Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3565)	3/24/2001 1:29:56 PM
From: Yorikke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33421

Ron, There was so little cost efficient power in the mills that the power people didn't even want to string the line to keep them on. Yes it was a pathetic joke. We have communities STILL turning down relatively clean gas powered plants. Its not the environmental crowd as much as the Yuppie contingent with their nimby attitude that is limiting power expansion. Ron, I can not address Nukes. I know people in the power industry and some off Nuc boats. Neither group feels long term public Nuc energy is desirable. I understand the economics. I've read your thread on the subject. Just can't even talk of em. My belief is that where the greens blew it was Hydro. Ed Abby and his books, though very entertaining and insightful did a major job at slowing Hydro. I believe we have the water resources in California, and we certainly do in the West, to contribute a large share of power needs through hydro. They are now talking of systems that charge based on demand price. And internal home systems that would conserve energy based on the same. The dishwasher and washing machine would go on after peak periods. Your lights would dim, and the refrigerator would go on hold mode. Interesting but not particularly cost effective at the moment. The point of conservation during peak periods will be hammered home very shortly that is for sure. In response to John's query, I can not name a politician that I feel has been particularly impressive in this fiasco. Davis waited much to long, to the point where his board of review , composed of some very good people, were limited in their recommendations. The head of the LAWP is a very intelligent man. There is a professor out in Redlands I think that has make some good commentary. Harry Snyder, chief legal counsel for Consumer Union has been out ahead of the curve in his comments. There was a good article in the LA Times about two months ago that picked 4 leaders. I'll try and find it. A lot of bad probabilities have come together to help make this situation. We had plants down for maintenance, A few major fires at power facilities. A generally higher gas price in the face of expiration of long term agreements. I believe we actually have more capacity than last year if we did not have the plants down. Private power companies have played some very questionable games with money and resources. There are some pretty contrived purchasing channels with new players inserted into them. New players who are making money and have familiar names on the boards. We saw the cost of MOVING gas through pipelines go up 5 times or so in a matter of months. High power charges are being alleged and proved in court. Power suppliers played a fear game with the people of California threatening to refuse to supply power, balking, and then forcing the state into the spot market. Now we all know California is not going broke, and the state will pay. But we don't know that the in state private power companies will pay. But there was a point there where California guaranteed the private company purchases and we still could not purchase power. I don't believe that Californians are in this because they are tree-huggers. They were led into it by very poor leadership, a lot of money to hype the sell out, and failed by a State press that has given up on reporting what goes on in Sacramento- In a period where money has not been a problem most major metropolitan TV stations and some papers have radically cut their press force in Sacramento. Now they scurry around with most reporters to new or stupid to talk about the real problems--and who can only catch the windmill stories. Anyway that's the perspective from Lala Land ...regards yorikke

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3565)	3/25/2001 10:28:37 AM
From: Gersh Avery	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 33421

Hi Ron .. Just got this e-mail that I thought you might want to check into: It seems like electric/energy bills are going are going up and up but we can put a stop to it. In fact, we believe we can eliminate your home energy bills. We are not offering something for nothing but rather we are offering a fair exchange. In my area of the country, home energy prices have gone up more than 58% in the last six months. If you're like me, it is beginning to put a squeeze on your budget. To make matters worse, there is no end in sight. Well, we may have a solution to this madness. Our company has been researching new ways to produce electricity since 1987. We are preparing to bring our revolutionary technology to market soon. It will produce electricity without polluting the environment in any way. We plan on putting a 30 kilowatt generator on homes all across America and Canada. This will be a completely distributed power generation. The unit will produce far more power than your home will use. You will get to use the power it produces. We will sell the power that you don't use back across the grid as our way of making money. You get your electricity for free in exchange for providing us an access point to the grid. This is the fair exchange we spoke of. We would like you to participate in this exciting offer. You can get more information about this incredible opportunity by sending an email to april_300@excite.com and put "More Info" as the subject. We will send you an email that will explain how to get all the details. There are a limited number of slots available so you will need to respond soon.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3565)	3/26/2001 5:16:11 PM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 33421

<<They would need well over 100,000 wind mills, with the consequent impact on scenic mountain passes(where most wind channels through) to the tune of about 1 acre per sited plant, AS COMPARED to maybe 50 to 100 acres for two nuclear facilities.>> You ever been around a major wind power site? the noise pollution SUCKS! No wildlife around for miles! Good news is that the wildlife that does pass through the area is deaf to human sounds & are easy hunting, but bad news is road kills are more common with vehicle damage great on wooded roads nearby. The news the greenies won't want published...