Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Phyzzle
Jan 26, 2008
It doesn't seem so unfair: pre-existing wind farms and solar generators count for zero percent change. The regulation would set certain pre-existing nuclear plants as counting for 5.8% change.

Those are plants that are announced as closing. So if a closing of a plant is reversed, and it's left running, is that "new" generation? 5.8% was a compromise, but it's all pretty arbitrary.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Phyzzle
Jan 26, 2008

Eregos posted:

As I understand it that's wrong. Pre-existing solar and wind farms count for 100% of their contribution
If Remy and Justin's interpretation is correct, it is very unfair.

But the regulation proposal being looked at says,

quote:

1. Proposed Quantification of Renewable Energy Generation

To estimate the CO2 emission
reductions from affected EGUs
achievable based on increases in
renewable generation
, the EPA has
developed a ‘‘best practices’’ scenario
for renewable energy generation based
on the RPS requirements already
established by a majority of states.

  • Locked thread