A new report finds 24 states have yet to establish an “energy efficiency resource standard," which has been shown to curb demand, lower costs and reduce emissions.
Guess we’ll know which 24 because the article didn’t do the due diligence for a graph, a list, a graphic, anything.
GOSH I WONDER WHICH STATES
Ohio’s Republican supermajority handed the utility companies a really big win, causing energy prices to skyrocket for much if the state, in a massive bribery scandal.
Larry Householder went to fucking jail for it, and the law is still on the books. Price per unit on my utilities is pretty low, but almost half (sometimes more) of my bill is additional fees.
There was chatter from the governor about trying to repeal it. We’ll see. I’m not convinced he wasn’t in on it
The last chatter I heard from DeWine about it was “we shouldn’t throw away a good law becuase of a bad guy” I’m sure damn near every repub in the statehouse is getting some sort of kickback for it.
This sounds like they’re looking to remove the remaining bits. From 2 weeks ago.
Well, at least that is something. Though they sure are slow-rolling a bill that steals from their constituents and everyone publicly trashes.
PUCO is a fucking joke.
They won’t need to bother with that for 4 more years, either.
Edit: 4 more years minimum.
In California they have raised our rates 6 times. We reduce they increase.
PG&E is for profit
SMUD is non-profit
I wonder which one raised rates…
All the PGE customers are forced to bear the costs associated with losses from fires caused by PGE in rural areas. If each city formed a municipal utility company, our prices would all be in line with SMUD since we’d only pay for the risks associated with ourselves. I’m guessing energy prices in the foothills would absolutely skyrocket. But I’d rather have cheaper power for myself.
PG&E*
PGE is the electric utility for northwest Oregon.
The US has had flat energy use for over a decade now. Which is great as far as emissions go, but honestly is extremely bad as far as civilization goes. Separate from energy prices or emissions, overall usage is a measure of overall activity. If our usage is dropping while population increases, then we’re dying as a civilization.
An improving situation would be increasing usage, with decreasing carbon emissions.
Decades ago (half a century ago) people believed energy production and usage was directly tied to growth. If your energy wasn’t growing, neither was your economy. If your energy per person started shrinking, that’s an oh shit moment …. Or so people believed back then.
Then the last half century happened. Energy production plateaued , yet economic growth continued. Per person energy usage decreased yet the economy did well a lot of the time
It turns out that correlation may have appeared in a manufacturing economy, but it’s not at all correlated when you have huge efficiency gains while also transitioning to more of a service economy
Yes, if lightbulbs went from 60W to 7W it totally makes sense for me to put 20 of them. /s
Dumbest argument ever.
If you save a dollar a month on electricity, you save it, that means your savings rate goes up, and banks do more lending, businesses expand due to cheaper finances.
Use more than one brain cell, that one is tired.
Can you provide a source for your flat energy use argument?
Google “<country name> total energy consumption” and pick your source. There’s literally hundreds. It’s an overall trend in most Western countries. Coal usage has dropped globally, renewable is up everywhere, which is all great and hopefully continues. Overall though, power consumption has stopped increasing 15 to 20 years ago.
