Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

modernhomeowner t1_iukinvr wrote

If only we kept up our nuclear plants in this state... too late for that, now the only option is to be encouraging residents to reduce our energy use.

Programs like connected solutions that pays you to raise your thermostat in the summer, should be encouraging you lowering the thermostat in the winter, I keep my house at 62 day and night, 64 morning and evening (the times when I shower), and it's not so bad. I used to go to 59° at night when I had oil heat but this new heat pump I have isn't supposed to have more than a 2° fluctuation. It's no longer about who can afford higher temperatures and who can't, it's about reducing use so there is still a supply.

We should be lowering the speed limit to 55 and enforcing it. Some cars have up to a 23% reduction in fuel consumption going from 70 to 55. It would be good for the environment and good for our wallets to ease gas use and lower prices. Even electric cars use less electricity when lowering their speed, and since electric cars run on Natural Gas in this state, they'd use less. My mapping automatically takes me the greenest route in my EV, which is the back roads much of the time.

The state put all their eggs in the windmill basket, and that has now failed due to multiple issues. They didn't have a backup, so we are all paying the price of our state legislators' decision on that.

48

Academic_Guava_4190 t1_iukzn5n wrote

Do you think people would actually obey the speed limit if it were lowered? I’m pretty sure it’s only 50 on Rt 1N and people still go like 75 on that road for no reason.

26

somegridplayer t1_iulviaj wrote

128 is a 55, everyone does 75.

18

NativeMasshole t1_iulyi9n wrote

Same on Rt2. There's T intersections and stop lights, yet everyone treats it like a highway. People would revolt if you tried to increase their commute times.

3

boulderdashcci t1_iun57pc wrote

Not our fault the staties are too busy sleeping or looking at their phones when parked to do anything about it

−3

RevengencerAlf t1_iundhne wrote

Them "doing anything about it" adds no value. Artificially low speed limits just create dangerous situations.

2

DawctorDawgs t1_iul1u9b wrote

Hey guys!! This dude claims that Route 1 has a speed limit!

/s

14

Fit-Anything8352 t1_iul03iu wrote

Well the easy and effective(but also a dick move) way to make people not speed is to just ramp up enforcement and hand out a lot of tickets. I mean at some point if you're going 15mph over the speed limit for no reason then maybe it's time to stop driving or face fines...

As a bike commuter and cyclist the things I see people doing on the road(because I have to pay attention to it) are insane sometimes. Turning out of parking lots while texting and not looking, nearly causing head-on collisions with incoming traffic because they couldnt bother to check for oncoming traffic before trying to pass, doing 20+mph over the speed limit on suburban roads, sitting straight in the middle of 4-way intersections because they can't figure out how blinking yellows work and causing a traffic jam, ...

Can we just start retesting people every 5 years or something?

4

fireball_jones t1_ium476s wrote

Nah just put up speed cameras. It’s always been fucking ridiculous that someone in a car thinks they can just drive whatever speed they feel like, but it’s equally antiquated to have a human out there standing on the highway with a gun to enforce it.

7

AlexeiMarie t1_iun2178 wrote

iirc speed cameras can increase fatalities by encouraging municipalities to reduce yellow light durations in order to increase revenue by making it harder to stop before the light turns red, increasing the chances of people running red lights (which means more ticketa which means $$$) and/or slamming on the brakes and getting rear-ended

3

fireball_jones t1_iun43m4 wrote

You’re talking about red light cameras, I’m not.

3

AlexeiMarie t1_iun486r wrote

Oh shit yeah I misread and lumped them together

3

fireball_jones t1_iun4hsq wrote

I agree red light cameras are bad. Heck, red lights period are bad, which is why more intersections are switching to rotaries.

2

GreatAndPowerfulNixy t1_iumy76a wrote

Speed cameras and red light cameras are not allowed per MA DOT, and it's better that way.

2

fireball_jones t1_iun499i wrote

Hmm yeah I wonder who pushed for making speed cameras illegal. Who would benefit from making $200/ hour to take naps on the highway.

5

Academic_Guava_4190 t1_iul3r9k wrote

I’m with you. I can’t even tell you all the stupid things I saw people doing just today.

5

ButtBlock t1_iulmlx7 wrote

It would be so easy if it were uniformly enforced with time stamped photos and radar speed cameras. Instead the police treat spreading much like the lobster industry in Maine. Manage to maximize revenue. Don’t catch all the lobsters at once because they would be extinct. If they started 100% enforcement, revenue would quickly plummet.

Obviously biodiversity is good which limits this analogy. But speeding really is bad in some contexts. Speeding in residential or pedestrian areas really kills many many people every year. If they catch you going 45 in a 35 there should be a proportionate small fine, every time. Not 130 USD once in a blue moon or whatever but like 40-50 USD every single time.

But until there is uniform robust enforcement, Americans are going to keep speeding on residential areas with their big ass cars, and will keep killing or maiming tens of thousands of Americans each year.

4

vegasdonuts t1_iumymvv wrote

Route 24 is 65 and most everyone is doing 95-100.

2

RevengencerAlf t1_iund6zz wrote

Setting the highway speed limit to anything lower than the 85th percentile is an absolute farce. It never accomplishes anything but giving cops an excuse to fundraise for their paramilitary toys.

2

ButtBlock t1_iunv0ks wrote

I agree with you about highway speed limits. I mean Jesus you could land a B52 on many stretches. But speeding in residential or pedestrian zones should be uniformly enforced. You going 40 in a 30 should lead to a consistent each and every time 50-60 USD fine. Because that’s the context where speeding is actually dangerous. Going 80-90 on a straightaway closed access road. Should be fine as long as your tires are rated for it. But speeding on residential backroads… not really safe.

1

Bicworm t1_iun4qim wrote

"no reason" lmao. They're late for work, or drunk - I promise you that

1

Academic_Guava_4190 t1_iuny9iz wrote

Ok maybe I should have said no GOOD reason. Running late for work is lame. Who wants to die on their way TO work?

3

InfiniteState t1_iul6atk wrote

The article is about natural gas, not gasoline. Saving on gasoline won’t help us this winter.

It’s also not that dire. They’re talking about if we get a very cold winter and have severe shortages on imported natural gas, then we should be ready to take reasonable steps like suspending the Jones act to allow non-US ships to transport gas between US ports.

There’s no cause to reduce speed limits which would cripple Boston’s already terrible traffic.

18

Kodiak01 t1_iumktcm wrote

The natural gas shortage in New England is due to the NIMBYs killing pipeline projects more than anything.

13

InfiniteState t1_iumvrem wrote

Not just the pipeline. NIMBYs also killed Cape Wind, the grid connection to hydro in Canada, the Pilgrim nuclear power station, ... We've lost countless opportunities to diversify our grid and generation sources.

15

closerocks t1_iunswry wrote

Killing the natural gas pipeline in a good way to reduce future use of natural gas. If we had a pipeline in place, the powers that make a profit off of the operation of said pipeline would insist on keeping it in operation. The same forces that keep the pipeline open would fight tooth and nail to keep using natural gas for heating and cooking in residential and commercial properties.

If instead, we shifted everybody off of natural gas for heating and onto heat pumps, we would free up a tremendous amount of natural gas for electrical power generation plants where it would be much more efficiently burned. Moving away from natural gas in the home would significantly reduce the amount of leaks of natural gas from the pipeline under our streets.

The gas utilities would still bitch about losing residential customers but fark them.

−1

buried_lede t1_ix1sj2o wrote

They wanted us to pay for the pipeline too - all costs passed onto consumers, for an energy source we are trying to get away from in part. I think we will need it for quite some time but we are overly dependant on it. And don't forget who fought solar and even wind, at first, - NOT THE NIMBYs - the pipeline people, the utilities and even the folks at ISO NE

2

PakkyT t1_iumcw8l wrote

>The article is about natural gas, not gasoline. Saving on gasoline won’t help us this winter.

True but keep in mind that about 1/4 of Massachusetts homes heat with oil rather than gas or electricity or other means, so heating oil (diesel fuel) and gasoline prices tend to go hand in hand as they are refined from the same source. But yes, getting a little off the topic of Natural Gas supplies.

8

modernhomeowner t1_iuluuku wrote

Several of our powerplants can be transitioned between natural gas and oil. If oil were cheap enough and enough supply, we could use this for power. That was where I was going on gasoline. But overall, we could easily use to decrease our consumption to save energy.

0

InfiniteState t1_iumdjs6 wrote

What?

Even if moving plants to oil and setting up the supply lines could be done in a timeframe that helped this winter, using less gasoline in Boston will do zero for helping that.

5

buried_lede t1_ix1ssfx wrote

We already reserve oil at all the switchable plants in Connecticut. They are reqiured to reserve oil and every winter the gas plants here burn oil, on low temp days when homes using gas are turning the heat up - they come first.

So it's done every year, but last reports I checked, their reserves were much lower than usual

There is blame to go around to all parties, all of them. The corps are trying to come out on top and have worked against plenty of projects too because they don't serve their bottom line

I’m sure most of the natural gas power plants up in MA are dual fuel as well, and reserve oil for winter use.

1

modernhomeowner t1_iumen95 wrote

It is a problem that has been compounding annually, if we don't do something now, next year will be worse. There isn't a magic natural gas fairy that will build a new well and a new pipeline by next winter.

0

SharpCookie232 t1_iul3epr wrote

We need high-quality, electric powered public transportation for the whole area inside 495 and point to point from the major cities.

10

SynbiosVyse t1_ium2x18 wrote

If only we kept our nuclear plants, but we didn't.

If only we didn't shutdown pipelines and drilling, then we'd have home heating oil and natural gas. Ukraine is a scapegoat.

9

GhostOpera406 t1_iumgjfb wrote

Shareholders have found out you don't have to take the risk of the boom/bust cycle. Just price it higher. Gas in an inelastic good. That's a major reason why companies don't even bother drilling anymore, even if the government made it easier.

3

buried_lede t1_ix1tzox wrote

That's exactly right. So few people are aware of that. They refer to it as "discipline" and it is assisted by sophisticated pricing models

1

buried_lede t1_ix1t8s1 wrote

[EDIT: oops. I thought this comment was in the CT subreddit. Pardon me. ]

Only one of three reactors at Millstone is operating because we barely averted a meltdown that would have been our Chernobyl. Why? Because we trusted for profit companies not to mess with the engineers' designs in order to save some money and then we trusted them to tell the truth when they never did. Who was that company? Eversource, fka Northeast Utilities

Environmentalists didn't shut down Millstone, the Atomic Energy Commission did and then threw them over to Congress, which ripped them to pieces in public hearings

Yet they rose again, like mutant Phoenix larva from a radioactive ash heap. Behold, the corporation!

1

vegasdonuts t1_iumyh7l wrote

Pilgrim was a dodgy joke. I’m all for nuclear, but not if it’s poorly maintained, inefficient and questionably safe at best.

3

icebeat t1_ium1483 wrote

What has to do natural gas with the speed limit? and by the way solar panels are awesome and don’t require gas!

1

modernhomeowner t1_ium35y8 wrote

Solar panels in MA can't meet our energy demand in the winter. We will for a very long time be dependent on Natural Gas. Maybe we get new better technology to supply and use energy, maybe some of these high utility rates encourage people to move south where utility prices, food, and taxes are less. One of the two would need to happen before we stop using Natural Gas.

I personally have the largest solar array on my roof allowed under MA's net meter laws. I have a heat pump for my heating and an EV. Those all run on electricity made by Natural Gas in the winter, and each evening and night all year. My massive solar array, due to our northern location, doesn't even produce enough in the winter for my lights, refrigerator and oven - and the load for my heat pump is about 10 times that, meaning I'd need over 400 solar panels to get me my heat in the winter, plus about $225,000 in home batteries.... Not happening.

0

bahmutov t1_iums1yc wrote

Wind. You forgot the wind.

1

modernhomeowner t1_iun7yjt wrote

I didn't forget wind, the question posed to me was about solar. Wind helps, but we are currently at a standstill in this state. Between objections to offshore wind, objections to on land wind, windmill supply chain issues and now patent lawsuits around offshore windmills, those are a little further out as a replacement energy.

1

bahmutov t1_iun9lq8 wrote

We are not at a standstill. The largest offshore wind farm got all its permits and is on track. Everything you listed a local political bumps on the road.

1

modernhomeowner t1_iunbzm2 wrote

Just yesterday on CNBC they had where I think it was 1600MWh of wind power in MA is on hold.

1

buried_lede t1_ix1uj3g wrote

The interconnection queue at ISO NE is chock full of wind getting ready to connect and batteries. ISO has to fix its pricing bs though

1

[deleted] t1_iums8ao wrote

More people should read your post. Too many people thing they are saving the world by slapping ten panels on their garage. We aren’t ready for electric, but it’s a decent start. Natural gas and oil are going to be here for a while.

1

icebeat t1_iumz8rd wrote

Exactly, there are only a bunch of people installing solar energy and that is the problem. Increase that number of solar and you will see a significant reduction on the energy demand. Of course electric companies don’t want to heard about this.

2

buried_lede t1_ix1uc2d wrote

In Connecticut, everyone is reporting great results from their solar arrays

1

[deleted] t1_ix23blf wrote

100% of the electric bill?

1

buried_lede t1_ix3wrff wrote

Pretty much, yeah. I’m surprised the marginal difference in climate in MA makes such a huge difference. It’s too bad.

If you peruse the CT subreddit, you’ll find lots of people really happy with their solar systems reporting ridiculously low electric bills

Is your result similar to others in MA? If not, maybe have your system tested, maybe something is wrong

1

buried_lede t1_ix1u7wx wrote

Are you serious? Not even your lights and fridge? Jesus.

1

modernhomeowner t1_ix1ujhp wrote

My non-heat, non-ev average energy use in December is 354kwh, my 38 solar panels will only produce 283kwh in December.

1

buried_lede t1_ix3y8nh wrote

Wow, I’m not only not an expert, I don’t own solar panels, but that sounds very low as to output from those panels. Something is wrong - with the panels? With the hours of sunlight per day? With the system set up? Something

1

modernhomeowner t1_ix3zc0d wrote

There is little sunlight in MA in the winter months, the sun is at a very low angle, reducing panel efficiency and increasing shading due to trees. Summer months I near 2,000kwh.

1

buried_lede t1_ix41dxa wrote

2000 sounds more like it. That makes more sense. Super, super low winter output though

1

modernhomeowner t1_ix41v80 wrote

That's normal for MA, you have much much less output in the winter. Add that to heat pumps and EVs that use more electricity in winter, and we have a reverse effect, more use in the winter while producing less.

1

buried_lede t1_ix4248y wrote

So does net metering there get you pretty much a zero annual bill? In CT people are reporting doing very well so far with the deal

1

modernhomeowner t1_ix42pw8 wrote

Net metering helps me, it doesn't help the grid reduce costs. I sell my energy for exactly what the grid sells it for, they earn nothing. But the grid still has to make my electricity with fossil fuels in the winter to give it back to me. It still has to have energy on standby for rainy days in summer. It still needs to pay year-round overhead and staffing for powerplants, even when the energy isn't needed like summer days when I make enough for 4 or 5 houses. My having panels is great for me, but bad for my neighbors electric rates.

2

icebeat t1_iumy7mf wrote

Boston and Barcelona are roughly on the same latitude, same sun hours and yet we don’t have enough sun? Curious

0

buried_lede t1_ix1s4m7 wrote

Our usage is already, as a state, one of the lowest per capita in the country

1

ThePremiumOrange t1_iuo2poz wrote

Fuel economy higher at 55 is a myth. It’s depends on the vehicle entirely and the vast majority see increases until 65+. Speed limits are set to allow safe travel based on the flow of traffic, not control mpg. You can EASILY drive 55 average speed and blow through more fuel than someone who drives consciously at 65/70. This, among the other things you’ve said, is a really dumb take.

−1

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iukp0vq wrote

Dude, you voting for the candidates who favor abortion because that’s all that matters?

−28

TheUnsightlyLocks t1_iukry5t wrote

Weird that you brought up a completely unrelated topic like abortion.

Sounds like you're projecting and something like abortion is all that matters to you.

Also, let people have abortions. Your religious world views are dying out.

15

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iuktrrj wrote

Naa, I heard the democrat running for MA AG campaign ad touting her view on abortion. She is running in Ma. No one is changing the law here.

Yes my world view on abortion, similar to the rest of the world except for North Korea and China which allow abortion up to birth…which is now the democrat stance.

−19

TheUnsightlyLocks t1_iukyuie wrote

> No one is changing the law here.

Well until they do. It's important to have people defending certain reasonable positions and local politicians have impact on nationwide politics. Massachusetts doesn't exist in a vacuum, and as stupidly self evident as it sounds, we're a country of states and we all have impact on each other. We need strong proponents of reproductive choice and autonomy.

It is odd and a bit revealing that you're focusing this much on one single topic, though. I truly hope you don't ever have a daughter, a relative, a partner or a friend that needs a type of an abortion that you don't agree on based on your current views.

4

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iukzw3d wrote

I know this may be hard for you, I was mocking democrats because the world is on the brink of a world war (according to Joe), we have record high inflation, oil rationing in the northeast, massive utility increases and democrats are like “vote for me because a third trimester abortion is a fundamental right”.

−8

NotnotNeo t1_iulufcq wrote

youre the person putting those small nonsensical notes in consumer goods for people to find, aren't you.

2

No_Bowler9121 t1_ium4ezs wrote

Because Biden caused a global pandemic and made Russia invade Ukraine, moron.

2

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumaghk wrote

Well his policies certainly aided the Russian invasion.

0

No_Bowler9121 t1_iumbp0i wrote

How so? Wasn't it Trump and his fans who were praising Putin? While Biden's administration is supplying Ukraine the tools to fight Putin.

3

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumc1ve wrote

Biden’s war against oil only meant that Russia selling it became more valuable. If Biden was serious about hurting Putin he’d encourage US oil companies to drill on US land to drive down the cost per barrel. That way, Putin makes less when he sells to India. Additionally, the way he pulled out of Afghanistan reminded the world how weak he is.

0

No_Bowler9121 t1_iumcdwd wrote

you do realize the USA is a huge oil exporter right? What fake news have you been consuming?

2

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumctua wrote

“Huge oil exporter” hahaha. So scientific. We could be exporting more if we had Keystone pipeline. And we could be drilling more but Joe threatens oil and gas companies with more taxes. Ironically, if he’d allow them to drill more cost would come down and their profits would come down also.

0

No_Bowler9121 t1_iumd8um wrote

Well one, you know the environmentalists are not incorrect right? and two we are the third largest oil exporter, THIRD. You are simply uninformed.

3

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumdf77 wrote

Great can we export more? Simply saying we are the x highest exporter when we could be exporting more is a weak argument.

1

OakenGreen t1_iumnkeb wrote

“Profits would come down also”

So now you see why these shareholder owned companies are reluctant to drill more?

1

Murky_side_ t1_iumhyc5 wrote

I know this may be hard for you, but maybe go get a job and stop policing a bunch of local subreddits with your bullshit - no one cares.

1

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumi31o wrote

Sorry, am I making this not a safe space for you?

1

Murky_side_ t1_iumn03v wrote

lol no, you're just an obnoxious cunt who is only undermining their own opinions.

Maybe get a job and get off reddit all day?

1

No_Bowler9121 t1_ium495g wrote

Anyone who supports forced pregnancies is a douchbag, must be from New Hampshire.

2

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumadmj wrote

Who forced them to get pregnant?

0

No_Bowler9121 t1_iumc1c2 wrote

A rapist? not having proper education? a broken condom? birth control failure? And lets not forget that the bundle of cells are not a person, they have no souls no thoughts.

1

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumclu8 wrote

And how often does that happen? Generally speaking birth control is over 99% effective.

1

No_Bowler9121 t1_iumd0xt wrote

Often enough that some people require the medical procedure that is an abortion. How often does brain cancer happen that it requires medical procedures.

1

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumdarp wrote

Less than 1% of abortions are because of rape and incest.

1

No_Bowler9121 t1_iuo6wxk wrote

Rape was only one part of what I wrote, abortion as contraception is 100% ok too. Remember the bundle of cells is not a person.

1

buried_lede t1_ix1vmw3 wrote

Correction, voluntary abortions. Necessary ones are performed all day every day in any sane medical setting throughout pregnancies that have taken a bad turn for whatever reason and these laws are now causing dangerous medical risks and even deaths. Why? So a bunch of insecure boys who think god promised them power can feel like they're somebody

1

Intrepid_Priority154 t1_ix1w7ox wrote

Did you just wake up from a coma? When should abortion be legal until?

1

buried_lede t1_ix3xny3 wrote

“Until?” Your ignorance is so severe. Go study medicine instead of the Bible if you want to understand medicine and keep your spectral evidence out of our faces

1

buried_lede t1_ix1vbcy wrote

D&C for a miscarriage -- happens every single day in this country except now it doesn't and women have died. Abortion law isn't only about voluntary terminations, when you outlaw abortion it absolutely affects all medical guidelines for any abortion procedure and that endangers womens lives and is not based on medical science but the witchhunts you probably call religion. So shove off

1

buried_lede t1_ix1v1zw wrote

them. talking about us in the third person. not a men's locker room here, kid

1

buried_lede t1_ix1uwjj wrote

You;re talking about women's reproductive health care rights and don't think it doesn't matter. You might as well come in here arguing dred scott, or rape as form of free speech or something. Women aren't going to be polite about attacks on their inalienable rights from an ignorant misogynist like you, so take a hike

1