Grid operator: 3.3 million California homes could lose power

[CountAllVotes]

Last edited Mon Aug 17, 2020, 06:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: ABC

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an emergency proclamation allowing some energy users and utilities to tap backup energy sources amid a heatwave that has prompted rolling blackouts affecting hundreds of thousands of households

SAN FRANCISCO -- An irate California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an emergency proclamation allowing some energy users and utilities to tap backup energy sources amid a days-long heatwave that has prompted rolling blackouts affecting hundreds of thousands of households.

The governor warned that customers could again lose power as early as 3 p.m. Monday as spiking temperatures strain the state's power grid. He didn't say where the outages might occur.

Newsom acknowledged the state failed to predict and plan for the energy shortages.

Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/california-governor-demands-probe-power-blackouts-72423755

---

They were bailed out again and now this in the midst of a pandemic!

ENOUGH!

[KWR65]

1. This is because we use alternative energy in California.

Last edited Mon Aug 17, 2020, 09:08 PM - Edit history (1)

The citizens can go a few hours with no electricity. Those with medical electricity needs can install solar or backup generators. I am very surprised that Newsom is against alternative energy. In ten years we will have solar and wind energy then sometimes we will have power use reductions. There is nothing wrong with rolling black outs. If you don't want to be effected then install solar panels.

[Mr.Bill]

4. There are many people, especially seniors

who can't afford to keep food on the table much less afford solar and generators. Perhaps it would be appropriate for there to be some more government assistance for these things.

[EllieBC]

6. I read it as sarcasm. But I could be wrong.

Over the last few months I’ve read many tone deaf posts written by well meaning middle to upper middle clas suburbanites on this forum.

[Mr.Bill]

9. I suppose it could be.

Now that you mention it. But I still stand by what I said.

[EllieBC]

10. And I agree with you.

If it wasn’t sarcasm your response is bang on. Too many people forget not everyone is a suburbanite with a good paying job. And o this forum we should know better.

[Mr.Bill]

14. I have a small generator that will get me by

during power outages, but I only have it because my kids and grandkids helped me to find a good deal and contributed to it. Good generators are expensive. Mine is a Honda and it will run my refrigerator, freezer, TV, a few lights and small appliances like a toaster oven or microwave. Not all at once, though. It will not run my AC, Electric range, water heater washer/dryer and other large items. It cost about 2K new, mine is used which made it a little cheaper but not much.

And also people don't stop to think that it has to burn fuel. Mine is gasoline powered and with the price of gas in California, it takes about $1 an hour to run it. That can add up over an extended time without power. And every day I will have to go fill a five gallon can. That is, if there's a gas station open. So just having a generator doesn't just make everything wonderful. My wife is 70 and a little frail and could not set it up, lift the gas can, etc. without me here. The generator itself weighs 89 lbs, but is on wheels.

[KWR65]

20. If they can afford a house then they can afford solar.

[Mr.Bill]

24. I live in a Senior Mobile Home park.

Yes, I own my home. Solar can not be mounted on an older mobile home for a variety of reasons. And even if it could, it would cost more than I paid for the home.

Are you being sarcastic? It's hard to tell.

[NutmegYankee]

11. Without a very expensive battery backed solar system

You get no power in a blackout. Most solar users go down just as hard as the others.

[NNadir]

15. The problem is that in California, the wrong type of alternative energy is used.

People will die if the wind isn't blowing for a week and the temperatures are in the 100F range.

Making California dependent on the weather for energy was a very, very, very, very, very bad, if popular idea.

[KWR65]

21. You are propagating the anti-green propaganda from fossil fuels industry.

[NNadir]

30. I have a very, very, very, very strong record here opposing ALL dangerous fossil fuels.

The difference between me and people who think that solar and wind are "green," is that I have spent more than 30 years in the primary scientific literature learning how stuff works.

Sorry, I don't buy pablum.

My journal in this space oozes with the stuff I've found out.

I couldn't care less whether you read it or not. If the wind isn't blowing, people - particularly old people will die in extreme heat, and no, burning dangerous natural gas and dumping the waste directly into the planetary atmosphere - the main source of energy in the state after half a century of cheering for solar and wind won't fucking cut it.

To make matters worse, the people of California, in their infinite wisdom are planning to shut Diablo Canyon. This is criminally stupid.

[KWR65]

33. We need an energy crisis to change peoples mind to change to green technology.

Fossil fuels need to go away and green energy needs to replace it. Without an energy shortage people will not change. We will soon need to do the same with gasoline cars so that people will change to green energy to get transportation.

[NNadir]

42. I'm an old man. I've been hearing these platitudes my whole life.

The real problem is that people do not have enough education - this is true on the left as well as on the right - to understand what sustainable energy is.

I have spent the last 30 years looking into the matter.

People actually believe that solar and wind energy are sustainable and green. They are no such thing. They are window dressing on the dangerous fossil fuel pig.

[KWR65]

47. I disagrre. People need a motivation.

People had a motive to move to fossil fuels 100+ years ago. With the absence of fossil fuels they will be motivated to embrace green energy.

[NNadir]

48. Well, at least you have an inkling of reality, poor interpretation of what it means but an inkling.

For thousands of years, humanity lived on so called "renewable energy."

They abandoned it, and this when the population was less than 1/7th of what it is now.

Could it be that the overwhelming majority of humanity lived short miserable lives of dire poverty, even more so than now? Has this simple fact ever occurred to anyone? Is it possible that we are being reactionary and not forward thinking?

We do not need to grind up the last wilderness to make it into industrial parks for wind farms, dig the last bit of ore to be smelted to make copper and batteries for distributed energy.

We do need nuclear energy. Period.

We have reached the point where the blind faith in so called "renewable energy" is a crime against the future. It hasn't worked; it isn't working and it won't work.

[Codeine]

52. I suspect we've lost the battle for nuclear.

It’s a fucking pity that anti-science fearmongering has brought us to this point.

[NNadir]

53. Not really. I have been reading the primary scientific...

...literature with special attention to climate change and with special attention to the environmental impact of nuclear energy for more than thirty years.

I see a big change in tone underway.

The obvious failure of so called "renewable energy" is becoming so obvious that all the wishful thinking in the world is losing credibility rapidly.

Scientists are people, and many of them, as such, were driven to discuss Chernobyl endlessly. But scientists by training can bury realities for only a short period before reality comes to their attention.

Hansen's seminal paper is often cited now, and many people are now paying attention to the fact that in the 34 years since Chernobyl, something like 200 million people or more were killed by air pollution.

Chernobyl, Fukushima...blah...blah...blah clearly didn't kill 200 million people.

Among scientists in general facts matter, and it is fact that nuclear energy need not be perfect to be vastly superior to everything else. It only needs to be vastly superior to everything else, which it is.

Either we go nuclear or we die; it's really that simple.

[Codeine]

54. I certainly hope you're right, NNadir.

I love DU, but it has some frustrating (Maddening? Enraging?) blind spots indicative of The Left in general.

[NNadir]

55. Look, as political liberals, we actually care about the future.

The older generation here, of which i am a member, grew up in fear of nuclear war, and the inappropriate associations of war and energy, although they certainly apply to petroleum, have caused us to behave badly.

I am privileged to have a son who is becoming a fine engineering scientist. He tells me that among his generation our dangerous associations seem absurd.

This coming generation is a great generation and they have it in them to sweep away the sordid superstitions that have prevented us from building a sustainable world.

My son says when he spouts my rhetoric, there is little opposition.

They will save the world or at least what is left to be saved.

[Mr.Bill]

27. There are places where the wind is pretty reliable and that's where the wind farms are. n/t

[NNadir]

41. Really? One can learn, by looking it up, what the capacity utilization of a wind turbine is.

I have extensively analyzed the Master Register of Wind Turbines in Denmark many times over the years.

Recently they changed the name of the register and now call the spreadsheet: Data on operating and decommissioned wind turbines

It was last updated on August 7, 2020, and has complete data on all the wind turbines in Denmark, those that are operating and those that have been decommissioned.

The total energy produced by all the wind turbines in that offshore oil and gas drilling hellhole from Jan 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020 is 8,992,194,815 kWh, which works out to 32.37 PJ of energy. There were 182 days between January 1 and June 30 of this leap year, and there are 86,400 seconds in a day. This means that all of the wind turbines in Denmark had an average continuous power output of 2058 MW, the equivalent of two average sized nuclear plants operating at typical capacity utilization.

The rated power of existing wind turbines in Denmark, found by summing column C in the Danish Energy Agency's spreadsheet is 6176468.5 kW, or 6176.4685 MW.

Thus the capacity utilization of Danish Wind Turbines "where the wind is blowing" is 2058/6176 = 33.3%

Of course, there is no predictability about when the electricity is needed. Some of this was probably available when the demand for electricity wasn't that high.

I have analyzed the data in this spreadsheet several times over the years to find the average lifetime of a Danish Wind Turbine. It works out to less than 18 years, with my last analysis taking place in 2018. I reported it here: Average Lifetime of Danish Wind Turbines, as of February 2018.

This junk is not sustainable.

California's Energy Commission publishes all the data from all sources of electricity in the state: California Electricity Production 2001-2018

The largest source of electricity in the state is dangerous natural gas, which they need because the wind does not always blow, and when it does blow, it may produce electricity when it is not needed.

One can see from many data sources, that most typically the highest demand for electricity is around 6 pm, when the sun isn't particularly bright.

So called "renewable energy" is not sustainable in California; it's not sustainable anywhere.

It will never be as safe, as reliable, or as clean as nuclear energy, but California hates nuclear energy. They are reaping the whirlwind.

[Mr.Bill]

43. Wind was never intended to be the sole source of power. It is a supplement.

And you do understand that wind turbines can be used to charge batteries, right?

You're starting to sound like one of Trump's speeches where he says solar can't work after dark. The electric car industry has facilitated great strides in battery technology in recent years.

And nuclear power in an area prone to massive earthquakes is sheer insanity.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

49. AMEN, Mr Bill! It appears that Fukushima wasn't horrifically dangerous enough, I guess.

I suppose that it'll take a China syndrome event to wake folks the fuck up. If crap gets really bad, during an Earthquake, (I live in California, (I'm native), who the hell is going to get things under control again? Imagine a continent full of Czernobyls...delightful thought isn't it?

[ripcord]

32. I hate what the solar farms are doing to the desert habitats

Acres and acres of ugly blight across the desert just to supply people's worship of their appliances.

[CountAllVotes]

18. They have home batteries now

One will cost you $13,000.00 if you can find someone to install it that knows how to do it!

$13,000 would pay my bill for years!

It better be a good battery.

[KWR65]

22. Oh come on. There a hundreds of companies in California that will install solar.

[CountAllVotes]

25. This is an actual battery!

It measures 5' X 2' approx.

There is one person where I am located that might know how to install one!

ONE PERSON that MIGHT?

[Codeine]

40. This is the 21st fucking century

in the richest state of the richest nation on the planet. There is no excuse for this nonsense. These are temperatures that can kill the elderly and infirm.

[procon]

2. It's not like these giant energy companies

aren't aware that every summer California experiences record high temps. It's not like they don't know the population is growing every year.

So why do they routinely hit us with power shortages when it's needed the most? Greed. They make sure they get their tax breaks and enjoy zero taxes in many cases, but the don't spend their profits on upgrading the grid and modernizing their old lines and outdated equipment.

Evidently there's not much to compel them to keep pace with consumer demand and keep their systems in good working order so we don't have these power outages like we're some third world country.

[DTomlinson]

8. "So why do they routinely hit us with power shortages when it's needed the most? Greed." THIS

[Igel]

56. Last week's news explained it well.

Record demand. So it exceeded expectations.

A traditional power plant was off line. That caused an unexpected reduction in output of just under 500 MW.

Then the article said that there was another reason and added to the problem. Wind generation was done. And *that* caused a gap of around 1000 MW.

Notice--the gap of 1000 MW was just an additional problem, the *real* problem was a traditional power plant. (I'm guessing natural gas, but the article didn't specify.)


You're most likely going to have a shortage when there's additional demand. Then even the regular amount is a shortage.


California produced a really serious teacher shortage back in the late '90s. They shrank the number of students in each classroom--since the number of students overall didn't change, that immediately required many more teachers. Alternative certification wasn't a thing yet, so it would take a year or two to produce them. So they had to recruit from across the country, and even from overseas, as they set up the first alternative-certification programs. Notice that this was an entirely predictable shortage. Had enough, demand increased, shortage. (To which one could ask, "Why is it that there's always a teacher shortage when we suddenly don't have enough?" but that would be snarky.)

Which this was, if Berberich's comments are accurate. I assume that's something that's verifiable, I just have no idea where to rummage for those particular filings online, or if the filings are even public information.

[NNadir]

16. It may well have something to do with engineering and popular perception than with greed.

People would rather hear what they want to hear than learn the facts.

The facts are coming home to roost.

[The_REAL_Ecumenist]

50. Sorry NNadir, but BULLSHIT!While I understand what you believe, I come from a family of engineers

physicists, (brother is an astrophysicist AND has a degree in theoretical mathematics), doctors, etc. I know SO MANY people who are COMPLETELY off the grid & use a combination of wind, water & sun with battery banks. If something were to happen to their panels, sunflowers, wind vanes, etc, it doesn't POISON the area for several thousands, (& depending on the isotopes & their related half lives, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS).

I was SO happy when Rancho Seco was decommissioned & look forward to San Onofre being taken down. I married into an eastern European family & to hear them talk about their panic when Czernobyl went off is a sight to behold AND something to hear. We have cousins, Aunts, Uncles, etc who are Ukranian & some family who gave children to the state because they didnt have the means to take care of their children who were damaged by the gamma radiation. Some have gone on to die & others, well lets just say that their lives will always be a hard row to hoe.

So, I hope you understand why I have alot of issues with nuclear ANYTHING, except perhaps, radiotherapy.

[NNadir]

51. Well, maybe if you come from a family of engineers, they can teach you to do math,.

Maybe not.

You know so many people who live off grid?

Good for you.

I know that the world has spent over 3 trillion dollars on so called "renewable energy," dominated by solar and wind, in this century for no meaningful result.

I don't really have a lot of time for this bourgeois daydreaming since I am involved with reality, as we all should be if we gave a rat's ass about the future. So I'm just going to report what I wrote a few days ago while hearing something similar. Telling me about your happiness at the cloture of nuclear plants, something I personally regard as a crime against all future generations almost makes me nauseous.

Context: Why not go full Trump?

To wit:

The death toll from air pollution while we all wait, as expectant assholes, for the grand renewable energy nirvana that has not come, is not here and won't come:

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (Lancet 2016; 388: 1659–724) One can easily locate in this open sourced document compiled by an international consortium of medical and scientific professionals how many people die from causes related to air pollution, particulates, ozone, etc.

It works to between six to seven million people per year.

This means that in the last decade, while we wait for the grand so called "renewable energy" nirvana, more people have died from air pollution than died in World War II.

We have spent, in the last ten years alone, more than two trillion dollars on solar and wind energy, more than three trillion dollars in this century, this on a planet where 2 billion people lack access to basic sanitation:

The amount of money "invested" in so called "renewable energy" in the period between 2004 and 2018 is over 3.036 trillion dollars; dominated by solar and wind which soaked up 2.774 trillion dollars.
Source: UNEP/Bloomberg Global Investment in Renewable Energy, 2019

How much energy has this grand investment produced, and how does it compare to the growth of the use of dangerous coal, dangerous oil, and dangerous natural gas?

In this century, world energy demand grew by 179.15 exajoules to 599.34 exajoules.

In this century, world gas demand grew by 50.33 exajoules to 137.03 exajoules.

In this century, the use of petroleum grew by 34.79 exajoules to 188.45 exajoules.

In this century, the use of coal grew by 63.22 exajoules to 159.98 exajoules.

In this century, the solar, wind, geothermal, and tidal energy on which people so cheerfully have bet the entire planetary atmosphere, stealing the future from all future generations, grew by 9.76 exajoules to 12.27 exajoules.

12.27 exajoules is slightly over 2% of the world energy demand.

2019 Edition of the World Energy Outlook Table 1.1 Page 38] (I have converted MTOE in the original table to the SI unit exajoules in this text.)

And yet we hear from people who have obviously never looked in their lives at read data, and who supply no references that solar and wind are means of addressing the growth in the use of dangerous fossil fuels, and that anyone who looks at data, is engaging in "talking points."

When confronted with hand waving airheads who have no interest in the fate of humanity, I often point to this paper, co-authored by one of the world's most famous climate scientists, Jim Hansen, about how many lives nuclear energy saved, and how many billions of tons of carbon dioxide it prevented from accumulating in the atmosphere, by his calculation (in 2013) about 31 billion tons:

Prevented Mortality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Historical and Projected Nuclear Power (Pushker A. Kharecha* and James E. Hansen Environ. Sci. Technol., 2013, 47 (9), pp 4889–4895)

Maybe there are people with solar cells on the roofs of their McMansions who "know more than the scientists" about climate change, and can confidently say that this paper, published in one of the most prestigious Environmental scientific journals in the world is "propganda."

Of course, I feel differently about what propaganda might be. To me, "propaganda" usually consists of slinging nonsense invectives by people who have no information at those who do, say like, um, "much misinformation, lack of context, and propaganda, with just enough facts to make it plausible."

As for context, the data on the accumulation of the dangerous fossil fuel waste carbon dioxide speaks volumes. I've analyzed it extensively, for several decades. But any asshole interested in humanity could do the same, if they gave a shit, which clearly they don't.

The data pages of the Mauna Loa Carbon Dioxide Web Pages, with data going back as far as the 1950's are here: Data: The complete Mauna Loa CO2 records described on this page are available.

We hit 417.43 ppm of CO2 in the planetary atmosphere this spring, in the week beginning May 24, 2020.

In the 20th century the average rate of increase in the dangerous fossil fuel waste was as follows:

1961-1970: 0.898 ppm/year on average.
1971-1980: 1.339 ppm/year on average.
1981-1990: 1.554 ppm/year on average.
1991-2000: 1.541 ppm/year on average.

In the age of the rise of "renewable energy will save us" beginning with Germany:

2001-2010: 2.038 ppm/year on average.
2011-2018: 2.418 ppm/year on average.

The 20th century average annual increase overall: 1.31 ppm/year
The 21st century average annual increase overall: 2.12 ppm/year

The last 5 years annual average increase: 2.55 ppm/year

Are we tired of so much winning yet? Do we care a shred for the planet we are leaving behind for our children, our grandchildren and their great grandchildren?

Well, I think the data speaks for itself, even this superficial evocation of it. Of course, if one isn't lazy, one can dig really, really, really, really deep into data, the chemistry of silicon refining, lanthanide mining, child slaves digging cobalt in the Congo for lithium batteries for "green" energy storage, the use and source of methylethylketone electrolytes in those batteries, leaching from lead mines, well, it goes on and on and on and on, but one would have to give a shit to look.

Propaganda?

There are two kinds of Trumpers in my view:

One of course consists of those who believe and support his lies, for the most part poorly educated racists. Everyone who writes here is well aware of these types.

The second, somewhat more subtle sort are those who "reason" like Trump, who believe that if they simply make stuff up and repeat it over and over and over in contradiction of the facts, it should be believed.

Anyone, I do mean anyone, who embraces the obvious lie that so called "renewable energy" is doing a damn thing about climate change or about the growth in the use of dangerous fossil fuels is engaged in Trumpism of the second kind.

Facts matter. They are clear, and they are unambiguous. Little bourgeois brats crowing about the solar cells on their roofs don't cut it if the issue under discussion is the most critical of our times, climate change.

Again, and again and again and again: Facts matter.

You may cheer all you want for mines so people can live "off grid" and congratulate yourself for knowing them.

I know this: History will not forgive us, nor should it.

[oasis]

62. Thanks NNadir , I'm bookmarking thread to pass along the valuable

information you and other posters have shared here.

[hunter]

59. I have the money to do that, at the moment.

But I'd rather send this money to the food bank. There are a lot of people out of work because of the coronavirus who are having trouble buying food.

I've been homeless in my life, I've been been affluent in my life, and a lot of places in-between. My wife and I have had medical bills we couldn't pay. At times we've been unable to pay the rent or the mortgage.

Maybe this is why the toys of wealthy people don't excite me.

Solar panels on the roof, batteries in the garage, and a Tesla in the driveway will not significantly reduce a person's environmental footprint. It's possible these things increase a person's environmental footprint just by purchasing something that would not otherwise exist. And whatever affluent people don't spend for electricity they might spend on jet fuel.

A person with a much smaller environmental footprint might live in the city without owning a car, might live in a home sharing two or more walls with neighbors, enjoying a mostly vegan or vegetarian diet.

If solar panels and batteries make people happy, fine. If people want to buy fancy automobiles, fine. These are things affluent people buy in our consumer economy. I can't tell anyone else how to live, but it's not "saving the world." It's nearly impossible for an affluent person to reduce their own environmental footprint. The money always goes somewhere. Maybe it's best not to play the game.

I think we ought to be paying people to experiment with lifestyles having very small environmental footprints, measuring the success of these experiments in terms of happiness.

If someone sees someone else living very happily without a car, without a lawn to mow, with utility bills so small there's no reason to consider solar panels, eating a healthy delicious diet without factory farm meat or dairy products, enjoying a twenty hour work week, etc., then maybe they'll start thinking they'd like to live like that too and the most environmentally damaging aspects of our high energy industrial economy would become unprofitable.

I used to be a dumpster diving radical anti-nuclear activist in California. I spent a lot of time on the road between San Onofre and Humboldt. I'm not an anti-nuclear activist anymore.

An economy powered exclusively by wind, solar, and other so-called "renewable" energy sources would look nothing like the economy many affluent people now enjoy. Nor would it be "clean." What's worse, it probably wouldn't have the industrial capacity to raise up all the people who are now living in poverty, and possibly not even the resources to feed all eight billion of us.

[ripcord]

3. The power companies didn't make this decision

It was made by Cal ISO.

[Mosby]

7. Not according to them

But Steve Berberich, president and CEO of California Independent System Operator, which operates the state's electricity grid, said they have warned the state utilities commission of a resource gap.

“We have indicated in filing after filing after filing that the resource adequacy program was broken and needed to be fixed," he said. “The situation we are in could have been avoided.”

The state Public Utilities Commission did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

[ripcord]

17. It is right in the second paragraph of the story

The California Independent System Operator says it will likely order utility companies to turn off power starting around 4 p.m. as demand for electricity to cool homes soars during the hottest part of the day beyond the power available in the grid.

[Steelrolled]

58. You are right that the ISO made the decision to start the rolling blackouts

because they had no choice. It was simple math. It was a decision forced upon them by the stupidity of the California state government regulators.

[captain queeg]

5. It's not the Just generation it's transmission. When it's hot the lines sag

That increases resistance so cuts capacity.

[CountAllVotes]

12. I knew it!!!!

People need to know!

I just got a call telling me to expect "power outtages" 1-2 hrs. long 3-10 pm!

Sickening!

How long this time around?

Its 89 in L.A. btw. One of the "hot spots" ---->

[yaesu]

13. I remember when enron, CNBC's wall street darling, was shutting off power to customers back in the

day and energy traders were joking about while they played the blackout game.

[Mr.Bill]

19. This all started when republican governor Pete Wilson

deregulated the electrical system in California because it was going to save us sooo much money with all that private competition. Then they paid Ross Perot's company for a software system to manage the grid and Perot then charged energy companies for classes showing them how to game the system he sold us.

I would say my Electric bill has roughly tripled since this debacle. Then the final insult was Wilson termed out of office and we elected Gray Davis, a Democratic governor, and the whole system blew up in the early 2000s and he got recalled by the voters so a washed-up action movie hero name Arnold could take over. A total disaster engineered by republicans and a Democrat took all the blame.

[mr_lebowski]

26. Everything that happened around then is a big reason I hate Texas to this day ... (nt)

[yaesu]

35. yep, like the disaster the tRump repukes are setting us up for. nt

[KWR65]

23. Great! The green new deal will allow them to install solar energy.

This is fossil fuel propaganda.

[mr_lebowski]

28. Good thing they're decommissioning nuclear power plants in Cali like Diablo Canyon

Not ...

[C Moon]

29. When we started the quarantine back in the spring, I knew this was going to happen.

Whereas people were bunched up at work in one building, now we have more people at home, with more air conditioners running (along with washing machines, vacuums, dishwashers, tvs..).

[myohmy2]

31. 'rolling backouts'...

...nothing seems to work anymore in this country...

...trump has turned us into a third world nation...

...and he won't stop there, give him 'four more years' and he'll totally destroy us...

...what would Cody Lundin do at a time like this?...

[Initech]

34. I'm a Californian and I can tell you rolling blackouts are a thing that existed long before Chump.

I think they go back to when Pete Wilson was governor and he privatized the energy industry, and that was a long-ass time ago. We've been in and out of power outages ever since.

[CountAllVotes]

36. Some are unaware of this nightmare

I'm no newcomer either but my gawd, this is some seriously old crap that needs to STOP!

[Initech]

38. Especially during a pandemic and record heat waves!

[Mr.Bill]

44. Last time was about 18-20 years ago.

[Baclava]

37. So a gas portable generator in every driveway? Power outage season is a thing?

[moonscape]

39. Wish this heat wave would've waited until

after the convention! Am on notice that I'll probably lose power a couple of hours/night through Wednesday. Great. Just at convention time

[maxrandb]

45. This country needs to tax the ever-loving-shit out of the 1%

and use those funds to fix the entire countries power, internet, air, and highway infrastructure.

It's time to make fucking power a God Damned non-profit business.

It's fucking maddening that we've allowed this country to crumble.

We've become nothing but a pig, and Wall Street is the fucking lipstick.

It's like having a shiny new roof on a burned out building.

The "privatization", the "trickle-down", the "lack of shared purpose", the absolute destruction of our social safety net....

All of this shit that has been foisted upon this country by the Ayn Randian fantasy fuckstick Retrumplican Party over the past 40 years needs to be torn out by the fucking roots.

[NickB79]

46. This is the future thanks to climate change

And 2-3C of warming is already locked in.

I figure we'll see climate refugees, AMERICAN climate refugees, fleeing the Southwest in the next 20 years for the Northwest, upper Midwest and Northeast. Think of it as a reversal of the Okie movement of the 1930's.

If the heat and wildfires don't destroy the region, water shortages will.

[Steelrolled]

57. All of the technical know-how in silicon valley

and a state government that can't do simple math. Embarrassing.

[CountAllVotes]

60. Batch of know-nothings that do nothing

It requires work and work and work and work.

Sitting behind a computer playing games all day isn't going to cut it this time around!

Fare you well Silicon Valley!