I don't care how righteous solar power advocates think they are. If they think they can function independent of their standard utility connection, let them. But if by reducing the amount of power they are taking from the public utilities they are also reducing what they should be paying for infrastructure that keeps them hooked up, it's only logical that they have to pay it some other way. Either that, or not use it.
Should they somehow go scot free from the responsibility, the majority of regular power customers and I would have our rates raised to subsidize their enterprises with the incurred costs that they have got out of paying.
Any thinking person knows that solar power by itself at this stage of the game is unrealistic. They need to pay in whatever way that works for their fair share, or be disconnected entirely. It's absurd to say or write that they are "paying for the sun" when they are still hooked up to an infrastructure that they can't do without. That's what they need to pay for. I'm paying my share; I don't want to end up paying theirs.
- 5 reasons Mitt Romney will probably run for...
- Janna Darnelle: Redefining marriage hurts...
- Catherine Rampell: Reasons behind the bad...
- Doug Robinson: Making sense of retired...
- In our opinion: Let FAA, not Utah...
- Letter: Enforcing the dress code
- John Hoffmire: Save capitalism by focusing on...
- My view: Don't make women optional in marriage
- My view: Don't make women optional in... 104
- Janna Darnelle: Redefining marriage... 100
- 5 reasons Mitt Romney will probably run... 66
- John Hoffmire: Save capitalism by... 45
- In our opinion: Here's how the Obama... 41
- Drew Clark: Either view of marriage... 39
- A. Scott Anderson: Energy development... 32
- Robert Bennett: Make climate... 28