Most of those involved in the nuclear boom have retired.
Now that they try to restart the nuclear industry, new young people must be hired and trained. There are also new people on the licensing side, who are much more cautious than their predecessors. demanding long paper trails on everything. This is driving up the cost of first new nuclear reactors.
In the future the builders and regulators start learning the habits of each other, thus the price of new reactors is going to drop from the current high prices, without jeopardizing nuclear safety.
Solar cells are likely to drop to a quarter of their current price as the they go from generating about 1% of the world's power needs (as they do at present) to most of it.
Nuclear power is already more expensive than solar, and isn't going to get much cheaper. It's not going to be competitive.
Solar generation needs storage to let it cover the whole day. Some exists -
formatting link
has been around since 1984. Snowy 2 in Australia will build on existing hydroelectric plant.
Some will be battery based like Musk's battery in South Australia, though
formatting link
is probably a better technology, and one now being built-up in China will have nearly twice the power of Musk's unit, and store about six times as much energy.
Really? So for how many years did the NRC just shake hands and take the wo rd of the utilities that things were right?
Such BS. When North Anna was built the license application was falsified t o say there was no fault line nearby. They got caught and paid the whoppin g fine of $32,000. The point is they had to file paperwork and people chec ked it. What paperwork is required now that was not required in the 80s?
Total speculation based on BS. "learning the habits" That is too rich. T he same paperwork will be filed. The same safety systems will be required. The same billions of dollars will have to be spent to build a full size r eactor. That's why they want to increase the size of new facilities, so th e various fixed costs can be amortized over more kWh.
--
Rick C.
++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
"The federal solar tax credit, also known as the investment tax credit (ITC ), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a solar energy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residential and co mmercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
That's just the fed subsidy here, some states are also subsidizing it on top of that. And in virtually all states, consumers of electricity are subsidizing it because solar homes and businesses are either zero users of grid electricity or near zero, so they are not paying for the huge costs of the infrastructure. Half my electric bill is for that. So, if you have a $150 a month electric bill, $75 is going to support the grid, without which your neighbor who is paying zero, would have no power at night, nor any way to put his excess power into the grid for profit. Put that $75 charge onto the solar house and suddenly the solar miracle doesn't look the same.
he examples in the US and the UK all seem to be way behind schedule and way over budget, and likely to be cancelled, but that's not the kind of inform ation a trade association puts out.
Wow, you finally figured out how to use google yourself, eh? Thanks for confirming for all that what I posted, that there were over 50 nukes under construction, was correct. It's your OPINION that because some are behind schedule, they will be cancelled. Of course if it was some lib govt project, which are ALWAYS behind schedule and over cost, why then there would be no such issue there of course.
TC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a solar ener gy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residential and commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
Yes, that is not uncommon for technologies that need a few years of assista nce to ramp up production to lower the cost to a usable figure. The nuclea r industry had it's day in the subsidy sunlight as has the petroleum indust ry, yet we still subsidize. So why all the outcry about subsidizing an ene rgy technology that in a very few years will be walking on it's own two leg s? Why no outrage of subsidies to the petroleum industry which makes recor d profits? What we should be doing there is not allowing all the mergers t hat happened over the last decade or so. The petroleum industry is one whe re the practical economics is well served with 10 or 20 major petroleum com panies. The petroleum industry wants to coalesce into just two or three at most. If they thought it would be allowed they would merge into one compa ny! It's not like the airlines where competition is fierce and smaller air lines get edged out in legal ways. Or the cell networks where being a litt le bit smaller makes it harder to provide all essential coverage.
I would like to see solar subsidized for another decade in decreasing amoun ts. It needs to be tapered off with adequate notice so it can be used with confidence. There are places where the utilities have gotten the state le gislature to reverse the laws requiring them to buy residential solar energ y at the same price as they sell to residences. Such an abrupt cut off cre ates FUD and prevents others from investing, which was the entire point of the program in the first place.
--
Rick C.
--- Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
TC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a solar ener gy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residential and commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
Try to learn the difference between a tax credit and a tax deduction, becau se apparently you don't know. And the tax credits are a scam. The credit is for the installer, not you. Y ou get the credit, sure, but all they're doing is returning the extra money the installer charged you. That would be extra in the sense of being above and beyond what they would have accepted if there was no credit. Your net savings is zero.
The examples in the US and the UK all seem to be way behind schedule and w ay over budget, and likely to be cancelled, but that's not the kind of info rmation a trade association puts out.
It is not a far leap to say some will be canceled. They canceled the react ors in South Carolina because of the massive overruns. If a company expect s to spend $2 billion on a reactor and before they've committed the full $2 billion they find out it's going to be $5 or $6 billion, that's not a hard decision to make if they don't have the money. Heck, the South Carolina p roject implosion took down the Westinghouse nuclear company with it.
Yeah, it's very likely some of those 50 projects will also implode under th e weight of the ballooning costs.
--
Rick C.
--+ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
(ITC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a solar en ergy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residential an d commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
tance to ramp up production to lower the cost to a usable figure. The nucl ear industry had it's day in the subsidy sunlight as has the petroleum indu stry, yet we still subsidize. So why all the outcry about subsidizing an e nergy technology that in a very few years will be walking on it's own two l egs? Why no outrage of subsidies to the petroleum industry which makes rec ord profits?
Because they aren't really "subsidies" would be a good place to start:
formatting link
For example:
Master Limited Partnerships ($3.9 billion ?subsidy?) ? ? Ending the MLP ?subsidy? would result in MLP?s being considered corporations that must be taxed before their distributions are passed along to shareholders. Therefore, any MLP income would be taxed at the corporate level and then again at the dividend level.
You'd have to be a real loon to consider that a subsidy. The income from the oil well is still being taxed, it's taxed as income to the owners in the partnership. It's basically the same thing as a Sub S corporation. Is the govt "subsidizing" the local hardware store, car dealer, supermarket too? Many of those are run as Sub S, where the income is not taxed at the corporate level, it shows up on the owners income tax returns as income to them and they pay the tax.
"Intangible Drilling Costs ($3.5 billion ?subsidy? ? ? low estimate is $780 million) - Intangible Drilling Costs are essential ly the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currentl y, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in th e year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs im mediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. "
What's so unreasonable about being allowed to expense immediately certain expenses or with the majors expense them over 5 years? How is writing off an actual expense against income a "subsidy"? It's nothing like the solar subsidy, where you don't have any profits, you just get to deduct 30% of the cost straight off your income tax. That's nothing like the above oil examples.
ed over the last decade or so. The petroleum industry is one where the pra ctical economics is well served with 10 or 20 major petroleum companies.
And who picked that magic number? What evidence do you have that there isn't enough competition? Why can't libs leave things that work alone?
The petroleum industry wants to coalesce into just two or three at most. If they thought it would be allowed they would merge into one company!
And you know this how? Fly on the wall? But just for arguments sake, the cell phone business is down to about three. How about the the OS market? MSFT dominates, lump in Android, Linux? It's three. That busted, not working?
es get edged out in legal ways. Or the cell networks where being a little bit smaller makes it harder to provide all essential coverage.
It's in fact exactly like those markets, competition is working, leave them alone.
unts. It needs to be tapered off with adequate notice so it can be used wi th confidence. There are places where the utilities have gotten the state legislature to reverse the laws requiring them to buy residential solar ene rgy at the same price as they sell to residences. Such an abrupt cut off c reates FUD and prevents others from investing, which was the entire point o f the program in the first place.
How about we start making solar customers pay their fair share of the cost of the grid? Like half the amount of their neighbor's bill? I'd expect you libs would be outraged, it's unfair to the poor, unfair to minorities. They can't afford to put in a $20K solar system, but they are paying $75 a month to give the rich yuppies with that solar system a free ride. There's a real subsidy for you.
Why would that be? Technology CHANGES, why do we have fossilized forms to fill out? You've never in your life been constrained to do things the same way your grandfather did. What 'safety systems' of today match those of fifty years ago?
Technology changes, as do 'full size' scales. Costs aren't fixed-in-stone by our grandfathers.
Unclear. Large factories (millworks) gave way to (usually) smaller shops when steam and line shafts were replaced by small electric motors..
When line losses are considered, multiple small generating facilities seems a more economic solution. NIMBY issues aside, that is.
This is to everybody but you got the reply because you were last.
untry where solar isn't worth a shit, in fact even satellite.
But Germany's government is extremely leftist and most leftists do not thin k out the consequences of their (knee jerk) reactions. They are talking abo ut building a whole lotta stuff, and that is going to drive energy costs up . But let them, that will turn the state conservative as they find that thi s bullshit does not work.
Nuclear is the best tradeoff with viability and not polluting. Going solar is wonderful but it takes alot of land, that is something they don't really have.
When the new tech has advanced enough then switch, but don't force it now. not yet.
The examples in the US and the UK all seem to be way behind schedule and w ay over budget, and likely to be cancelled, but that's not the kind of info rmation a trade association puts out.
The point was always to find out where you were getting your information.
You never revealed that, but eventually it became obvious what you were wor king from.
nukes under construction, was correct.
A nuclear industry trade publication claims that there are fifty-odd nuclea r reactors under construction. They aren't all power stations.
It does seem likely, and has happened before. Your source ignores the possi bility that this might happen.
le and over cost, why then there would be no such issue there of course.
Which "lib govt project" do you have in mind?
This is a rhetorical question. We all know that you are a right-wing propag anda shill, who won't reveal his sources because that would make it obvious how unreliable they were.
None. They had common sense. Don't drive into things, keep your hands away from that saw blade when it is turning, keep one hand in your pocket when m essing with electricity, bob your hair if it is long when working with heav y machinery like lathes etc.
I would never let anyone use my machines unless they are at least 50 years old. That includes guns. I have refused the kid because I did not believe h e was mature enough for a gun. Told him that he was likely to get into more trouble with it and solve nothing, and of course possibly wreck his life.
But the Germans were experts with machines, really. Better than us actually . More productive with better precision, and this has been true for quite s ome time. There is a REASON they came so close to taking over half of Europ e.
He was a boon to Germany, and responsible for Wolksvagon. I wonder how much he and Ford picked each other's brains, they were pen pals and had quite a bit of mutual respect. They were doing about the same thing - making cars people could afford.
But he got out of hand. He got too much against the Jews, in fact it took h im a while to get the people up to it even though they had been the ones fu cked. I would have regulated them. That is what Putin does. Seems to be wor king, Russia is in great shape now. The media might say otherwise but look it up for yourself and see the numbers. And when they lie, they usually lie against him, not for him.
Like Pussy Riot, what hapened to them ? Some locality where they caused tro uble at the entrance to an Olympic event and then Putin said he thought the sentence was a bit too harsh. They didn't disappear. All this about his en emies disappearing, well if Pussy Riot ain't one then there are none. They are still there.
I hear from people over that side of the pond that even though their govern ment is liberal, a hell of alot of them are not. And look at Brexit, the su pposedly liberal, progressiv Brits voted that they are sick of the interfer ence, and the immigration policies of the EU and want their sovereignty bac k. Some will not understand that but I do. they want to rule themselves and not have some foreigners telling them what to do about immigration or anyt hing else. AND IT PASSED. What does that tell you ?
I know what Slowman would say here and really wish he would choke on a pean ut, or a big dick. Globalist socialists are my enemy. I want my guns. I wan t my three acre yard where I have enough room to have a party even though m any of my friends hate each other. Well not really hate but... And I want t o earn the money for all this, not have it given to me. I want the freedom to use the Nword without going to jail, if I get busted I want my day in co urt. I will never again take a plea bargain unless they get me drunk drivin g, then that is really your best option. But anything else I will stand for myself in court. If they come and decide to search the house for whatever I want the right to say - got a warrant ? They want permission, no. Wake t he judge up, umm, (taking out my wallet) Spanagel's number is, fluff trough all the shit in my wallet and say " was right here, must be in the house, want me to get it for you ? (Spanagel is a judge in this town)
So as nice as Germany is, I doubt I would like to spend much time there. Li ke retire or anything. There are much better countries suited to me. At one time I might have considered it but they have too conservative of a govern ment.
t (ITC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a solar energy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residential and commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
y
e
istance to ramp up production to lower the cost to a usable figure. The nu clear industry had it's day in the subsidy sunlight as has the petroleum in dustry, yet we still subsidize. So why all the outcry about subsidizing an energy technology that in a very few years will be walking on it's own two legs? Why no outrage of subsidies to the petroleum industry which makes r ecord profits?
?? Ending the MLP ?subsidy? would result in MLP? ?s being considered corporations that must be taxed before their distribu tions are passed along to shareholders. Therefore, any MLP income would be taxed at the corporate level and then again at the dividend level.
.
et
? low estimate is $780 million) - Intangible Drilling Costs are essential ly the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Currentl y, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in th e year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs im mediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. "
Explain to me how the cost of a well with no value is any different from an y other well? Yes, business expenses are deductible and there should be no need for special deductions, right?
formatting link
l-oil-subsidies
This should be enough info even for you to understand.
ened over the last decade or so. The petroleum industry is one where the p ractical economics is well served with 10 or 20 major petroleum companies.
Uh, it isn't a number, it's a range. The issue is why can't the oil indust ry leave things alone? Why do they have to merge over and over until there are only a handful of companies? The answer is because the fewer the numb er, the less competition there is.
Part of your problem is that you can't actually think without applying inap propriate labels. What does "lib" have to do with the soundness of an idea . As long as you think in terms of "lib" ideas and whatever else there is, you aren't looking at the ideas themselves.
. If they thought it would be allowed they would merge into one company!
The government tried to bust up Microsoft, but they weren't good enough to fight Gate's lawyers. They even tried to unbundle internet explorer, but t he lawyers convinced the judge it would wreck the OS. lol
BTW, Android isn't a desktop OS.
ines get edged out in legal ways. Or the cell networks where being a littl e bit smaller makes it harder to provide all essential coverage.
Again, you miss the mark. There are many markets where airline mergers hav e resulted in two or three carriers are now one and prices have jumped sign ificantly. This is well documented if you want to learn about it.
mounts. It needs to be tapered off with adequate notice so it can be used with confidence. There are places where the utilities have gotten the stat e legislature to reverse the laws requiring them to buy residential solar e nergy at the same price as they sell to residences. Such an abrupt cut off creates FUD and prevents others from investing, which was the entire point of the program in the first place.
So you want the non-solar customers to be subsidized by the solar customers ? Here I thought you were about fairness.
Everyone pays for the grid if they use it. The greater grid is charged as "transmission" on your bill. The local grid is billed as "distribution". I don't know of any states that allow a residential supplier to be paid for their electricity. They can be credited against future use. Again, this is about getting an industry jump started. In a few more years there won't be any more subsidies on EVs or residential solar. Then what will you fin d to complain about?
...and the CO2 emission problem DID NOT CHANGE; ditto regarding GW. Hell, even Santa did not change his protocol... Ditto regarding our favorite ball players. Ditto regarding astronomers. Or the weather reporters. Or the way circuit boards are designed and made. GET IT? Not related.
dit (ITC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a sola r energy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both residentia l and commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
it
ity
ro
the
t.
rt
e
d
ssistance to ramp up production to lower the cost to a usable figure. The nuclear industry had it's day in the subsidy sunlight as has the petroleum industry, yet we still subsidize. So why all the outcry about subsidizing an energy technology that in a very few years will be walking on it's own t wo legs? Why no outrage of subsidies to the petroleum industry which makes record profits?
? Ending the MLP ?subsidy? would result in MLP? ??s being considered corporations that must be taxed before their distr ibutions are passed along to shareholders. Therefore, any MLP income would be taxed at the corporate level and then again at the dividend level.
om
on.
rket
?? low estimate is $780 million) - Intangible Drilling Costs are essent ially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Curre ntly, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the costs immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. "
in
any other well? Yes, business expenses are deductible and there should be no need for special deductions, right?
The intangible deduction applies to either well. It's just allowing the expense to deducted in the current year or over 5 years, instead of capitalized over the life of the well.
oal-oil-subsidies
ROFL. Great objective source. Except you can smell the shit from the very opening:
For one thing, it leaves out the annual $14.5 billion in consumption subsid ies ? things like the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LI HEAP), which helps lower-income residents pay their (fuel oil) heating bill s. (There are better ways to help poor people, but let?s leave that aside for now.)
What kind of asshole does it take to come up with that nonsense? That energy assistance for the poor somehow could be equated to subsidizing coal and oil companies?
"Most significantly, OCI?s analysis leaves out indirect subsidies ? things like the money the US military spends to protect oil shipp ing routes, or the unpaid costs of health and climate impacts from burning fossil fuels."
More silly lib nonsense. Like they want to kiss their asses for being so fair, they didn't add the cost of the US military in as a subsidy.
ROFL! ROFFL!
Then finally they get down to what they do consider "subsidies" and right on the list is what I already explained to you, BS like claiming that because master partnerships pass the income through to the partnership OWNERS who then pay the taxes on it, it's a "subsidy". By that definition then the local supermarket chain, car dealer, hardware store are "subsidized" too because they are Sub S corps and treated the same way. But you libs wouldn't understand that, because you know zippo about running a business, but think you should be able to tell others what to do and how it works.
ppened over the last decade or so. The petroleum industry is one where the practical economics is well served with 10 or 20 major petroleum companies .
Good as anything you've ever pulled out of your ass then, so why should anyone question it.
ave to merge over and over until there are only a handful of companies? Th e answer is because the fewer the number, the less competition there is.
There's more than a handful and there is ZERO evidence there is any market problem. It's just you whining. Not even your Democrats in Congress are whining, except some of those fools running for president that are rabid socialists and think all business is evil.
appropriate labels.
Not inappropriate at all. I see what libs stand for, what libs rant about. And here you are, proving it.
What does "lib" have to do with the soundness of an idea. As long as you think in terms of "lib" ideas and whatever else there is, you aren't lookin g at the ideas themselves.
I've looked at lib ideas, a lot of lib ideas:
high taxes big govt more govt programs sanctuary cities sanctuary states refusal to build a wall to help control illegal alien flow refusal to amend asylum laws that are flagrantly being abused supporting illegal aliens over Americans. obsession with the alleged evils of businesses, especially big businesses believing that whenever there is an imperfection in any system, govt is the answer
Did I leave out anything?
st. If they thought it would be allowed they would merge into one company!
o fight Gate's lawyers. They even tried to unbundle internet explorer, but the lawyers convinced the judge it would wreck the OS. lol
Yes, oh the horrors as a result! How will we ever survive? A PC cost $3K thirty years ago. Now one that's twenty times better costs $300. Yes, let's fix that!
Who said it was? But it clearly is competing with PCs, which is why PC sales are declining as people use tablets and smart phones. Which again shows why there was no need to break up Microsoft. More fundamentally, under the law, being large and successful is not a crime. That's another thing with you libs. For some reason you eschew success and want to reward failure. Why is that?
rlines get edged out in legal ways. Or the cell networks where being a lit tle bit smaller makes it harder to provide all essential coverage.
ave resulted in two or three carriers are now one and prices have jumped si gnificantly. This is well documented if you want to learn about it.
Heh snowflake, the world ain't perfect. Butch up. So the airlines are finally making some money, it's still a very tough business. I suppose you'd rather it be GM so the govt could bail it out.
amounts. It needs to be tapered off with adequate notice so it can be use d with confidence. There are places where the utilities have gotten the st ate legislature to reverse the laws requiring them to buy residential solar energy at the same price as they sell to residences. Such an abrupt cut o ff creates FUD and prevents others from investing, which was the entire poi nt of the program in the first place.
rs? Here I thought you were about fairness.
WTF? The people with solar installed are being subsidized by their neighbors, including their poor, minority neighbors who can't afford $20K for a solar system. The solar customers need and use the grid, they would have no power at night and would not be able to sell their excess energy into the grid, without the grid. Yet they aren't paying for the grid, because their electric bills are zero or close to it. Yet the poor family they pay $150 for electric, about $75 of that is to pay for the grid. If everyone had a zero electric bill, there would be no grid, capiche?
s "transmission" on your bill.
Solar customers have no bill, stupid.
hat allow a residential supplier to be paid for their electricity.
Most states,maybe all, do allow it. Why would a state want to disallow it? That would be stupid, states want more solar, they want to encourage it, they want more solar going into the grid. And of course it's billed as distributions, based on your kwh of usage:
Rich yuppie family with $20K solar system:
Bill: 0 Distribution charge for 0 Kwh, $0
Poor family bill: $150 total Distributions charge ~half, $75 Energy charge $75
redit (ITC), allows you to deduct 30 percent of the cost of installing a so lar energy system from your federal taxes. The ITC applies to both resident ial and commercial systems, and there is no cap on its value"
g it
icity
zero
r the
hat.
port
ave
rid
y
assistance to ramp up production to lower the cost to a usable figure. Th e nuclear industry had it's day in the subsidy sunlight as has the petroleu m industry, yet we still subsidize. So why all the outcry about subsidizin g an energy technology that in a very few years will be walking on it's own two legs? Why no outrage of subsidies to the petroleum industry which mak es record profits?
:
? Ending the MLP ?subsidy? would result in MLP? ??s being considered corporations that must be taxed before their distr ibutions are passed along to shareholders. Therefore, any MLP income would be taxed at the corporate level and then again at the dividend level.
from
tion.
market
t
? low estimate is $780 million) - Intangible Drilling Costs are ess entially the cost of drilling a new well that have no salvageable value. Cu rrently, most exploration companies are allowed to deduct 100% of the costs in the year they are incurred with the majors able to deduct 70% of the co sts immediately with the remaining 30% amortized over 5 years. "
tain
g
ng
m any other well? Yes, business expenses are deductible and there should b e no need for special deductions, right?
-coal-oil-subsidies
idies ? things like the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program ( LIHEAP), which helps lower-income residents pay their (fuel oil) heating bi lls. (There are better ways to help poor people, but let?s leave th at aside for now.)
ng
? things like the money the US military spends to protect oil ship ping routes, or the unpaid costs of health and climate impacts from burning fossil fuels."
o
happened over the last decade or so. The petroleum industry is one where t he practical economics is well served with 10 or 20 major petroleum compani es.
k
have to merge over and over until there are only a handful of companies? The answer is because the fewer the number, the less competition there is.
inappropriate labels.
t.
u think in terms of "lib" ideas and whatever else there is, you aren't look ing at the ideas themselves.
he
most. If they thought it would be allowed they would merge into one compan y!
,
to fight Gate's lawyers. They even tried to unbundle internet explorer, b ut the lawyers convinced the judge it would wreck the OS. lol
airlines get edged out in legal ways. Or the cell networks where being a l ittle bit smaller makes it harder to provide all essential coverage.
e
have resulted in two or three carriers are now one and prices have jumped significantly. This is well documented if you want to learn about it.
ng amounts. It needs to be tapered off with adequate notice so it can be u sed with confidence. There are places where the utilities have gotten the state legislature to reverse the laws requiring them to buy residential sol ar energy at the same price as they sell to residences. Such an abrupt cut off creates FUD and prevents others from investing, which was the entire p oint of the program in the first place.
r
mers? Here I thought you were about fairness.
as "transmission" on your bill.
that allow a residential supplier to be paid for their electricity.
t?
Which ones allow it? I have checked into this and you cant' get paid for g enerating electricity. At most you get credit on your bill toward future e lectricity use. Many states limit that either in amount or by duration. K inda like saving up vacation at work.
"Distributions"? What does that mean?
Electricity bills have Generation, Transmission and Distribution in additio n to taxes and possibly other fees. Sometimes Generation and Transmission are lumped together since they are both charges from third parties and not the local utility... at least not always.
Here they have a fixed base amount everyone pays for distribution. So that won't be zero. The rest of the bill should be zero if they are not using any net electricity. Do you pay for things you don't use? One of the taxe s is also a fixed fee, so not zero with zero usage.
LOL, so everyone else is "poor"?
ROFL indeed.
Not much point trying to discuss any of this with you. You literally can't see reason or appreciate facts. Everything you look at is through a biase d point of view.
So enjoy.
--
Rick C.
-++ Get 2,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.