Green Power Bill [LAW'D]

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Under what authority can the Federal Gov't force someone to buy a private product of any kind?

I like the goal but a blind mandate on this is in my opinion too far. If they are to be paid market rates for power then the power companies would be willing to buy the power anyway and would have no reason not to other then there being too much power on the grid which I don't think would be an issue.

Theoretically if you were going to engage in this project people would go to the power company and find out what deal they would offer before spending any money on putting the production capacity in place. Anybody who dives in without "security" of knowing shouldn't be in my opinion putting one of these in. 

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I will try to reduce the confusion.

The aim of the Act is to promote energy alternatives and not for big energy companies.  The goal is that the general public benefits directly.

There is a large potential for alternative energies in the private households or for small farmers. There are already people they have at home Solar energy, farmers who produce biomass energy, small wind turbines on private land or energy from Hydroelectricity. But this can be more like today.

If you get a fair price be guaranteed for the energy you produce and not need for your own, then many more people build a this systems to produce Alternative Energy. In Atlasia there are so many roofs that could be used for solar energy and also a lot of places where you could set up wind turbines.

Of course we could finance such a thing even on taxes, but a direct promotion with public money would have disadvantages as well.

1. If you get the money at once to build such a system, there is no great incentive for a efficient maintenance of the plant. Not so with a guaranteed electricity price, for example, works only when the solar or wind power system can benefit you
2. It is also useful for the environment not to be financed through taxes.  Taxes pay all, no matter how much energy they consume. With a guaranteed price of the electricity will they who consume a lot of energy more exposed, because the power companies give the cost to the consumer.

The law is not inventive to me. There are similar laws in some states in Germany and in several countries in Europe.

I ask again why would this be necessary. If the Power Companies are to offer people market rates why aren't they doing it already (I beleive they are) so why should we force power companies to do something they are already doing? If a company isn't doing it, there would be some kind of reason such as financial problems or what not that this unfunded mandate would make worse. I still don't see the need.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea behind this bill, I am just worried about some of the technical aspects of it. Would a company be able to stop buyinh electricity from people if it is in surplus or there is too much on the grid?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea behind this bill, I am just worried about some of the technical aspects of it. Would a company be able to stop buyinh electricity from people if it is in surplus or there is too much on the grid?

Reasonable concerns. I hadn't thought about the "too much power" issue. I suppose that, even after accounting for the estimated private producers energy contributions to the grid, if private production is greater than anticipated the utility could reduce energy production at its own power plants. But I emphasize 'suppose' as I know very little about the details of managing a public utility's power supply.

Come to think of it, could this work in reverse where there is less power supplied than expected by private producers, resulting in power shortages? The more I think about this I could see issues with the public utility responsible for providing power to a region having to manage production by factoring in the estimated production of hundreds or thousands of private producers.

A utility I assume, can regulate power production from it's multiple power plants it directly or indirectly controls. While factors can effect production targets (e.g. price swings in natural resources, labor disputes, natural disasters, etc.), the utility essentially has control over the means of production to react to these changed circumstances. Obviously the utility can't plan nearly as well for the performance (or lack thereof) for hundreds or thousands of independent small energy producers.

Again, any news articles to see if and how these issues have been dealt with in RL would be very helpful indeed.

Well I am no expert but I think that Power companies can shut off the supply from individual producers when necessary or would create  a system to be able to do that, however under this bill, they would still have to be paid for uneeded electicity.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay, I still feel ill at ease about portions of this.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nay, I still feel ill at ease about portions of this.

Atlasia thanks you for your efforts to change it and your intimate involvement with this bill's progress.

I trust your obnoxious attitude is directed at Mint alone, for I did participate in the debate. Some of us have lives and loose track of when stuff comes up for a vote, otherwise I would've done more to improve it.