f5f11833a8d1e0d/Ohios-Clean-Energy-Report-Card-web.pdf

They got a "do over" and the are waiting for the subject of this thread to repeal the mandate, which based on that report Kasich commissioned, is evidence that is part of his plan.

Posted 11 months ago #