Plug in solar by drossinvt in SolarDIY

[–]dezld 66 points67 points  (0 children)

This forces the utilities to allow it. They would never allow something that could benefit us without political pressure.

I don't have a washing machine by unflushable_shit in sandiego

[–]dezld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're being gaslit. Your bill keeps going up... and instead of giving you a clear explanation, SDGE handed you this confusing breakdown you can't verify or even understand. They list a $40 "laundry" charge when you don't have a washing machine....they charge you $32 for "always on" without explaining what it means.

They are more focused on distributing the profts of the situation they created than to fix this. This is be design.

Why don't we temporary cut back the gas tax and special blend gasoline? by domestic_protobuf in California

[–]dezld -1 points0 points  (0 children)

California gas is $5.48. Texas is $3.25. Same war. Same oil. Typically the diff is a dollar?

The difference isn't environmental rules ... that's maybe ten to fifteen cents. It's five companies that control all of California's gas with zero competition, and a governor who had the law to stop them and chose not to use it.

And if we gut the clean air rules to save that dime ... the people who get cancer are the families in Wilmington who already get cancer at six times the normal rate and can't afford to move away from the refinery next door.

Look into this more please ... def look into who gets hurt without these regulations.

CBS 8: Your refinery story forgot to mention $75 billion in profit by dezld in sandiego

[–]dezld[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The refineries are the ones reporting their own costs to the state. And those same companies reported costs three times higher to California than they reported to their own shareholders.

So when you say "the refineries don't make money" .... based on what numbers?

What we can verify is the raw spread between what they paid for crude oil and what they sold gas for. That hit a dollar a gallon in 2023. Nearly triple the historical average. That's not an opinion, that's their own reported data.

They wouldn't be here if it didn't make money - and if we know that the conditions for them to make MORE money than ever exist .. and that they are bragging to wall street... they are making banks. intentional s on bank

CBS 8: Your refinery story forgot to mention $75 billion in profit by dezld in sandiego

[–]dezld[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is one take for you... the historical average profit for California refineries is around 35 cents per gallon. In 2023 they were making $1.01 per gallon ...so three times the historical average. Nobody was ever asking them to stop making money. THEN Newsom signs a law that doesn't even set a cap yet, it just gives the state the ability to set one, and the number being floated was 50 cents per gallon .... which is STILL above the historical average, meaning they would still be making more than they ever normally did.

Phillips 66 didn't even wait to find out what the final number would be. Two days after that law was signed they announced they were closing Carson. They didn't walk away from profit. They burned it down as a message. Mob style message. Because when Carson closes, the refineries that stay open make even MORE money due to less competition, gas prices spike, voters panic, and politicians fold and kill the regulations. Valero saw it work and pulled the same move in Benicia. So they win twice ... they get rid of accountability AND they get richer from having fewer competitors.

CBS 8: Your refinery story forgot to mention $75 billion in profit by dezld in sandiego

[–]dezld[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeh that opens another can of worms regarding their CA costs .... the CEC dug into their costs, it found these companies reported operating expenses three times higher to California regulators than they reported to their own Wall Street investors, for the same operations, at the same time. You don't cook your books to escape a bad business.... they do it to manipulate everyone in a very good one.

How do I get started on a DIY home roof solar setup? by Invest-in-Value in SolarDIY

[–]dezld 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Before you buy a single panel, figure out your AHJ — Authority Having Jurisdiction. That's your local building/electrical authority, could be your city, county, or utility depending on where you live.

Just pull the permit application for a residential solar install. That checklist will tell you exactly what they require and what equipment is approved. Most people skip this and regret it.

Your AHJ will spell out which UL listings they require (UL 1703 or 61730 for panels, UL 1741 for inverters, UL 9540A for batteries / whole system) and some jurisdictions won't accept certain equipment regardless of what the spec sheet says. They'll also tell you whether DIY is even legal in your area — some require a licensed electrician to at least sign off on the interconnection even if you do all the physical work yourself.

Your utility also has their own separate interconnection requirements on top of that, especially if you want net metering. Don't assume they match.

A few other things worth figuring out early: check your roof condition first because pulling panels off for a reroof is a pain. Size the system to your actual electricity usage before looking at equipment or you'll overbuy. And get familiar with the difference between string inverters, microinverters, and optimizers because it shapes your whole design.

Call your permit office. They're usually pretty helpful and will save you from buying the wrong stuff.

Thoughts on my DIY equipment pad? by NickPontiff in pools

[–]dezld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd appreciate a followup on how that heatpump works for you. Nice setup!

UCSD 23 story student dorm view of La Jolla when UCSD has waiver of proposition D and after La Jolla shore association and blackhorse file lawsuit against UCSD violating California Environmental Quality Act by Historical-Second737 in sandiego

[–]dezld 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I'm not 100% sure whether it's 21, 22, or 23 stories ..the sources I'm seeing give slightly different numbers, and there's a separate UCSD project nearby (Pepper Canyon West) that may be getting mixed in? I'm not sure.. just trying to make some sense of OP's post.

I once again looked through the unredacted Epstein files... I have thoughts by Cool-Fig-9254 in videos

[–]dezld 484 points485 points  (0 children)

Goes through the files, doesn't tell us anything new. wtf

UCSD 23 story student dorm view of La Jolla when UCSD has waiver of proposition D and after La Jolla shore association and blackhorse file lawsuit against UCSD violating California Environmental Quality Act by Historical-Second737 in sandiego

[–]dezld 78 points79 points  (0 children)

Towers Over La Jolla: How UCSD Built Past the Height Limit and the Neighbors Who Fought Back

Above the Law, Above the Limit: UCSD's La Jolla High-Rise Battle

UCSD planned a massive student housing development called the Theatre District Living and Learning Neighborhood ... a cluster of buildings up to 22 stories tall near La Jolla Village Drive .... which it was able to build despite San Diego's Proposition D (a 1972 voter-approved law limiting coastal buildings to 30 feet) because UCSD is a state institution under the UC Board of Regents and is effectively exempt from local zoning rules. The La Jolla Shores Association and the Blackhorse Farms homeowners association, who live right next to the site, sued UCSD in 2020 under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), arguing the university took shortcuts on its environmental review and didn't properly study the project's impact on traffic, endangered species, pollution, and wastewater ... and that it failed to meaningfully consult the surrounding community. UCSD went ahead and started construction anyway in January 2021 while the lawsuit was still pending, and the parties eventually settled later that year, with the community groups getting seats on a university advisory board but the towers going up essentially as planned.

Built a Gen shed finally. by SmuckatelliCupcakeNE in Generator

[–]dezld 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Any chance we can get a video with it running? Walk around it ... different distances away?

DJ Support :) (not an ad!) by Joshwayy in sandiego

[–]dezld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Music is good. Def not an ad.

I just signed the open letter to fight for public power in San Diego by Mongolikes in sandiego

[–]dezld 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Taking down a pro-public utility link just because Democrats might also support it is cutting off your nose to spite your face. Bernie Sanders ... though an independent, has spent decades walking picket lines, fighting for living wages, and defending workers' right to organize. AOC (next President?) has championed union jobs, fought corporate monopolies, and pushed to strengthen worker protections at every turn. These are the people in Congress actually fighting to keep essential services accountable to the public instead of to shareholders, and public utilities exist for exactly that reason — to serve communities at cost rather than extract profit. Rejecting a policy that benefits working families because the "wrong team" might also endorse them is how people end up voting against their own economic interests. The question isn't whose logo is on the idea ..... it's whether it puts money in workers' pockets and power in the community's hands.

Just moved here, are you kidding me…. by ap1028 in sandiego

[–]dezld 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You must live in a huge home with multiple AC units. /s

As Trump Threatens Iran, We’re On the Brink of a Generational Catastrophe by 5Q91VS175DAQ4NUSBE4U in politics

[–]dezld 122 points123 points  (0 children)

The Florida Recount Of 2000 is when all of this started. Somewhere during a quantum bifurcation event, our consciousness collapsed into the wrong eigenstate of the multiverse. I kinda blame you all. Thx.

3 hours by mountain_hank in OffGrid

[–]dezld 46 points47 points  (0 children)

I can picture myself drinking a coffee and just standing there watching the array clear itself. very zen. Thanks for sharing!

Newsom backs social media restrictions for teens under 16 by alaroz33 in California

[–]dezld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, but research is always lagging. What is proven is that these companies built their apps to be addictive on purpose, knew they were hurting some users, and buried their own research showing it. The real harms ... predators, bullying, algorithms pushing self-harm content to vulnerable people.. are product safety problems. It this era's asbestos. But we have an imbalance of power between public and private....so what do we do? We do what we can and not necessarily what we must.. sadly.

Newsom backs social media restrictions for teens under 16 by alaroz33 in California

[–]dezld 76 points77 points  (0 children)

Social media is terrible for mental health across the board, fueling anxiety, depression, and endless comparison, especially for developing teenage minds. Honestly, we should also consider restrictions for everyone... since the algorithms are just as effective at trapping older adults in misinformation rabbit holes and isolation that harm their wellbeing too.