374
all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 89 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Our grid desperately needs it, but I have to wonder how much of this is ultimately tax payers paying for the stuff power companies should have been doing for decades. If this is another example of privatizing profits and socializing losses.

[-] 0110010001100010@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

Not only that, the power companies are double dipping. Look at your bill sometime, my bill specifically has a rider for grid enhancements. It's buried in there, but I bet yours does too.

The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio in Case number 23-169-EL-RDR on August 9, 2023 approved an adjustment to Ohio Power Company's Enhanced Service Reliability Rider rate effective with this bill. A residential customer using 1,000 kWh of electricity will see an increase of $0.28 per month.

[-] ZeroCool@feddit.ch 30 points 1 year ago

but I have to wonder how much of this is ultimately tax payers paying for the stuff power companies should have been doing for decades.

The answer is $3.5 billion.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Have a family member in renewable installation and if the local power company around me is any indication, they're gonna take the money, then charge the consumers to do what the money was supposed to be for.

[-] SayJess 12 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, the successor to the let’s get everyone on the broadband wagon with government assistance

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

You forgot the crucial bit: then not do any of it and pocket the money from both.

[-] Franzia 2 points 1 year ago

Should have been doing? Why? By the way its actually profitable when your power goes out. Only the state can hold them accountable, aaaaand finally the state is doing what they should have been doing for decades. Why? By the way its actually politically advantageous to kick the can down the road rather than give voters what they asked for. Biden just has nothing left to lose except his legacy, and I suppose the next election. But people will remember this dude.

[-] krayj@sh.itjust.works 27 points 1 year ago

This is a step in the right direction.

China is investing 13.7 trillion in their power sector to achieve net-zero emissions. 3.5 billion is rookie numbers if we want to keep up and remain competitive. At least it's a start.

[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Impossible. You think a trillion dollar military industrial complex funds itself?

[-] fleabomber@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

China says they're going to do that. Meanwhile, they're still going apeshit for coal.

[-] Skua@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

China's state grid corporation said investment in power may reach 13.7 trillion dollars (100 trillion yuan) by 2060. This number is not a real thing currently happening, and even if it was it'd be spread out over almost four entire decades. It's also just investment in power generally, not in reaching net zero.

[-] MisterD@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 year ago

I'm fine with this provided Texas doesn't get a dime.

[-] mrpants@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Read the article and get your questions answered.

[-] SuiXi3D@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

I wonder how much of this will go towards Texas? And would our governor do anything but pocket the money?

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 9 points 1 year ago

Of course. At least part of it will be spent on frivolous lawsuits and "team training" in the Bahamas.

[-] PigsInClover@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Jfc I hate my state

[-] Franzia 8 points 1 year ago

My hot take is all of my money secretly goes to Texas. Texas is where all tax money goes to die.

[-] TheBaldFox@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

And how much are we giving Ukraine and Israel this week?

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago

You understand the concept that more than one thing can happen at a time, yes?

[-] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

Not to mention these projects are just a small part of a $550 billion dollar infrastructure investment bill.

But for the poster above you, the idea of that law is instead of passing smaller bills regularly, this will make sure there's enough funds available until the end of the Ukraine war so it doesn't get used as a bargaining chip by Republicans in domestic squabbles, and so the Russians know they can't win by just waiting for America to get bored and stop supporting Ukraine. Attaching a small amount of Israel support and other things to it are a way to help ensure it gets bipartisan support to pass (since even though republicans no longer really want to vote to help Ukraine, they do want to be seen to help Israel, and republican support is needed to get it through the house of representatives which they control).

[-] Franzia 5 points 1 year ago

Like 1% of our military budget and in return our military industry is putting highly skilled engineers back to work replacing our stockpiles and supply the countries that feel a need to up their defensive security capabilities in the wake of a return of war in europe.

[-] Krono@lemmy.today 4 points 1 year ago

There are children buried under the rubble of a former apartment complex in Gaza City right now.

It was destroyed by a "defensive", American-made JDAM missile.

How many more "defensive" weapons should we give them? $3.5 billion is enough to kill lots of children.

[-] Franzia 1 points 1 year ago

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/10/07/tower-collapse-gaza-city-orig.cnn

This story? I'm having trouble looking for sources because Israel bombed an apartment literally next to it in 2021 🤠 (and by the way Hamas was known to be using that building, and they warned people to evacuate multiple times - according to whatever news article I read)

yeah clearly JDAMs aren't defensive, we're supposed to be supplying Israel to defend itself... This is a more than fair complaint.

[-] Nudding@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Spoken like a true american

[-] Franzia 1 points 1 year ago

🇺🇲🦅 GET SOME!!!!!! GET SOME!!!! 🦅🇺🇲 America #1 babyyyy

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

A minuscule fraction of what we spend on our own military. Strange that bothers you less than this war we don't have to fight but still benefits us immensely.

[-] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Different color of money.

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago

3.5 billion ... for the US?

Are they going to pull like a single wire to the entire country or something?

[-] mrpants@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Just like read the article it says what it'll do and that it's part of more spending bills to come.

this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
374 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3581 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS