Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

kristopher

(29,798 posts)

12. There weren't that many interpretations, I simply didn't verify your innaccurate initial comment

Reply to saras (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 28, 2012, 06:20 AM

Feb 2012

My bad.

Once Yo Mama posted the text it was obvious what was at stake - it is still a case where the utility doesn't want the law, and it is still because the law encourages a distributed renewable grid and a distributed renewable grid is what is going to slash their market influence to only a fraction of what it now is.

They would much much rather have centralized generation like nuclear so they can maintain control of all energy production and serve as the bottleneck through which it flows.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The heated debate over solar power (Georgia) [View all] jpak Feb 2012 OP

It's rather a sucky bill. Good riddance. Don't let Republicans write alternative energy bills. saras Feb 2012 #1

The utility doesn't like it because it reduces their market influence and profits kristopher Feb 2012 #2

You're assuming a lot better quality of business doing the aggregating than I would. saras Feb 2012 #3

There is nothing wrong with a for-profit entity acting as an aggregator kristopher Feb 2012 #4

This bill is bad for much of GA Yo_Mama Feb 2012 #5

That is a crock. kristopher Feb 2012 #6

But they are talking about aggregated purchases Yo_Mama Feb 2012 #7

You are now cooking a stew in that crock kristopher Feb 2012 #8

You are so, so wrong Yo_Mama Feb 2012 #9

It isn't what you say but neither is it an authorization for aggregators. kristopher Feb 2012 #10

It does legally create that option, Kristopher Yo_Mama Feb 2012 #13

If you folks can find so many interpretations of the law, I trust lawyers will do even better... saras Feb 2012 #11

There weren't that many interpretations, I simply didn't verify your innaccurate initial comment kristopher Feb 2012 #12