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.
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Our thoughts...
- 18 of the most heart warming and feel-good...
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination stance...
- What one word best describes Barack Obama?
- What The New York Times gets wrong about...
- In our opinion: Fairness for all: Religion...
- Letter: Slap to our history
- Drew Clark: The beams and motes of getting...
- What The New York Times gets wrong... 90
- In our opinion: Fix, don't repeal,... 74
- Michael and Jenet Erickson: Utah... 50
- In our opinion: Fairness for all:... 44
- Mike Lee: Tax reform shouldn't penalize... 38
- Why LDS Church's anti-discrimination... 38
- Jay Evensen: Will Obama visit Utah? Do... 37
- In our opinion: It's time for Utah to... 27