Comments by CaptD

Birds, you're gonna die

Lets put solar wherever it makes sense, especially on our SoCal rooftops, then require that our Utilities pay us what they pay themselves for the Soar energy generated based upon the time it is generated and added to the Grid! Now some factual info about Birds and Wind Generation: *Want to save 70 million birds a year? Build more wind farms* By Mike Barnard on 10 August 2012 ( Includes several great charts) [][1] snip Wind turbines are often criticized for killing birds. Fights against siting wind turbines in bird migration corridors or in bird habitat are frequent. Highly inflammatory language is used by anti-wind lobbyists such as ‘bird mincer’, ‘bird blender’ and ‘eagle killers’. Outlandish numbers of deaths are often attributed to them. If this were true, it would be a matter for great concern and a reason to stop constructing wind farms. If humans weren’t killing birds by the hundreds of millions through habitat destruction and other human impacts that weren’t mitigated by wind farms, this would be a big problem. Even if the impact were in the same order of magnitude as other impacts, this would be a reason to slow wind farm construction. However, replacing all fossil fuel generation with wind turbines world-wide would save roughly 70 MILLION birds’ lives annually. Wind energy is actually the form of generation with the lowest impact on wildlife. Wind farms kill less than 0.0001 per cent of birds killed by human actions annually, and perhaps 0.00000075 per cent of birds on the planet annually. Wind farms are a strong net benefit for bird populations, and their direct impacts on bird populations are so insignificant that they can’t be considered a problem compared to the advantages. [1]:
— December 2, 2014 5:03 p.m.

California electricity rates top nation’s — by far

Here is an update on the continuing story about the 3+ Billion Dollar replacement steam generator debacle that our Utilities want SoCal ratepayers to pay for: CPUC MEETING THURSDAY ON $3.3 BILLION BAILOUT SETTLEMENT FOR SAN ONOFRE Where: California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) HQ, 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 2103, San Francisco, CA 94102 When: Thursday, 11/20 9:30am What: Commission meeting where the five-member governing board of the CPUC will approve or deny the proposed decision to adopt the $3.3 billion settlement. The meeting will be WEBCAST at this address: --> Please note that you need "RealPlayer" to successfully play the video. Visit to download the free player (do not pay for the premium player, you do not need that! Ratepayers! Call in to express your views: You can call in and express your views and/or send an email with your comments to: Telephone: 866-849-8390 or 415-703-2074 Email: BACKGROUND On Jan 31, 2012, the San Onofre Nuclear Station had an emergency shutdown due to errors made in the design of new steam generators (4) which were replaced as little as 11 months earlier. The plant has never restarted and in June 2013, the plant operator, Southern California Edison (SCE) decided to close the plant permanently and discontinue questionable attempts to restart the plant. The CPUC is the regulator and they are required to review any plant that is no longer operating. They attempted to start this review in mid 2012, but in secret negotiations with CPUC President Michael Peevey documented in emails, the start of the OII was delayed until October of 2012. We are still trying to prove inappropriate further negotiations to split the proceeding in to phases, and place the most important phase last -- the actual investigation into the prudency of the Steam Generator Replacement Project -- so that it would never occur. On March 27 of this year, SCE, SDG&E, TURN (The Utility Reform Network, a ratepayer advocacy group located in SF), and ORA (the office of Ratepayer Advocacy, an arm of the CPUC that is suppose to represent ratepayers) provided a settlement document to the world that was "fait accompli" already done and allowing no changes or negotiations by other parties. The settlement was for $3.3 billion, $1.4 billion less than the original (ridiculous) request by SCE and SDG&E, but requiring that the ratepayer cover the losses incurred by SCE and SDG&E, while still allowing them to pursue litigation with their subcontractor Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) and their insurance carrier NEIL (Nuclear Energy Insurance limited) Cont.
— November 20, 2014 8:22 a.m.

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!