Koch Brothers Going After Solar Energy Customers

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The Kochs are showing their true colors with this one. Their 'libertarian' ideology is totally self-serving.

Their colors are the same as your colors, I suspect. So we hear all the time that "Right to Work" legislation is bad because a bunch of freeloaders reap all the benefits without paying any dues. Now comes the utilities using the same argument, and you guys don't much care for it, huh? That's interesting.....

"As solar prices come down and this becomes more popular, we want to make sure everybody who's using the grid is paying their fair share," she said, adding that it’s unfair for the utility's traditional customers -- roughly 799,600 of them -- to foot the bill for grid maintenance when several hundred people end up saving money by using their own solar panels to provide power to the utility while not paying the grid maintenance surcharge.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/...taxes-20140423

[Pio1980]

Same argument used against efficient automobiles re fuel taxes for road maintainance. Selective free market advocacy.

Right to work leads back to wage slavery, that's the problem

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Their colors are the same as your colors, I suspect. So we hear all the time that "Right to Work" legislation is bad because a bunch of freeloaders reap all the benefits without paying any dues. Now comes the utilities using the same argument, and you guys don't much care for it, huh? That's interesting.....

"As solar prices come down and this becomes more popular, we want to make sure everybody who's using the grid is paying their fair share," she said, adding that it’s unfair for the utility's traditional customers -- roughly 799,600 of them -- to foot the bill for grid maintenance when several hundred people end up saving money by using their own solar panels to provide power to the utility while not paying the grid maintenance surcharge.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/...taxes-20140423

And 'fair share' is how much? If not proportionate to use, what?

As much as they can get, of course. In some cases they are trying to get the camel's nose in with a fairly nominal $5.00 a month, but the real goal, the economic destruction of competition from solar, is revealed in Arizona:

In Arizona, a major utility and a tangle of secret donors and operatives with ties to ALEC and the Kochs invested millions to persuade state regulators to impose a monthly fee of $50 to $100 on net-metering customers.

(from the OP LA Times piece.)

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

Their colors are the same as your colors, I suspect. So we hear all the time that "Right to Work" legislation is bad because a bunch of freeloaders reap all the benefits without paying any dues. Now comes the utilities using the same argument, and you guys don't much care for it, huh? That's interesting.....

"As solar prices come down and this becomes more popular, we want to make sure everybody who's using the grid is paying their fair share," she said, adding that it’s unfair for the utility's traditional customers -- roughly 799,600 of them -- to foot the bill for grid maintenance when several hundred people end up saving money by using their own solar panels to provide power to the utility while not paying the grid maintenance surcharge.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/...taxes-20140423

The very same grid found it profitable to charge us $75 simply for delivering 1700kWH. With no changes to that very same grid the charged $265 to deliver 7100kWH, and that caharge was only for delivering, we get the electricity from another source. So they just made a $190 windfall and they want my sympathy> Screw em.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by whell

Those are the "shovel ready jobs" we’ve heard so much about. Infrastructure spending is also a great way for Feds to pay back unions for their support at election time.

No, what these are are a few examples of how government has subsidized business in this country from the very beginning.

Read a little history.

http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroo...ad/grants.html

Without the assistance of the U.S. government, railroad construction between 1860 and 1900 would have been greatly curtailed. Building a railroad was an expensive venture. Private banks, fearing the railroad companies would need a long time to pay off their debts, were reluctant to loan money to the companies. To remedy the situation, Congress provided assistance to the railroad companies in the form of land grants. The land grant railroads, receiving millions of acres of public land, sold the land to make money, built their railroads, and contributed to a more rapid settlement of the West. In the end, four out of the five transcontinental railroads were built with help from the federal government.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

....but Bob's gonna make the case that they are all by himself, ’cuz he's a one trick pony.

Coming from a partisan hack like you that's high praise indeed.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

No, what these are are a few examples of how government has subsidized business in this country from the very beginning.

Read a little history.

Why don't you:

http://www.ushistory.org/us/29.asp

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

(from the OP LA Times piece.)

Hate to break this to you, but an op ed piece is not news, and it is not fact. It is opinion. And when reproduced from a paper like the LA Times, its sometimes nothing more than BS.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

Right to work leads back to wage slavery, that's the problrm

Yeah, we're all slaves here in MI.

[Pio1980]

And anyone that believes greed to be self-limiting is living in fantasyland.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk