Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Your reply is nonsensical / a non sequitur. Where I live the local utility is 100% renewable anyway.


sort by: page size:

I'd like to have the choice not to. I have extremely limited options for that.

And I already live in a country which regularly has all of its electricity generated renewably.


I have a choice between having the one regional electricity provider provide me with electricity, and having no electricity.

If I owned a free-standing house, I could theoretically switch to rooftop solar, but it is uneconomical compared to utility solar.


Unused electricity in one location is not fungible to be available elsewhere.

You misunderstand...in some municipalities if you were to opt to not connect your house to the power grid, or water mains you would cited.

Yes, you have to use the municipal electricity. You cannot lay your own power lines, it's illegal. And in most urban areas, you can't run your own generator for emissions restrictions. You also can't power your home with a bicycle. Even champion bicyclists output 50-100 watts.

Using Bing, DuckDuckGo, or other Google alternatives are incomparably easier than not using utilities like electricity and plumbing. I struggle to see how one can honestly make this comparison.


Technically you are just feeding it power from a different utility company than the electric company.

I don't live in the us so I'm not using your electricity. I'd argue the pettiness of your argument if it were at least applicable.

> Locals can always charge at home.

In which case you're just pushing the negative environmental effects to the power plant.


So basically you can forego all modern infrastructure and not pay anything, who knew?

I explicitly brought up wells and septic as an example of having to source your own resources, why is it any different for electricity?


> you wouldn't download electric power

Conveniently ignoring the ‘real electricity’ part doesn’t help your case.

That is nuts, that power should be routable to somewhere else on the grid. Hell even heating a greenhouse.

FWIW:

I have a Powerwall and solar. My electric company offers no incentive for me to use my powerwall, or to feed into the grid during high demand.


The article even mentions that the utility provider ConEd in Brookyln offers green energy, so there's almost no point in LO3's services.

Not that I'm an expert in electrical grids, but I'd rather the actual grid coordinate a changeover to renewable sources, because these actors just sound like they're selling a scam that'll end with a class-action lawsuit someday.


And the delivery of electric power doesn't require any infrastructure, pipes, wires, etc?

An odd argument by an account created right after this story was posted...


I'm pretty sure that whatever business you work for has no planned replacement for their local power company ceasing to provide electricity.

This doesn't mean they should go out and build their own gas peaker plant.

We live in a society, and no man is an island. You can't control everything you depend on. Sure, you can control some things you depend on, but that's a long, and expensive rabbit hole. Hoarding twenty years of canned food and seventy thousand rounds of ammuniton is all well and good, unless doing so puts you in a situation where you can't pay rent.


Do you pay taxes? Does the near-zero cost of the electricity vs the thousands of dollars the town will waste dealing with the matter seem like an odd tradeoff to you?

FWIW your utility company probably doesn't want you to get solar, so the answer is most likely in the middle of the two.

> We deliver electricity to every household in America

This is certainly not the case. There are many homes without electricity, especially in Alaska and other rural areas.

next

Legal | privacy