(on a separate, unrelated note, for those of you that live in CA, how should I vote on Prop 7, and why? "Requires govt. owned utilities to generate 20% of their electricity from renewable energy by 2010 ... raises requirement for all utilities to 40% by 2020..." But there are ads on TV saying it will concentrate energy to the corporations and prevent decentralization of solar panels. Thumbs up or thumbs down? It's great for the environment, but it means our children and grandchildren will still be paying for power instead of generating their own, right? Or am I wrong? That is why I am asking.)

Rybold,

You know more about the markets than most of us, I would think you would be telling us how to vote.

One thing I know for sure, California prices for electricity are absolutely OBSCENE! When you get beyond the first couple price tiers (that would not supply enough electricity for a one room shack) many of us pay $.38 per Kw. That is just disgusting. The Cal PUC tries to do a good job, but Utility companies know how to get their pork projects funded. Bleh. The last thing we need is legislation to help the utilities fund a bunch more pork projects for them.

PG&E is already spending a lot of money on renewable energy, (very large solar project in the socal desert, plus others) this legislation will just allow them increase our rates even more.

I'm surprised the proposition does not allow utilities to count customer wind/solar production in their tally. This would speed conversion as the utilities would be trying to encourage their customers to make the capital outlay for distributed production.

Just asking, but are you sure the proposition does not count production by those on their grid?

I don't have a real problem with the higher oil prices for one reason, it will keep the hope alive that we will eventually get rid of the SUV's and the gas hogs now on the highways. When gas was $4 a gallon it was the top topic in the news, when it dropped the news turned to other topics. Four and five dollar gas is what we need to get the American drivers to wake up and trade to smaller vehicles. It will also keep alive the push for wind, solar and alternative fuels.

I'm still looking into this, however those who put the proposition on the ballots sued to have what they called "misleading lies" removed from the voter pamphlet thingy put there by the against people. Plus the fact that PG&E and SoCal Edison are the two hugest backers of the against campaign makes me wonder how bad could it really be

Reality hits home. A massive shift to renewable energy requires massive costs. It's that simple. However, if you figure out how to live off grid, then problem solved. That requires a change of lifestyle and large capital costs as well.

I would vote for the increase and then spend the money getting off the grid.

You can deal with your envy like that or you can figure out how to move forward with your life. I'm sorry your broke and you're stuck with a gas hogging SUV. I own an SUV too. A Durango Hemi Limited. I need it from time to time. Fortunately, for most of our daily driving, we drive the Prius, an every day practical car with go-go gadget features and 50 MPG mileage. I realize tha you probably can't afford one and that your life is spinning out of control, but the mark of character is how you deal with it when life gets tough. You need to fix your character before you can fix anything else.

I understand what you are saying. Assume only 5% of the population decides to (and can afford to) put up the capital investment to put solar panels on their roof, that leaves the other 95% of society still getting their electricity from non-renewable resources. So, by voting yes, it will make sure that the millions of people living in apartment buildings won't by burning hydrocarbons. Good point ... most of society would rather spend the $10K on fancy clothes, rap music, and chrome wheels for their SUVs before they'd spend the $10K on a solar grid for their roof. So, those of us that are more responsible need to make that decision for them. I sound like a Republican. Last time I checked, I was an Independent. LMAO.

SORKA, that comment by Large SUV and your reply were hillarious!!!!

What I did not say is that the CA commitment to much larger percentages of renewable energy is the right decision. Those that can think ahead already have this figured out and why. Those that cannot.......

Actually, I think Republican's would take offence to you suggesting that they want to control other people's lives. They would tell you that you sound like a Democrat (very likely equating you to a Socialist or Communist at the same time).

Though in practice, there isn't much difference. (Question - has government gotten bigger or smaller since Republicans came into power in 2000? Do you have more or fewer freedoms? Has government spending gone up or down?)

Either way, it's fairly obvious that we need to push harder to get the country off this oil addiction.

I agree.

Absolutely!