talked to chairman Copenhagen about cutting off the oxygen....wait...crap....gotta get back to mars.

What is wrong with this state?

First you talk about "freedom" and "democracy" and the will of the people and then you prevent any city, county or other local jurisdiction from deciding for themselves how they think businesses that enjoy the bounty of our economy should behave with respect to their employees in terms of minimum wage, sick time, etc.

Because of course if you don't please your corporate masters you will be taken out behind the woodshed and spanked or worse yet, denied funds for your next campaign. Keep the people poor and powerless. That fits into the OK mindset.

Now you want to penalize people who take the "free" energy from the sun and convert it into an energy source for doing so? I could understand a fee, commercially agreed (not the State dictating) a fee for pushing any excess energy generation back on the grid provided that you are compensated in return when you take power back from the grid.

This is Inhoffe at his best. There is no climate change so screw anyone who tries to reduce their energy costs in an environmentally sound way. This will screw the fossil fuel companies in OK and we cannot have that.

Maybe the neighbors need to join together to form a co-op to install and share each other's solar power...and/or find a way to store it better for when "the sun don't shine".

We have to start thinking of ways to compete with the corporations. This country needs more co-ops.

I belong to a rural electric co-op, and I love it. It is kept honest by the people who belong to it and use it. I even get checks back every year now that help offset some of my energy costs in winter. Not by much, but hey...it's better than nothing.

that heat their home?

the grids need to be maintained....well actually most need to be completely replaced.

IF you read the article, solar produces in the daytime, when the draw of power is greatest. By decentralized production, as happens with solar AND wind, it actually takes stress off the lines, making them last longer.

So as far as maintenance, if they were to do anything, they should give people with solar a kickback.

And by the way, they buy back the energy at their cost of production in most states. If it costs 4 cents a Kw/hr, then they pay the solar or wind producer that amount, while charging around 11 cents an hour. You do better if you try to use it all, or store it with battery systems, than get charged a fee. Then again, batteries bring their own environmental and actual costs.

Weather and mechanical damage from humans, trees, animals etc. affects them a lot more.

What does care is the protective relay schemes that prevent system damage and personnel hazard upon failure. The impacts of point generation on the local, or neighborhood if you will, from a safety standpoint cannot be ignored much longer in a lot of areas.

I am not really defending the tax on small producers, but the electric grid in most areas was designed as a one way street.

I am currently working on protective relay schemes for several Micro grids planned for Connecticut's Norwich Public Utilities Co.

like power companies. The rest of us can go pound sand.

The thing almost received 100% support in the state house

Democrats are useless there. An Oklahoma Democrat is not the same animal as a Vermont Democrat, for example...

to the Original problem--campaign finance. Corrupting, polluting, old money oil and coal, are buying politicians to make it more expensive to use solar, as each Kw/hr produced by a user, means one they don't sell at close to three times the cost they'll pay you for any overage.

eom

not those of the rank and file citizens in Oklahoma.

grid and sell excess power back to the power company.
Big big money is determined to stave off solar and wind until they can control it and make the same money from it.

can't you just not sell the electricity back and avoid the fee?

when there is no sun or wind. And I think current battery storage may not be good enough for being completely off the grid?
Hopefully someone with a lot more knowledge than me can answer that.

Smaller, local grids are less of a terrorist threat, too, I would think.

You are correct, a typical 100amp residential service with a 50-60 amp peak usage would require a very large battery bank. Keeping in mind that home power at 120 volts (Wattage = Voltage x Current) so 120 volts at 1 amp would be able to accomodate 120 watts per amp. BUT, battery voltage at 12 volts equal 12v at 1 amp = 12watts. I use my battery bank as a backup emergency generator when there is no charging and during full charge cycles use all the excess wattage in the home. Someday they will produce batteries with adequate storage for the dollars, but that hasn't happened yet for small single home systems.

I think that once the storage problem is solved, maybe we should go to local grids, easier to maintain and protect. And perhaps more jobs? Or jobs for power company workers who are out of jobs?
It is ridiculous that so much of the eastern seaboard can lose power all at once.

Other than batteries, there are other ways. In homes in the South in the Summer for instance, you could run the AC to achieve lower temperatures during the daytime, using up some, if not all of the excess, then back off at night, where it'd have a buffer before it kicked on again.

And batteries provide their own environmental issues as well, sadly.

Of course they're experimenting with systems that pump water uphill to a storage tank with excess energy during the day, then it runs over a turbine to the bottom tank at night, generating electricity too. That is probably only at a "grand" scale now, but I don't see why it couldn't be adapted to a smaller scale, a basic hydro-solar system.

Solar panels are still very $$$, with the sell-back option folks can reap a bit of that cost back and eventually the panels pay for themselves. That's the selling point, I believe. I wonder if in years to come, how much of this will be needed for maintenance of the panels and/or the system itself.

So, the PTB will try anything to stop this(solar) unless they can get $$ out of it.

run through the counties and their cities. In the case of Oklahoma, the state government jump the cities and counties wanting to allow the affordable sale of solar and wind devices and ordinance protections for and against renewal energy not controlled by the FEC-Fascist Energy Complex. Ever more Oklahomans are seeing the link between fascism and the GOP.

Gov. Fallin. She seems to be in the pocket of the rich.

Marriage Benefits..

Oklahoma’s Governor Denies Marriage Benefits to National Guard Members

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/27/oklahoma-s-governor-denies-marriage-benefits-to-national-guard-members.html

The utility has to maintain the powerlines.

Maybe don't pay for the excess?

What precisely is reasonable about a fee for not using a service?

You'll see that distributive systems of electricity from many sources, actually keeps them from having to pump so much electricity over long distances, which actually takes stress OFF the lines, making maintenance costs less. So not only do solar and wind installations save them money because of reduced maintenance needs, but they'll get this fee too.

It's a tax on the environmental, basically. It's like the Washington State measure they were trying to pass, a per mile tax on cars, to replace gas taxes. That means whether you've got a Chevy Volt, or a YUKON SUV, you pay the same per mile, even though obviously the YUKON does much more damage to roads over time.

It is basically a tax on being a good environmental steward of the planet. It is completely wrong.

Cushing, OK.

Nothing more needs to be said here. Every last politician in OK is owned and operated by big oil (read Koch Brothers).

When its yuppies with solar panels, that's capitalist extortion.

It's the same damn problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

Use the grid, pay for the grid.

that seems like and apples and oranges comparison to me.

The grazing fees have been in effect since the late 1980's. Bundy has been sponging off the taxpayers for over 20 years. How are the people with solar panels doing that?

more than the cost of the electricity used. Apparently this transportation fee doesn't have a rainy day fund attached to it because since the ice storm earlier this year we are paying approximately an additional $50 fee/month to pay for the line repairs necessitated by the storm.

What cost is there to the electric company other than a two way meter that probably is already charged to the customer?

If I own a dam what fee would I have to pay to sell my electricity to a power company, a nuclear plant, how about a coal fired plant?

Let the power companies get their profit the same way they do from them, pay them less for the electricity than they charge customers for it.

We need to start treating these monopolies a little more harshly, a guaranteed 5% return on stock is more than I can get for a savings account at the local bank. That should be enough. Of course with your name you could probably come up with a better formula.

And as far as the federal land is concerned, $1.35/month would still be freeloading if Bundy was even paying the fees. In New York I had two cows and almost enough pasture just for the summer months. For the fall, spring, and winter I needed hay that costs more than $1.35 per bale and a full grown cow will eat a bale per day plus grain when there is no outside feed. My taxes on that acreage cost me over $1000/year. So tell me again how Bundy isn't a freeloader.

The point is to discourage people from going solar so that they will use and pay for the (lobbying) local power company's power. This is politics in a nutshell.

...after all ...that's not capitalism.

By using the government. But they make such a big deal when the poor do the same, to a much, much smaller degree, don't they.

solar panels?

Is Oklahoma trying to be the worst state in the Union?

somehow merge FL and OK into FLOK, and we could send it south for the winter.

They are basically implementing his wish list.

From TECO's web site:

Customer charge
The monthly customer charge covers the cost of maintaining your electric meter and the wires that bring electrical service to your home or business. The customer charge also covers the cost of reading the meter and maintaining customer records and accounting for bill payments, credit and other transactions affecting your account. The customer charge is incurred even if electricity is not used during the month.

Energy charge
The monthly energy charge includes all other costs of producing the electricity you purchase, except fuel. This also includes conservation, environmental and capacity cost recovery charges.

Fuel charge
The monthly fuel charge is the cost of fuel used to produce your electricity. Fuel costs are passed through from fuel suppliers to our customers with no markup or profit to Tampa Electric.
The maintenance thing - "freeloading" is bullshit, IMO - if I am using less electricity, the power company does not have to pay for as much fuel.

Energy charge and fuel charge have always been pegged to how much electricity I use - if I use less, then I am putting less load on the grid, and using less fuel. Plus, I would be actually SUPPLYING Teco with electricity that it does not have to create.

I am pretty damned lucky TECO was not bought out by Duke Power - I would be paying for nuclear plants that I don't want, and that Duke has no intention of building - just "planning" and sucking up government subsidies.

Come to think of it - freeloader can probably be applied more to companies than people.
If I had solar, I would be more than happy to store excess electricity, and I wonder if it is required to sell excess back to the power company.

readiness to do work.

if one stores the excess energy created in water tanks or batteries . It says it's to recover expenses on infrastructure changes to distribute energy. Bogus since the grid needs redone anyway. My feeling is the utility collecting the fees should be responsible for updates and care of grid, but we know that'll never happen.

DEVIOUS....that's Republicans.

Arizona has the most sunshine of any state. Now they succeeded in New Mexico. They won't stop there.

I use ALL power generated by my solar/wind/battery system. After the batteries are fully charged during the day I bring online devices that use the excess and keep the batteries at full. If you are generating more power than you use, selling it to (the govt in my area as local govt owns the utility) just allows them to exert control over your power independence. If they see an opening to regulate or charge for something, they will use it.

It is that simple.

you first have to do something about the preachers who imply that gawd only loves republicans.

This mess really kicked into high gear when Reagan's people fell in with the churches (or vise versa).

What is happening? gag

as long as the cause of that negative effect brings fees (taxes) into the gov't (which would be offset by a loss of tax revenue from lost sales)


BUT, negatively affecting businesses (which is a lie) by allowing minimum wage increases or paid sick days is downright evil!

But then, what would one expect from a state that has an oil derrick on the state capitol lawn?

-- Mal

So this bill is a straight up money grab for the power companies.

in Oklahoma. These RWers seem to have a very great dysfunctional love and respect for the authority and authorities chosen by the plantation class to subjugate them.

And I'm saying this from the viewpoint of a resident of Arizona.

Is this correct or is it if you so much as install Solar Panels? I see nothing wrong with taxing wealthy people who are increasing their wealth.

I' m not wealthy but retired on SS and buy parts only as I can afford it.

100 watt solar panels are running about $125.00 apiece for good european (not chinese) mfg. You can start small 100watts at a time and upgrade as you can afford it. I have been building mine a piece at a time. Started with just 200watts solar, a couple of marine batteries and a small invertor. Over the past 2 years I have expanded it to 400watt solar and 500watt wind and more batteries. It will never run the entire house (yet), but what I can run off of it is making a 10-20% dent in my utility bill.

The advantage is you can grow it as you can afford it small chunks at a time. Plus it's really easy to install yourself, all the information is out on the web as to optimum panel angles for the season changes and the suppliers provide all the wiring specifics.

I just do NOT grid tie and try to sell excess to the utility exposing me to fees and taxes like the OP. I use all I can produce.

If you don't start going green at some point, you never will. Nothing gets cheaper and I figured if I kept waiting, then my utility just reaped all the money. Building up a green system at least is one you can start small, expand as you can. I equate it to starting with a car chassis with wheels and pedalling it at first and adding horsepower as I can until it starts reaping benefits. Even a small system running just some lights and TV will reduce your utility bill.

I can see where really wealthy people will go out install more solar panels than they need and reap the earnings on their excess electricity and those people should be taxed.

grid tie systems. I am one. If the wealthy invest in solar, I applaud them.

...more and more. And as technology renders the state and its services less and less necessary, you can expect more of the same.

K&R


''All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.'' ~George Orwell

It seems as if they are selling additional energy created. I am truly not sure how this works so am not forming an opinion. It would seem, if they are in essence selling a product, they need to be taxed on said sail. If it goes into the system and they get some form of credit, someone has to pay the taxes on it at some point. Are other residence currently paying that or is it the power company. Or does none of what I am saying make any sense at all. Strong possibilities all the way around.

They're starting to sound just as bad as NoDak.

oklahoma continues to embarrass those who left it a long long time ago - how medieval can they sink? guess we'll find out with the next repressive law. as an ex-okie, and looking to leave north carolina because of the same attitude of those now in office, it is shameful how low the republicans have sunk - where did they get an education? at the same place i did? it should be burned down.

Publicity for being fuckwitted throwbacks, that is...

What is sad is a lot of these places had progressive histories...and "liberal" was a compliment, not a dirty word:
http://www.liberalkschamber.com/relocation.html

states in the country. William Jennings Bryan was around, Afalfa Bill Murry - there was even an Oklahoma Socialist Party, and it had a number of members. Up until about the 80's, it was a pretty good place to derive the benefits of that past, too.

No more. Now is the time of the fascists.

Laborfest looks at Oklahoma’s forgotten history
https://www20.csueastbay.edu/news/2010/09/laborfest-looks-at-Oklahoma-forgotten-history.html

(To be raped by oligarchs.)

And a law against raising the minimum wage? More FREEDOM!

(To be raped by oligarchs.)


"Power against the people."

Not that these ham-fisted scammers care about the irony:

I would advise any intelligent people to GTFO while you still can.

It sounds like the Oklahoma legislature is full of smart ALECs.

legislature needs to do is pass some extremely restrictive 'voter fraud' (voter suppression) legislation and I think they just may win the 'Worst State to Live' competition.

They do have some stiff competition with the Florida's 'no public restrooms open to voters' policy though.

Than laws that prohibit homeowners from harvesting their own rain water? I think in Nevada, rain barrels are illegal. What's the difference?

Because I think the government there has terminal brain damage.

Wind competes with the Koch's coal and Alberta Tar Sands business, so I suppose such legislation might be coming this way.

I'll have to get a closer look at the Unicameral's legislation and see what's up.

why should this be a surprise.

nearing the top of the list for the dumbest state in the union.



-p

For all the talk about renewables the State in the end sides with the utilities who every month bring in millions in taxes for state coffers.