When you can’t sell this on the green left coast, you know its gotta fail worldwide.
Gotta love this quote, one of the best denials of reality I’ve ever seen:
“It was a demonstration program, and it’s successfully concluding after meeting its goals,” Romans said. “Certainly we would have loved for more customers to have participated.” said company spokeswoman Katie Romans.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/10/BUPR1LTB45.DTL#ixzz1dWdO8WPl
Now if that way out alarmist Mary Nichols and CARB can get a clue, we might be getting somewhere. CARB is still set to enact cap and trade in California.
I wonder if customers will get the 10 million dollars back they contributed to this “successful demonstration program”?
On the plus side, even Joltin Joe Romm thought the program was dumb
The spin PG&E put on the announcement would be enough to power several generators:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Calironia’s CARB is bad for California, but good for the nation as a whole. It will expand the business cycle for the other 49 states, while California’s declines.
The opportunities are tremendous as the displaced business’s reap the rewards of expansion in the economic viable 49.
Imagine, people will not voluntarily pay more for electricity. Now, we will see the Green Shirts employing force.
Give em a fair trial and a nice hanging —- Rooster Cogburn
Hah! You folks have never worked for an investor owned utility in California. All that green crap is mandated by the state. Administrative law judges reduce the companies rate of return on investment if the company does not make these noises. Fortunately there are enough believers around that PG&E and SCE can hire them to run these silly projects. Gag reflex keeps normal people in those companies from taking these green projects on. The normal folks can keep on trying to make do with the reduced maintenance funds allowed by those same administrative law judges. After all, if you spend money testing and maintaining natural gas pipe lines, you are just wasting customer money – or so the CPUC said in the past.
The company wanted 160,000 sign-ups but got only 29,623 at the end of their ‘campaign’ to coerce their customers into paying more for their power in order to let some trees grow bigger and better.
I wonder why the scheme was such a dismal failure? Can’t figure it out, myself.
Nice try. Get your customers to pay for your carbon credit projects so you can sell them to the other utillities who will charge their customers for the credits they had to buy.
Australia’s Origin Energy has just started to promote its “Green Energy” campaign whereby, for $1 per week, consumers can reduce their impact on the planet. http://www.originenergy.com.au/1542/Green-energy
Perhaps they could take a leaf out of PG&E’s book.
So, PG&E used the $100K/mo to fund that cabin up at Tahoe where select and dedicated executives monitored the impact of greenhouse gases and sequestering bimbos,,,er, I mean limbos…er, I mean alternate heating methods at the extreme lower troposphere….. On weekends, of course.
Wouldn’t the ratepayers LOVE to the the independent audit report on this one????
Just another display of the abject hypocrisy employed by the warmista.
So it costs an incremental $3.30 a month for “carbon-neutral” energy? Ha! The £/$ exchange rate must have gone loco then, as in the UK it already costs everyone around £25 a month on top of our bills to fund policies and initiatives that do not even get close.
One wonders what gave them the notion that they would have 168,000 takers (accuracy to first three significant figures!). I suspect they used some bogus theoretical studies about “willingness to pay.” Anyone know?
I wonder if similar methodology has been used to model the voluntary penetration of solar, wind and other renewable technologies.
The bottom line in California appears to be the following: The majority of Californians will not VOLUNTARILY pay more for green energy, but the majority of Californians will VOTE for politicians who FORCE them to pay more for green energy. I’d equate the demonstrated California mentality to that of Warren Buffet, who refuses to write a check to the U.S. Treasury each year for more than his calculated federal income tax bill (after a covey of accountants and tax attorneys have squeezed that bill to an absolute minimum) while complaining that the federal government does not charge the rich enough in taxes.
Robert of Ottawa says:
November 12, 2011 at 3:13 pm
“Imagine, people will not voluntarily pay more for electricity. Now, we will see the Green Shirts employing force.”
Here in Germany, quite a lot do pay up. Greenpeace has a subsidiary “Greenpeace Energy” here that sells “100% renewable energy”, demanding amongst the highest prizes for electricity. The law here is that your local supplier must supply a basic tariff to you if you don’t have a contract with a different supplier. Greenpeace Energy is more expensive than these local suppliers yet finds customers. Of course, you get the same electricity like anyone else as you’re on the same grid; it’s more of an accounting exercise; and a lot of the renewable energy Greenpeace Energy sells to you is “recycled” Nuclear Power – meaning, you use cheap nighttime thermal base load from a French nuke to pump water up a hill, and during daytime you empty the reservoir, make electricity and resell it; it’s now hydropower and as PC as it gets.
I am not making this up. I am living amongst idiots.
So they only got 15% of their voter base……..
It’s that same 15% that shows up in every poll
The program was basically like other PGE constructs, a reverse auction to get the credits from the lowest bidder.
A real disincentive, and rigged, In my opinion.
A full auditing of the money collected through the climatesmart program is necessary to preclude the appearance of impropriety and fraud, and an audit of the assets procured by the money is needed to verify that things like forests were truly additional carbon sinking material and not pre-existing the program.
Apparently, the cap on guilt assuagement is about $3.30 a month.
Now that a range has been established, the traders can come in and start manipulating the “market”.
Don’t know about California, but in Chicago this is the point where I start to wonder just how many of more greedy/stupid people begin their path to jail.
Hey, Maw!! Where’s my waders? The BS is gettin’ pretty dang deep around here.
Dirty open secret : not all the offset money is spent, or any at all
With 5.1 million customers, and only 30,000 takers, this means only 0.5%, or one consumer in 200, felt they could afford to fore go a latte a month in the name of saving the planet. We’re doomed!!
Glad I was able to escape that insane state. The only place were adding regulations is called deregulation!
I think the customers should get their money back…
It time that a penality be paid by companies and governemnt (Solyndra) for this “green” agenda gone amuck !
According to the news article the PG&E sucked in $16 plus million dollars from all rate payers to admininster the collection of $10 million from the few self flagelating fools who volunteered to be fleeced. And THESE people want to run the planet?
Robert of Ottawa on November 12, 2011 at 3:13 pm said:
Imagine, people will not voluntarily pay more for electricity. Now, we will see the Green Shirts employing force.
———-
People will not voluntarily pay for anything. And if you don’t pay the energy company for the energy you use the energy company will be employing the full force of the law.
So your green fascists fantasy seems to be tame compared to the reality.
Indur M. Goklany says:
November 12, 2011 at 4:08 pm
One wonders what gave them the notion that they would have 168,000 takers (accuracy to first three significant figures!). I suspect they used some bogus theoretical studies about “willingness to pay.” Anyone know?
I wonder if similar methodology has been used to model the voluntary penetration of solar, wind and other renewable technologies.
————
It was models…..models all the way down.
I’m going to be watching to make sure my state targets jobs in CA for recruitment during CARB. It will be a good litmus test of efforts in each of the other states.