May 3rd, 2016
WOW… can you believe?? It’s not just me, it’s not just denial of Intervention of No CapX 2020. See 20162-118122-01_Denial2_Overland-NoCapX Intervention.
This is the most recent Order in the Xcel Energy Rate Case:
Here are their Intervention Petitions:
To see the full Rate Case docket, go to the PUC’s Search Documents page, and search for Docket 15-826.
And the Order… Dig this, parroting Xcel’s objections:
And this, even worse, as if the interests of the “Clean Energy Organizations” who bought into, stumped for, and sat quietly during the legislative hearings about Xcel Energy‘s e21 Initiative are the same as the interests of SunShare and Institute for Local Self-Reliance – ILSR:
This is SO offensive. There is no consideration that the perspectives are different, only statements that the issues, the concerns, are the same.
The late, great Myer Shark, rate case Intervenor extraordinaire, would spin in his grave at the limitations of participation in this rate case.
April 19th, 2016
Here’s an interesting case (oh, how I hate that word “interesting”). It’s about whether a state can offer “incentives” over and above FERC wholesale electric rates that would incentivize construction of new in-state generation. US SCt says NO! The states can only regulate retail rates.
This is a case regarding Maryland “incentives” and PJM, but it’s applicable to our good friends at MISO too.
So do tell, what does this mean for FERC set rates of recovery and cost allocation for all this transmission to enable the wholesale market? What happens when FERC rates stick their nose under the tent in state rate proceedings, i.e., Schedule 26A covering return and cost allocation for these big transmission projects we know and love? From what I can see of Schedule 26A, they’re allocating a “retail share” and, well, what business does FERC, via MISO (in this area), have with retail rates?
Schedule 26A – Indicative Rate Charges MISO (last updated 3/31/2016)
Look at all the ways we’re charged for transmission:
April 5th, 2016
March 23rd, 2016
AP Photo – Seth Periman
There’s a good editorial in the STrib today about Donald Drumpf’s abject incompetence and nailing journalists for not reporting it, not holding him accountable, not exposing it, and the bottom line:
But the media in general haven’t really made enough of it. Journalists are quick to accuse him of bullying and bigotry (and rightly so), but he’s rarely called grossly incompetent for his basic factual understanding of the world, or even called out on his inability to speak coherently.
Here’s the full OpEd:
This headline puts it well, and “incoherent gibberish” is exactly the sort of thing we often heard from Sarah Palin. It is just bunches of words, often code words a la Wallace’s hate speech, puked out and strung together, and it does not make any sense. Read it. Worse, read it out loud!
What does it mean when there’s such strong support for someone who cannot even speak sufficiently well to communicate a coherent thought? What does this say about his thought process if this is what comes out? And what does it say about media, where reporters do not raise their eyebrows, screw up their snouts, and say, “WHAT?” “What did you say?” “What do you mean?” “What you said makes no sense, what are you trying to say?” “What on earth are you talking about?”
Here’s the transcript of his meeting with the Washington Post editorial board, something that I want to preserve in case they disappear it, it’s that _________ (scary? mind boggling? bizarre? inexplicable?).
I’m confident that he will not be elected President, one way or another, but that he is regarded as a contender, and that he is commanding so much of our country’s collective time, OH MY DOG!
March 17th, 2016
Be it Sanders or Clinton, there is no Democratic nominee yet, and that nomination will not occur for some time. There are many primaries, and compared with 2008, MANY that have not occurred yet that were held much earlier in 2008.
There are “some” saying that Clinton now is ahead of where Obama was at this point in 2008, using that to argue that she is the presumed nominee. Ummmmm, NO!
Look at the schedule, we’re more than a month behind now in primary and caucus scheduling:
As of this time in 2008, the following states had had primaries but as of this time in 2016, they have not, they’re yet to occur (in 2008 date order, with 2016 date written in):
Alaska – March 27
Arizona – March 22
California – June 7 (2008 2/5!)
Connecticut – April 26
Delaware – April 26
Idaho – March 22
New Jersey – June 7 (also 2/5 in 2008)
New Mexico – June 7 (ditto)
New York – April 19
North Dakota – June 7 (ditto)
Utah – March 22
U.S. Virgin Islands – June 4
District of Columbia – June 14
Maryland – April 26
Hawaii – March 26
Wisconsin – April 5
Rhode Island – April 26
Wyoming – April 9
Sooooooo… see what nonsense it is to state that there is a presumptive nominee at this point in time? But I’ll wager this perspective is promoted by a certain candidate who doesn’t want to be bothered with the facts.
Just stop it, folks, and let’s keep moving forward with this contested nomination campaign.