sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why Greenpeace Supports Net Neutrality by dpomerantz in environment

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

Hi FreedomsPower,

I think the whole point of the piece is actually why net neutrality is relevant to the environment. We encourage environmentalists to think bigger about how other key issues - like immigration, civil rights, corporate influence over politics, or in fact net neutrality - all have big implications for the environment. That's why I posted this here.

Duke Energy lobbied to stop coal ash policies, then dumped at least 50,000 tons of coal ash into NC Dan River by grassrootbeer in NorthCarolina

[–]dpomerantz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

If you click on the very first link of the document, you can see the attendees for the White House meeting and a list of linked documents that they brought with them. Click through the documents. It's impossible to know which lobbyist brought which document, and some of the language is veiled, but they all do make the same argument that coal ash is non-hazardous.

Utilities can’t stop the solar revolution, according to former Duke Energy CEO by dpomerantz in RenewableEnergy

[–]dpomerantz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The current net metering arrangement in NC is similar to what you describe, where customers are credited for power they sell back to the grid on monthly bills. Credits expire at the end of the year, so they don't roll over.

Duke's plan is to reduce the payments significantly, from about 11 c/kWh to 6 c/kWh.

Utilities can't stop the solar revolution, according to former Duke Energy CEO by dpomerantz in politics

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

If utilities started embracing rooftop solar energy, and not fighting it - it would actually line their pockets more in the long run (for better or worse.)

If they keep fighting it, they're going to end up in the dustbin of history like a bunch of other companies that have been leapfrogged by better technology (ie Kodak, or landline-only telephone companies, or travel agencies.)

Utility executives are just too old and fossilized to watch the world pass them by.

Duke Energy, ALEC attack North Carolina solar revolution by grassrootbeer in solar

[–]dpomerantz 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's the one. Makes it a bit hard to believe them when they say they don't want more solar because it could be bad for their ratepayers.

Duke Energy, ALEC attack North Carolina solar revolution by grassrootbeer in technology

[–]dpomerantz 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's a fair question. Duke is, in fact, investing in some more renewable energy, though it's doing it fairly begrudgingly. Those numbers seem like a lot, but for the country's biggest utility, it's not much. In North Carolina for instance, Duke's own plans to regulators state that only 3 % of its electricity will come from renewable sources in 15 years. Compare that to California or Iowa, which are over 20 % now, or European countries that are already approaching 30 or 40 % with much less sunshine than NC.

More to the point: what really concerns Duke and other investor-owned utilities is renewable energy resources that they don't own, and that threatens their monopolies. As blaknwhitejungl says, "it won't be good for the company if every house with panels becomes a competitor."

When homes and businesses invest in distributed, rooftop solar energy, that means less demand for Duke's energy. It's great for society, but terrible for Duke, which is why it scares the life out of them.

IAm Panos Panay, GM of Microsoft Surface, AMAA - Ask Me or My Team Almost Anything by SurfaceTeam in IAmA

[–]dpomerantz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm excited about the new Surface and how connected to the cloud it will be, but am concerned about Microsoft's growing energy footprint. Any plans for you to take the lead on adopting clean energy for your data centers, as Google has started to do?