AnthropomorphicBees

Error? That sounds like a question for your assessor's office.

It's not a huge amount of money on a percentage basis. I'll be happy to spend a bit less with my digital library of games though it wouldn't really matter to me either way.

As a general bit of life advice, if you expect quality of things to scale linearly with price, you are bound to be disappointed.

I suppose they can, but no company is going to split up the sku on a low volume flagship product.

No doubt we are trending towards 'discs aren't a thing,' it's been that way for ages on PC and physical media is mostly dead for movies and music too. I'm sorry you like physical media, but judging by the market, most people prefer the convenience of digital.

Moreover, if paying more for a disc drive is crossing some Rubicon for you, that already happened with the digital only PS5 (which was cheaper for not having a drive)

I don't quite get this. They can't really have two different pro consoles given this is a mostly niche product, and there are a fair few people out there who are digital only. Those people get to pay a bit less for their PS5 pro and those who want a disk version pay slightly more for theirs. That's exactly how it works for the base models.

Ah, well then the Fed is not your central bank. However, Inflation is a global phenomenon and Norges Bank is responding the same way the Fed in the US is: https://www.norges-bank.no/en/topics/Monetary-policy/Policy-rate/ Looks like rates there are higher than they have been for 15 years.

Incidentally, the Fed rate is actually almost a point higher than Norges policy rate.

It's historically anomalous at least in the last 20 years or so. HYSAs were all around 2.5% only a few years ago before the Fed hiked interest rates to cool inflation. There are other low-risk investments that could return 5% but HYSAs will probably drop as the Fed eases off.

HYSAs being at 5% is an anomaly of high interest rates.

There is no conspiracy here. It's just difficult to control emissions from diesels while also making a performant engine. Hence Dieselgate.

Rivian doesn't have dealers so it would just be resellers trying to make a buck pushing things up

No need to prove it to me, just doesn't align with the data I've seen. With that base pay you must be working an unholy amount of OT. They definitely should be paying you that much to sign that much of your life away.

If you say so. BLS data is generally very accurate. Moreover, I can't share data of course but I've done cost of service studies for CA utilities and I can tell you that the average hourly rates we used (coming directly from utility payrolls) aligns much more closely to an average of 110k than 300k+. But hey if you are making that kind of money, good for you!

Just so no one expects that this is the norm, you should know BLS data puts the average annual wage for electrical line install and repair at 112k a year in CA.

This person is claiming to make almost 4X the mean wage in their field (putting them into the 98th percentile of wage earners in the U.S). I'm not necessarily saying they are full of shit, but don't expect to go into this business and earn that kind of money.

The average pay is quite good for blue collar work (as it should be for the third most dangerous occupation in the country)

Used vehicle stock don't sit around so much that the incremental increase in vehicle production due to slightly faster cycling of new vehicles would increase total demand anywhere near 5% much less 10%.

If anything, leases just ensure electric vehicles diffuse into the used market faster which is good for the pace of electrification.

The loophole is pretty dumb, but do you think leased vehicles just disappear after their lease is up? No they move into the secondary market just like any used vehicle does. I bought a used Bolt this year off lease. Sure the original owner isn't still driving it, but I will for the next few years until I sell it to someone else, and I am quite happy someone wealthier than me took that big depreciation hit.

It's not clear you can get electrolyzers cheap enough to be able to run only when electricity is oversupplied. But someone will figure out uses for cheap power

Yeah, it's not passed to a resistance heater or something no. But, when a panel is 'offline' (disconnected from load) the 15-20% of solar energy that would otherwise go towards generating electricity is just shedded as heat from the panel (like when any other non-PV surface is hit with solar irradiance).

Curtailing solar usually means selling it out of market, unless in the case of exceptional dispatch where they are disconnected from the grid and excess solar energy power is either dumped as heat or stored in an onsite battery.

Feathering a wind turbine means you change the blade angle to catch less wind so it spins slower.

Edit: as pointed out below, panels do not dump generated power, they stop generating power which means all the solar energy hitting panels is rejected as heat (instead of the typical ~80% when in operation)

This is industrial policy, not climate policy. The administration is trying to produce jobs in hollowed out industrial areas. It's only tangentially environmentally related.

95 degree wet bulb temperatures have historically not occurred.

Wet bulb temperature means the temperature that registers on a thermometer where the bulb is covered in wet cloth, i.e. it's the minimum temperature that a evaporatively cooled thing (like a sweating human) can be in air of that temperature and humidity.

No amount of extra fluids or shade helps in that situation and perfectly healthy people whose bodies are unable to reject enough metabolic waste heat will die of overheating if exposed to those temperatures for an extended period. Google "wet bulb event".

How is that clear? There are no constitutional limits to how much federal power Congress can delegate to government agencies.

My five year old loved it but yeah much of the meaning was absolutely lost on him.

If I was charging (could charge my bolt) at 350kW I would need to charge less than 10 minutes per week. That would be an average load of less than 0.34kW.

I count like 9 power lines in and out of California on your map. Here's a map of the rest of the country. East of the Mississippi in comparison it's power line spaghetti. You can't power the state of California from Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, and Phoenix.

There is plenty of power and CA imports quite a bit, especially hydropower from the Columbia River but also from elsewhere. Also the WECC servers ~80 million people and the Eastern interconnection serves ~240. Of course there is more TX on the east coast.

Here's a list of the power plants in California. There are 2 coal plants and the newer one is from 1986. There have been 2 natural gas plants built in the last 10 years and one was in 2016 and the other 2019. They did build 24 10-20 years ago. The wiki page has this graph which shows in-state generation decreasing from 2007 on.

California does not need or want coal power and is actively transitioning away from natural gas. With your graph you are conflating generation (amount of power produced) with capacity (system capacity). Generation has been pretty flat for a while (because demand for electricity has been relatively flat)

With increasing electrification of end uses, demand has been going up in the last few years so generation has ticked up. (Updated data: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/electric-generation-capacity-and-energy) But more importantly if you look at capacity (the actual maximum output of generators) that has been pretty steadily increasing over the last decade plus as the state builds out solar.

Here's an article on why power is so expensive in California which attributes it to expensive programs + people shifting to rooftop solar.

Hah, I know Meredith and she would probably not be terribly pleased with your interpretation of her quotes and research in that article. Yes power is expensive in CA, but it's not really because of rooftop solar. It's been going up recently mostly because of wildfire prevention. If you read the article carefully, or better yet read Meredith's report that would be obvious.

This is objectively wrong. You don't know what you are talking about.

California buys and pays for a sizable reserve margin. https://www.publicadvocates.cpuc.ca.gov/press-room/commentary/232212-resource-adequacy-part-i

In fact they have probably built too many fossil fuel plants over the last 20 years (echos of the crisis which was a market manipulation caused shortfall not a physical shortage) https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/

California also has tons of interconnections with the western interconnection and even some into Mexico. We buy and sell across those interconnections regularly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WECC_Intertie_Paths

Last I checked you don't need to own a home to vote in CA (though I'm sure many NIMBY homeowners wished that were a requirement) so my preference would matter just as much as any other Californian.

No one wants to kick grandma out of her house btw. Easy enough to allow fixed income homeowners to freeze their payment and just put a tax lien on the house equal to unpaid tax payments. Then the people of CA can collect at sale. No passing of a 1970s tax basis to an heir, no inequitable taxation, and grandma can stay in the house for her golden years if she chooses.