Proposition 7 will require all California utilities to supply half of their power from renewable resource by 2025. The bill proposes to achieve this goal by quadrupling the levels of production of solar, wind and other renewable energy sources. The bill will also require California utilities to increase their purchases of renewable electricity by 2% annually to meet what is called the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of 40% in 2020 and 50% in 2025.
A “Yes” vote would require utility companies to produce an increasing amount of energy from clean and renewable sources.
- It mandates the production of energy from tried-and-true sources to help halt the energy crisis experienced by California and the entire United States
- Its methods have been crafted by experts in both the policy and scientific communities who understand the relevant concerns
- It will make California the world leader in alternative energy
- It sends the message to utility companies which provide public goods that they have an obligation to pursue what is publicly supported
- It will spur economic growth with 370,000 new high wage jobs
- It vests California’s government with the power to force a transition which is desperately needed
A “No” vote means that utility companies would not be required to produce more clean or renewable energy.
- It is an environmentally unsound bill which forces small energy providers out of the market using absurd regulations while bolstering the power of established utility companies
- It provides no adequate regulatory apparatus to oversee the production of new alternative energy sources; in fact, it shifts the responsibility for energy production to the wrong place
- Its drastic quickness could be such a shock to California’s economy that it would cause a depression
- It is a rehash of an old method of policy making by Government fiat, rather than through cooperation with those institutions which actually understand the implications
- It is opposed by environmental groups, corporate groups, Democrats, Republicans and alternative energy advocates
- It ignores the necessity of market mechanisms for the production of energy by mandating the usage of unrealistic long-term contracts
Comments
Chazzy Boy
How is "if every home had a solar system" a reasonable goal? Arent we being a bit naive? Even Mao never promised anyone a whole solar system.
this is a hard one!
On the one hand California has a lot of sunshine! and look around, and no one is utilizing its power!
If every home had a solar system think what would that impact be? tremendous! so why not a more reasonable mandate that makes a reasonable goal. and as well make power companies purchase back electricity made by the average homeowner and small business. utility prices are already out of this world and this measure would surly give them an excuse to raise them much further. but we have a responsibility to our environment and our energy needs hav to be concidered, how about conservation mandates? We have to have some kind of mandate because it seems people are to selfish or lazy to take any steps on there own to Change how we make our energy. mandate some incentives for people to get involved and included in the problem. let big business decide and we all seem to suffer every time. I don't think this one is right! its suspect! Vote NO and lets talk about it some more! but make a real effort to make something happen thats not just people making it look like there doing something to keep there government job!
Facebook
YouTube
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Twitter
Newsvine
Propeller
Mixx
Xanga
LinkedIn