303

Almost half of US states haven't done the bare minimum to cut utility bills. (grist.org)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Cat@ponder.cat to c/news@lemmy.world

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A new report finds 24 states have yet to establish an “energy efficiency resource standard," which has been shown to curb demand, lower costs and reduce emissions.

all 39 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] Ghyste@sh.itjust.works 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They won't need to bother with that for 4 more years, either.

Edit: 4 more years minimum.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

GOSH I WONDER WHICH STATES

[-] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 33 points 1 year ago

Ohio's Republican supermajority handed the utility companies a really big win, causing energy prices to skyrocket for much if the state, in a massive bribery scandal.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Larry Householder went to fucking jail for it, and the law is still on the books. Price per unit on my utilities is pretty low, but almost half (sometimes more) of my bill is additional fees.

[-] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

There was chatter from the governor about trying to repeal it. We'll see. I'm not convinced he wasn't in on it

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The last chatter I heard from DeWine about it was "we shouldn't throw away a good law becuase of a bad guy" I'm sure damn near every repub in the statehouse is getting some sort of kickback for it.

[-] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

This sounds like they're looking to remove the remaining bits. From 2 weeks ago.

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/dewine-supports-repeal-of-remaining-scandal-ridden-firstenergy-legislation

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Well, at least that is something. Though they sure are slow-rolling a bill that steals from their constituents and everyone publicly trashes.

[-] TheD00d@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

PUCO is a fucking joke.

[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago

In California they have raised our rates 6 times. We reduce they increase.

[-] Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

PG&E is for profit

SMUD is non-profit

I wonder which one raised rates...

[-] pbbananaman@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

All the PGE customers are forced to bear the costs associated with losses from fires caused by PGE in rural areas. If each city formed a municipal utility company, our prices would all be in line with SMUD since we’d only pay for the risks associated with ourselves. I’m guessing energy prices in the foothills would absolutely skyrocket. But I’d rather have cheaper power for myself.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 9 points 1 year ago

PG&E*

PGE is the electric utility for northwest Oregon.

[+] Skyrmir@lemmy.world -34 points 1 year ago

The US has had flat energy use for over a decade now. Which is great as far as emissions go, but honestly is extremely bad as far as civilization goes. Separate from energy prices or emissions, overall usage is a measure of overall activity. If our usage is dropping while population increases, then we're dying as a civilization.

An improving situation would be increasing usage, with decreasing carbon emissions.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 year ago

Nonsense. Some things have become more efficient - like swapping 60W incandescent bulbs for 9W LEDs.

Civilization isn't dying 🤣

[+] Skyrmir@lemmy.world -14 points 1 year ago

Efficiency is great, but should make energy cheaper, leading to more usage. Again especially with a growing population. Dropping energy usage means costs increased despite efficiency, or they decreased and there was no productive capacity to put that energy to use. Either way it's bad for the country.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 7 points 1 year ago

Efficiency should not lead to more usage but to often it does. The example above shows that at a time we should have seen massive dips in usage as you say it just sorta leveled off which would indicate quite and increase in use. Lighting after all is one of the bigger eletric usages. Or I know it was in the time of filament bulbs.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Efficiency lowers demand, which lowers prices, which should create opportunity for expansion and higher demand. Except prices have been rising, profits have been rising, and real energy investment has been flat. And you can see it across the entire western economy, not just the US. It's great that we've been moving to clean energy, the problem is that we're doing less over all as a civilization.

Think of it this way, fusion power is about to be an actual thing, making cheap clean energy on tap for the planet. And we're just going to sit and watch it glow, because no one can figure out what to do with limitless energy.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 4 points 1 year ago

oh man. firstly using energy for energy usage sake is again a pattern but its generally due to waste and human nature. Laziness and indulgence. Secondly fusion is not about to be an actual thing. Thirdly when fusion becomes an actual thing it is not limitless energy. There are a whole bunch of limitations around the technology the will have cost. Very much the way fission was not limitless energy and its not because fissionable material is scarce its due to all the associated costs around fission. Even block hole energy won't be free limitless energy.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, try aluminum. Used to be super rare, rarely used. Now you can't throw a cat without hitting some. Production efficiency went through the roof, price dropped like a rock, and suddenly there's aluminum things everywhere. Efficiency created far greater demand due to the drop in cost. Energy is even more useful than aluminum, it literally makes aluminum. And yet, we're using less, as we get more efficient at making it.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 6 points 1 year ago

aluminum replaces other materials in its use. energy is its own thing. using more aluminum for no real reason would not be good but we replaced things we made with other materials with aluminum once it was common but we don't use it for things aluminum would not be a better material to use it for.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Energy is a base commodity, no different than aluminum, plywood, orange juice, oil or eggs. All of which increase as the population, thus demand and production, increase. And aluminum is used in a lot of structural applications where other materials would be far superior, but aluminum is a hell of a lot more affordable. It's not that it's the best material, it's the best material at that price, due to cheap efficient production.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 3 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Its a fungible item that can replace or be replaced by other things which energy is not. And your right that increased population will increase demand but we don't want to be increasing demand of anything as all the fungible commodities while being fungible are not inexhaustable.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Lowering demand while increasing population means a lowering standard of living. That's how wars start, and we end up with extremist idiots in charge. If you want lower demand, lower, or stop growing the population. And also realize that most attempts to lower population growth will be massively unpopular. But again, the alternative is war and extremism.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Well the problem there is the increasing population which should not be happening as long as we are using more than a years worth of planetary resources each year.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Agreed, but try telling people not to breed or worse do something to stop them. That's going to end almost as badly as over breeding in the first place. The difference being it would happen right then, rather than some inevitable future date.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 2 points 1 year ago

I don't believe underbreeding will end very badly. It means we have to handle things differently and getting back to growth is not incredibly tough. When it comes down to it we need to lower the wealth gap which will largely take care of the rest.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's not that population decline has to end badly, it's that causing it will end badly. It's eugenics and religious and class wars all rolled into a ball of angry fun.

Knowing the solution to the problem isn't the problem, it's that billions of people don't like the solution.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 1 year ago

nonsense. education and birth control is all that is needed.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Have you met humanity?

[-] Shardikprime@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

What's this, a voice with common sense I hear? Incredible. Upvoting before the mass downvotes arrive

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

People be down voting like I'm calling for rolling coal in their front yards.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Leave that argument back in the 1970s where it belongs.

[-] parrhesia@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Can you provide a source for your flat energy use argument?

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Google " total energy consumption" and pick your source. There's literally hundreds. It's an overall trend in most Western countries. Coal usage has dropped globally, renewable is up everywhere, which is all great and hopefully continues. Overall though, power consumption has stopped increasing 15 to 20 years ago.

[-] ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Yes, if lightbulbs went from 60W to 7W it totally makes sense for me to put 20 of them. /s

Dumbest argument ever.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

If you save a dollar a month on electricity, you save it, that means your savings rate goes up, and banks do more lending, businesses expand due to cheaper finances.

Use more than one brain cell, that one is tired.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Decades ago (half a century ago) people believed energy production and usage was directly tied to growth. If your energy wasn’t growing, neither was your economy. If your energy per person started shrinking, that’s an oh shit moment …. Or so people believed back then.

Then the last half century happened. Energy production plateaued , yet economic growth continued. Per person energy usage decreased yet the economy did well a lot of the time

It turns out that correlation may have appeared in a manufacturing economy, but it’s not at all correlated when you have huge efficiency gains while also transitioning to more of a service economy

this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2025

303 points (97.8% liked)

News

36491 readers

2404 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world