Comments
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.
somegridplayer t1_iulviaj wrote
128 is a 55, everyone does 75.
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.
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
RevengencerAlf t1_iundhne wrote
Them "doing anything about it" adds no value. Artificially low speed limits just create dangerous situations.
DawctorDawgs t1_iul1u9b wrote
Hey guys!! This dude claims that Route 1 has a speed limit!
/s
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?
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.
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
fireball_jones t1_iun43m4 wrote
You’re talking about red light cameras, I’m not.
AlexeiMarie t1_iun486r wrote
Oh shit yeah I misread and lumped them together
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.
GreatAndPowerfulNixy t1_iumy76a wrote
Speed cameras and red light cameras are not allowed per MA DOT, and it's better that way.
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.
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.
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.
vegasdonuts t1_iumymvv wrote
Route 24 is 65 and most everyone is doing 95-100.
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.
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.
Bicworm t1_iun4qim wrote
"no reason" lmao. They're late for work, or drunk - I promise you that
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?
Bicworm t1_iuo5bho wrote
Bootlickers
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.
Kodiak01 t1_iumktcm wrote
The natural gas shortage in New England is due to the NIMBYs killing pipeline projects more than anything.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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!
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.
TeacherGuy1980 t1_iuko6e9 wrote
Tis the winter of our discontent. :/
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!
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.
bahmutov t1_iums1yc wrote
Wind. You forgot the wind.
icebeat t1_iumyh9p wrote
Yeah wind is another great source of energy and how about WECs?
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.
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.
modernhomeowner t1_iunbzm2 wrote
Just yesterday on CNBC they had where I think it was 1600MWh of wind power in MA is on hold.
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
[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.
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.
buried_lede t1_ix1uc2d wrote
In Connecticut, everyone is reporting great results from their solar arrays
[deleted] t1_ix23blf wrote
100% of the electric bill?
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
buried_lede t1_ix1u7wx wrote
Are you serious? Not even your lights and fridge? Jesus.
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.
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
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.
buried_lede t1_ix41dxa wrote
2000 sounds more like it. That makes more sense. Super, super low winter output though
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.
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
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.
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
buried_lede t1_ix1s4m7 wrote
Our usage is already, as a state, one of the lowest per capita in the country
NotnotNeo t1_iuluhc4 wrote
lots of shoulds, few hows whens and whos
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.
modernhomeowner t1_iuod2b3 wrote
Studies from the EPA, AAA and every automaker show that 55 is more efficient than 70. Here is just one source on a government website
ThePremiumOrange t1_iupfkjd wrote
That’s a chart with no study explaining it or it’s testing methodology.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iukp0vq wrote
Dude, you voting for the candidates who favor abortion because that’s all that matters?
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.
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.
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.
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”.
TheUnsightlyLocks t1_iul0cz4 wrote
> know this may be hard for you
Stopped reading right there. Don't talk down to me you barren troglodyte.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iul1eaw wrote
Ohh sorry complete stranger on Reddit.
NotnotNeo t1_iulufcq wrote
youre the person putting those small nonsensical notes in consumer goods for people to find, aren't you.
No_Bowler9121 t1_ium4ezs wrote
Because Biden caused a global pandemic and made Russia invade Ukraine, moron.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumaghk wrote
Well his policies certainly aided the Russian invasion.
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.
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.
No_Bowler9121 t1_iumcdwd wrote
you do realize the USA is a huge oil exporter right? What fake news have you been consuming?
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.
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.
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.
OakenGreen t1_iumnkeb wrote
“Profits would come down also”
So now you see why these shareholder owned companies are reluctant to drill more?
[deleted] t1_iumqwje wrote
[removed]
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.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumi31o wrote
Sorry, am I making this not a safe space for you?
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?
No_Bowler9121 t1_ium495g wrote
Anyone who supports forced pregnancies is a douchbag, must be from New Hampshire.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumadmj wrote
Who forced them to get pregnant?
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.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumclu8 wrote
And how often does that happen? Generally speaking birth control is over 99% effective.
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.
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_iumdarp wrote
Less than 1% of abortions are because of rape and incest.
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.
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
Intrepid_Priority154 t1_ix1w7ox wrote
Did you just wake up from a coma? When should abortion be legal until?
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
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
buried_lede t1_ix1v1zw wrote
them. talking about us in the third person. not a men's locker room here, kid
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
buried_lede t1_ix1un2e wrote
get out
AgitatedEggplant t1_iumrlwk wrote
FUCK EVERSOURCE. My workplace consults for this 'company' and it's an absolute clusterfuck of disorganization. Our evs correspondent has been replaced 4 times in 3 years because they couldn't handle doing the job of 3 different departments in one position, and I don't blame them. It's shocking we haven't had blackouts already with the shit I see on a weekly basis coming from this conglomerate of liars.
Eversource's CEO is actually 3 toddlers with full diapers dressed up in a trench coat looking for a mommy to throw a tantrum at.
saltthefries t1_iun62xu wrote
I have worked with Eversource as well as many other utilities and I echo these sentiments. They're one of the worst in North America, in my experience. That being said, there is legitimate risk of an energy crisis in the region because there are limited ways to get usable energy here in the short term. Energy infrastructure is fragile (even more so when it's managed by idiots like Eversource) and the combination of a surprise cold snap and some other disruption might be enough to trigger severe rationing or outages.
Polynya t1_iuonvkm wrote
Jones Act delenda est. It’s literally insane that it’s illegal to ship natural gas from the Gulf Coast to MA because of a century old law the result of which is there are like three rickety pieces of junk in the entire US allowed to move gas between two US ports. We essentially buy natural gas from Trinidad and Europe because of that dumb law.
And then there are the environmentalists and NYS which have opposed plans to build a pipeline from the Marcellus & Utica shale fields to NE. The result? We get shortages and MORE carbon emissions because we have to start turning back to coal. (Also obligatory fuck Maine and them blocking the NECEC - would be nice to have a GW of Quebec hydro right now!)
saltthefries t1_iuoovj2 wrote
Even with LNG, a ton of energy consumption and emissions are involved in chilling natural gas to -260 F and maintaining that temperature in transit.
This is really a massive failure of federal policy that might freeze some people to death in the winter.
buried_lede t1_ix1rr3u wrote
I think Biden should answer Nolan by dumping truckloads of solar panels on their front lawn
JoshSidekick t1_iumw1xb wrote
Maybe if they stopped leaking it in the sewers and blowing out manholes, there'd be enough to go around this winter.
mini4x t1_ium56f3 wrote
Maybe he should start by giving up a portion of his $4.7 million dollar salary?
stackinpointers t1_iumdx5g wrote
Giving it where? There are about 1.5m households in Mass that rely on NG for heat. He could give up his entire salary and that would buy everyone in the state a few hours of heat.
I'd rather overpay him the $4.7m if it means he's able to secure LNG for the region this winter.
SileAnimus t1_iunj524 wrote
>and that would buy everyone in the state a few hours of heat.
Good then, because the issue is that there might be a shortage under extreme situations like a cold snap, which results in only a potential service loss of a few hours
stackinpointers t1_iunw12v wrote
Did you read the article? Money won't fix that problem
SileAnimus t1_iuozgf7 wrote
Money is literally the only barrier to not relying on gas for heating, are you daft?
stackinpointers t1_iuufvr3 wrote
No, actually it turns out there's more to it. If you, you know, read the fucking article
SileAnimus t1_iuupxb7 wrote
I think you are illiterate and didn't understand what I just said in my comment. Why do we use Natural Gas as a sole heating source in homes? The answer: Because people don't want to/can't spend the extra money on other forms of heating.
Good job using your huge brain though. Really showed me.
stackinpointers t1_iuw5mao wrote
If only your big brain could understand how far $3/per home would go toward this winter's shortage.
It's fortunate for Mass that we don't have idealistic idiots like you doing anything important. Keep barking up the wrong tree while the adults solve the problems at hand.
I mean really, you're going to spend a few million on heat pump incentives instead of lobbying the federal government for help? Give me a fucking break
SileAnimus t1_iuye90k wrote
You're one of those kids who didn't pass basic thresholds in math at middle school, aren't you?
Again, I understand you are stupid, but use your brain for a second. What is the literal only barrier to converting homes from gas-only heating to gas and heat pumps?
I mean it, really, stretch those smooth lobes you have up there: Why don't people have heat pumps in their home to augment gas heating?
It's money. Literally just that.
I'm sorry if you're illiterate and didn't understand what I said in my comment. I am not paid you to educate on home heating systems.
stackinpointers t1_ivdzbmg wrote
30 billion.
That's the lower bound on what it would cost to retrofit 2m nat gas Mass homes with heat pumps. Of course this ignores the fact that the labor to get it done in time for this winter is non-existent at the scale required.
And your big idea for our natural gas shortage this winter is to take 4.7m from the man to get started.
You're 0.015% of the way there, leaving 99.98% of homes wishing we had the CEO of eversource back. Great work math wiz.
SileAnimus t1_ive1rlk wrote
Amazing numbers to pull out of your ass considering that Mass only has 1.5 million homes that use natural gas at all. And even then, you don't have to convert every single home to not use natural gas. You just have to convert enough of them to offset the made up natural gas shortage. I understand that this is a hard thing for you to understand though. Let me put it in simple terms for you: When you got too many trees, you take out enough so you don't have too many trees, you don't fell every forest until there are no trees. Make sense?
And no offense, but if you've ever worked with or interacted with Eversource you'd know for a fact that their CEO does jack shit. You should know this since being a CEO and president is a part time job, seeing as Nolan is also the director of seven other different companies. He could disappear and nothing would change. A CEO's job has nothing to do with business operations.
Hell, if Eversource wanted they could also build LNG storage stations, similarly to other states that rely on natural gas. But you know, that would require them to do their job as an energy supplier. So that's out of the gate.
But anyways, this kind of all goes back around to you ignoring the obvious statement that money is literally the only reason why this is an issue at all. Gas supply is only in a shortage because there's nothing that stops natural gas production from being shorted for profit. Massachusetts also has no regulation regarding cost of municipal supplies such as natural gas. There is no disaster coming other than the natural consequence of manufactured greed.
laxmolnar t1_iumh2s3 wrote
You take their comment so literally and like try to think.
They’re clearly alluding to cutting costs and bringing to light a clear large cost that could be cut. Ugh
[deleted] t1_iumro3y wrote
I don’t think you understand how little of an impact salary has on something of this scale. You can’t just “cut back costs”, and reduce the price of natural gas. We need to start producing our own before we see price cuts.
[deleted] t1_iumb4vr wrote
It’s November and it was 75’ out yesterday. In 10 years we’re not even going to need to heat during the “winter” in Massachusetts.
stackinpointers t1_iume0sr wrote
This comment will not age well.
JoshSidekick t1_iumvl1t wrote
Just wait until April when there's 3 feet of snow on the ground over a 2 week period.
WhatAboutJustBeKind t1_iuu82so wrote
That’s different, and reaffirms climate change. It’s an extreme event.
Generally winter will be warmer with less snow though. Do you live here? It’s obvious that there’s less!
koebelin t1_iumy85k wrote
Don't worry, the unstable polar vortex will still give us a blast once in a while.
PunkCPA t1_iun39xp wrote
Maybe that LNG pipeline wasn't such a bad idea after all.
iamnotemilio t1_iungwka wrote
Natural Gas and oil are global commodities. Unless the gas is being stored explicitly for domestic use, like the strategic stockpile was, the pipeline would just speed up delivery to the international market.
irondukegm t1_iunl9xo wrote
Not true, outside of the Gulf coast, pipelines only serve the domestic market
ganduvo t1_iuob7fc wrote
I remember when people were up in arms about Biden cancelling the Keystone XL pipeline because they thought it would cut tons of local jobs and massively increase domestic oil prices. They didn't realize that the pipeline's primary purpose was literally to sell Canadian crude to other countries, and that the oil companies actually wanted to cancel the pipeline anyway because (at the time) the cost of oil had gone down so low that it wasn't worth it.
Physical-Birthday-33 t1_iuofz21 wrote
For any nerds interested in why this winter and winters in the future will produce self-inflicted wounds to New England’s energy reliability, I highly recommend the book “Shorting the Grid” by Meredith Angwin. The author uses examples from her local grid (New England) to describe what goes on with the grid throughout the country. What’s frustrating is that there are no easy answers to these questions, but you’ll see the solutions in place currently are unnecessarily convoluted and the primary driver behind these policies is not what is best for the customer.
guesswhatihate t1_iuo7d2x wrote
Don't forget, Maura stopped two pipelines.
OkMudDrankin t1_ium6b37 wrote
As a solar sales rep this is both promising in terms of job security, but also a little disheartening knowing how many homes will struggle this winter. I’ll try to do what I can getting people off the grid and producing their own power.
PakkyT t1_iumd9fr wrote
We are too far North and of course in Winter here the sun is low in the sky during the short daylight hours. While solar panels are a nice supplement, they are not the solution they are in places like Southern California.
OkMudDrankin t1_iumeeyy wrote
You are too far north for solar? That makes literally 0 sense my friend. If energy prices are so unbearable for you why don’t you make a smart sound investment for your 1 asset that you most likely own in life and invest in renewable energy sources instead of continuing to get fucked and acting like it’s all Joe Bidens fault. I guarantee your home gets more than 800 sun hours annually which is plenty for a home that consumes 10,000 kWh yearly. Stop blaming democrats for your shitty consumer habits.
PakkyT t1_iumhgzk wrote
Funny how you read into post all kind of things that were not at all stated. Not sure how you got politics from my post at all. Where did I blame either party or specific politician other than in your own head? You seemed a little triggered there sir.
My point is where we are solar panels are supplemental especially the smaller scale systems installed on private homes. In the dead of winter there is no way solar panels alone can take care of all the needs for electricity in a house especially if you are going to try and heat via heat pumps to further reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
On a side note, my house is likely one of the worse for solar panels with no south facing roof section and many tall trees around my house which would need to be removed for maximum solar exposure.
OkMudDrankin t1_iumhmk2 wrote
So remove the trees then. And in the winter Solar can provide more than enough of your needs as long as you have a big enough system. All I hear is excuses.
PakkyT t1_iumvne6 wrote
Easy for you to say if you are not paying $10k for the removal of a lot of large trees. Just like you won't be paying for the increased costs to cool my home in the summer now that I no longer have the natural and free cooling effect of shade on my house. Removing trees is not without consequences and like my example, the benefit of doing so from one season is often offset by the loss of that benefit from the opposite season.
And as a sales rep, by definition everything you say is likely not exactly true or accurate. Just get the signature on the contract is likely your boss's motto.
[deleted] t1_iumsmzx wrote
Nope. Not gonna happen. You can’t run an average size house on rooftop solar panels in a New England winter. You’re probably one of the gems I told to get off my doorstep.
OakenGreen t1_iumofty wrote
I’ve got solar on my roof. Produces more than necessary in the midst of summer but in the winter it doesn’t come close to producing enough energy to be solely relied on
OkMudDrankin t1_iumr324 wrote
Yes the point of solar isn’t just it’s application to the homes it’s installed on. Solar if installed on as many homes as possible would create a net benefit for the grid by greatly alleviating all of the demand for electricity.
chadwickipedia t1_iune5wv wrote
That wouldn’t decrease prices
oneMadRssn t1_iun9asp wrote
You might be right for home solar. But generally, we are not too far north. Some of the biggest commercial solar plants are being built in Canada - much further north than MA.
The amount of sunlight is only part of the equation. The more north you are, the higher your winter energy demands are, and also the energy itself tends to cost more up north. With higher prices and higher demand, it makes financial sense to wildly over-spec a solar installation.
[deleted] t1_iumx3iq wrote
[deleted]
gittenlucky t1_iunh4op wrote
So a solution is different LNG ships. My question - why not put a US flag on them instead of a foreign flag? I’m sure it’s about money, but whatever happens it’s going to cost some serious money.
saltthefries t1_iunlpwm wrote
The Jones Act requires the ships be built in the US. There are no shipyards in the US that currently build LNG tankers. This might be a solution on a timeline of a decade at significant and likely uneconomical cost vs. building pipelines or transmission lines + increasing renewable generation in the region.
gittenlucky t1_iunqbmd wrote
Oh! Thanks for the clarification. Didn’t realize it was construction too. Thought it was just own/operate.
craigawoo t1_iuopb87 wrote
Please don’t get Biden involved. 🙄
[deleted] t1_iumk23m wrote
[removed]
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iulqyfy wrote
Or maybe start drilling for our own natural gas, expand pipelines, that way this situation won’t happen again
OkMudDrankin t1_ium6fwp wrote
And do you think Joe Biden is responsible for making this happen? Or the energy companies that are currently churning out record profits?
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_ium6udu wrote
Yes and if the attorney general let the natural gas company expand their pipeline maybe the profits wouldn’t be so high because it would be spending on construction
OkMudDrankin t1_ium75wr wrote
How can you be so terribly misinformed. The attorney general has NOTHING to do with an energy companies willingness to pursue new revenue streams do you understand that? There are currently over 9000 permits not being used for energy companies to produce new energy. They will not construct new infrastructure around energy just to meet a temporary supply shortage that would negatively affect there profits down the line. The solution is more renewable energy. Not more of the same bullshit that got us into this damn situation to begin with. How can you be so shortsighted.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_ium82c5 wrote
Electric and wind cannot meet the need they don’t have the technology that’s the shortsighted idea
OkMudDrankin t1_ium89gs wrote
Wind and solar can meet 85% of the countries energy needs. Again if you’re gonna spew stupid easily disprovable talking points maybe stick to Facebook?
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_ium90jp wrote
You may want to read something instead of listening to a talking point enjoy your scooter
OkMudDrankin t1_iumbr0d wrote
Yeah I posted several links for your dumbass. Sources to verify my statements unlike you. Go fuck yourself moron. Ashamed to know that you and I share the same state.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iumlfa5 wrote
Someone hates being told he’s clueless, enjoy your scooter
GreatAndPowerfulNixy t1_iumzght wrote
Go back to New Hampshire
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun185p wrote
Remember if I can’t plow the snow, you can’t ride your scooter
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun4gxx wrote
Try again Saudi Arabia produces zero natural gas along with Texas
GreatAndPowerfulNixy t1_iun54l0 wrote
Go back to New Hampshire
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun7jrv wrote
Sorry you can’t take it
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_ium7yk9 wrote
In Massachusetts she brags about shutting down to natural gas pipelines and I don’t know what eversource House for profits but gasoline and natural gas for two completely different product
[deleted] t1_iumbww4 wrote
The energy companies who are purposefully reducing supply to keep prices high are going to spend some of those profits on expansion? Yeah, right.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iumlls2 wrote
They have a plied to expand the pipeline in a fighting a Massachusetts to open a compressor station at this time might want to do a little research
SynbiosVyse t1_ium2ysk wrote
Common sense evades everyone nowadays.
[deleted] t1_iumbr1m wrote
You know that the government has handed out thousands of drilling permits, but the oil companies don’t want to use them, right? Other than opening a government owned oil company, there’s nothing we can do to increase the supply of oil and gas.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iumlhsm wrote
You do realize we’re talking about natural gas this has nothing to do with oil
[deleted] t1_iun3796 wrote
where do you think Natural Gas comes from? It's a byproduct of oil drilling. Natural gas is produced by oil fields.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun4lqb wrote
Try again Saudi Arabia produces zero natural gas along with Texas
[deleted] t1_iun7g2m wrote
Many oil wells burn their natural gas at the well, because they don't have the capture mechanisms in place. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Routine_flaring
Natural gas is produced when crude oil is depressurized. Isolated natural gas fields do exist, at a much deeper depth than oil fields, and so they require much more work to obtain.
5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas is burned at the well worldwide, and another 2 trillion cubic feet is simply vented to the atmosphere, every year. We could increase the worldwide gas supply by 10% by simply capturing waste gas.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun7onk wrote
Sounds good to me
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iun8xvh wrote
I think you may be confusing methane yes natural gas
[deleted] t1_iunnjxt wrote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas
Natural Gas is refined methane.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iunq3sl wrote
Wikipedia really
[deleted] t1_iunuglj wrote
I'm sorry I can't find a reference on Truth Social or Parler or whatever you think is an acceptable source. I've provided references for everything I've tried to explain to you, and your answers appear to be typed out with your phone jammed fully up your own ass. Get a clue or go back to New Hampshire.
Creepy-Ad2944 t1_iunvaeo wrote
Born in Boston lived here all my life, back too gasoline prices have nothing to do with natural gas prices, that’s like saying bread is expensive because the chicken farmers are making so much money. Skinny Jeans, man purse and a scooter, the girls must be chasing you
Db3ma t1_iukqpod wrote
That's rich. One would think that a CEO of Eversource had more smarts than to expect Biden to acknowledge a need for anything that would help We The People.
[deleted] t1_iulzyij wrote
[removed]
moderntechguy t1_iukre0c wrote
Well put. Biden isn't going to do anything. We're in for a rough winter.
OkMudDrankin t1_ium6mzn wrote
Please explain what you think Joe Biden could possibly do? What should he nationalize the energy sector? Then we can be like Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela? Or actually Norway. Then republicans like you would call him a communist. Literally can’t win with you psychos.
Db3ma t1_iunboam wrote
Huh? For starters Joe could undo what he has done to get We The People to where we are, eh?
moderntechguy t1_ium8ggr wrote
- He shouldn't have been elected.
- He shouldn't have shut down the Keystone pipeline.
- He shouldn't have ceased issuing new drilling leases on federal lands and offshore (or making their restrictions so onerous as to make them unattractive).
- He shouldn't have consistently said we are detransitioning from a fossil fuel economy which disincentivizes banks and other investors from investing into long term fossil fuel projects such as drilling, exploration, and refineries.
- He shouldn't be supporting sanctions against Russia which only hurt Europe and our other allies while Russia has plenty of other customers for its oil and gas and is making as much money as it ever was.
- He should start an open season on drilling and fracking in America.
- He should offer interest free loans for new refineries since that's the main issue with why gasoline and diesel prices are so high, guaranteed by the US government so if he reduces demand, no private investment is lost.
- He should approve every fucking pipeline, including natural gas, and pass laws that state that local governments cannot stop pipeline construction as they are part of national security.
- He should repeal the Jones Act.
Basically, it's a combination of Biden fucked up bad and got us into this situation (thank you Massachusetts voters) and now he needs to do a complete u-turn and embrace fossil fuels.
OkMudDrankin t1_iumb3n0 wrote
-
That’s how democracy’s works sorry your side lost.
-
The keystone pipeline would literally have 0 effect on New England energy prices.
-
There are over 9000 permits currently not being used to drill for oil. Stop watching Fox News
-
How is the president of the United States making a commitment to transition to RENEWABLES possibly considered a bad thing in your tiny mind?
-
First of all the decision to sanction Russia was not a “Joe Biden decision”. The entire continent of Europe thinks maybe an 8th package of sanctions is a good idea but you’re right blame Joe Biden like the fucking idiot that you are., Secondly your stupidly incorrect statement about the Russian economy. The Russian economy shrank 4% in 2022 FOUR PERCENT! oil profits are just keeping the coffers filled enough to keep sending grunts into their demise.
-
Again why would ANYONE invest into a dying industry. I can tell you obviously are not in charge of making important financial decisions because if it was up to you we would have oil pumping ghost towns like they do in china.
-
Again why would you ever consider making large investments into dying industries. Please my friend revise your investment strategies. And curious do you actually have any money in the market that you invest yourself or lemme guess no you lost it all lmao?
-
Oh man you’re really stuck up on the fossil fuel thing huh? Literally no investment bank will give energy companies a large sum of money to produce more fossil fuels. You sound like a complete fucking moron man. FOSSIL FUELS WILL BE GONE IN 50 years. We should’ve started making the renewable transition 20 years ago. Get over it man. This has nothing to do with Biden and everything to do with 20 years of shitty environmental policy.
-
And yes you’re right at a time when Americans couldn’t be more fucked financially we should just give our most secured and in some cases much higher paying jobs to other countries citizens instead of our own. You know that doesn’t sound very conservative of you.
Again you want to blame anyone for the energy crisis blame Putin for invading Ukraine, blame opec for cutting production. But Joe Biden has done literally everything he could to help. From releasing 1 million barrels a day. America has produced more oil than any country in the world in 2022 but please tell me how we need to be drilling for more right?
[deleted] t1_iumbjog wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iumbzad wrote
[deleted]
OkMudDrankin t1_iumcjyt wrote
Jesus Christ man so is it up to Joe Biden, to go out and build the American flagged LNG ships or is it up to some American company that literally only cares about making profits not actually helping out Americans? Like why don’t you direct your anger towards Big oil that spent so long lobbying against renewables did everything in there power to squeeze Americans for all they were worth at the pump and now that there’s an energy crisis you want to blame Biden who’s been president for TWO YEARS. Democrats have been pushing green energy for 40 years and now that it’s finally come full circle trumptards like you want to blame Biden. Well no I won’t fall into the homogeneous zygotic thinking, and No I won’t be freezing to death because unlike morons like you my house has solar panels and is extremely energy efficient.
[deleted] t1_iumds98 wrote
[deleted]
OkMudDrankin t1_iumf2dy wrote
Ok the nuclear plants were voted on by dumbass citizens that don’t know anything about how energy works like you. And it had nothing to do with environmentalists and everything to do with conservative NIMBYS. Stop blaming dems for trying to actually transition away from fossil fuels because it inconveniences you somewhat meanwhile who gives a fuck about our grandkids and great grandkids, as long as I can save some money on electric every month. Hey bud there’s tons of ways to go solar. If your electric bill is so expensive then finance a system. Take out an equity loan. Just stop fucking bitching and blaming Biden for everything it makes you sound pathetic. Like “wahhh it’s everyone else’s fault why I’m getting fucked” , no I can almost guarantee you have taken 0 steps to protect yourself from the energy crisis. You don’t need to be well off to take advantage of solar either. I sell solar and there are 0 outta pocket cost programs where you can start saving money right now. Feel free to DM and I’ll explain how you can benefit so you can stop crying about Joe Biden on Reddit.
[deleted] t1_iumgbtp wrote
[deleted]
OkMudDrankin t1_iumgkq5 wrote
Do you think the only way to get solar is to live in a single family home? There are plenty of condos with solar/renewable energy. Maybe try talking to the people in charge of your condo. Maybe get some of your neighbors together maybe organize maybe do something to actually make a change instead of just complaining about Joe Biden. Like this is what’s so pathetic about American politics nowadays in a country where you can literally do anything you just choose to do nothing.
[deleted] t1_iumgtku wrote
[deleted]
OkMudDrankin t1_iumhfzv wrote
Again you’re literally just lying about solar lmao. I’m not sure why. I’m sure your condo is less than 1500 sq ft it does not use that much electricity man. Literally I bet you don’t even know how many kWh you used last month. But you’re gonna sit here and try to lecture me on energy. Maybe be more mindful of your own energy use? And if your condo is thirty stories tall that means plenty of sunlight so there won’t be an issue there. Stop making excuses.
Joseph_Fidler_Walsh t1_iunxhqb wrote
We are sick of the energy monopolies in mass. They don’t care about us, they just want our money. They want to do whatever they can to hold on to their power. I mean for fuck sakes EVERSOURCE IS ON THE COMMITTEE THAT AWARDS THE CONTRACTS TO ENERGY COMPANIES!
“One of bills National Grid opposed will make solar more accessible to lower income residents.”
“ National Grid – a UK-based utility that sells electricity and gas to 20 million customers in New York and New England – also lobbied this year against a Massachusetts bill that seeks to exempt larger solar energy producers from the net metering cap.”
“ National Grid lobbied this year in opposition to another bill by Representative Haddad enhancing the offshore wind industry by increasing the megawatts of wind energy procured by Massachusetts and reforming the state’s offshore wind procurement process by removing utilities from the selection committee that awards power supply bids.”
moderntechguy t1_iukqar4 wrote
Well, Massachusetts is getting what it voted for. I'd rather have mean tweets than freeze to death.
NativeMasshole t1_iulymh6 wrote
Remember that time Trump diverted necessary PPE away from us when we were the epicenter of the pandemic?
OakenGreen t1_iumo0k8 wrote
They don’t.
Sayoria t1_iuldx85 wrote
I can only assume you are going to vote for Jeffrey Deals, aren't you?
OkMudDrankin t1_ium6cpj wrote
What are you even talking about?
moderntechguy t1_ium7uth wrote
Biden's destruction of domestic energy industry.
OkMudDrankin t1_ium82fa wrote
The same energy industry that is currently recording record profits? get real you delusional morons This has nothing to do with Joe Biden get it through your thick Trumptard skull. Holy shit it’s like dealing with Kindergarteners
moderntechguy t1_ium91vf wrote
This has everything to do with Joe Biden. He's openly stated we are de-transitioning from a fossil fuel economy. Banks and other private investors have stopped investing in energy because of that. The primary bottleneck right now is refining. We simply cannot make enough gasoline, diesel, and heating oil. The profits from a barrel of oil turned into diesel have gone from $10 to $100 in less than a year due to lack of capacity. So of course whoever owns the refineries are going to make bank. That's not their fault. All of these products are bought and sold on public markets and the public sets the price through supply and demand. Right now there is very little supply due to the bottleneck. So they are making money. But refineries cost tens of billions of dollars and take decades to recoup their expenses. Absolutely no one is interested in investing in new ones. Why? Because, as Biden goes around saying, "We're detransitioning from fossil fuels", so they'll never get their money back.
High gas prices, lack of natural gas supply, lack of diesel, high oil prices, high heating oil prices, high electricity prices, all of energy being so expensive is all directly the result of this administration's war on fossil fuels before replacement renewables were in place. They got rid of our energy before what was replacing it was even built. That's the problem.
This is a big part of the reason that according to PredictIT, he's about to lose both the House and the Senate and become a lame duck President and polls show him hovering at a 40% approval rate, lower than Trump was at this stage of his Presidency.
OkMudDrankin t1_iumbnr1 wrote
They didn’t get rid of anything. America has produced more oil than any country in the world for 2022. The process to refine the oil has not changed, the only thing that has changed is the global supply do to russias war in Ukraine and OPEC+ turning down production. I don’t understand why you guys are parroting Fox News talking points. If America has produced more oil than ever before shouldn’t the prices be going down? No they are not because oil companies have 0 incentives to lower prices because idiots like you will just keep buyin. Hey maybe here’s a solution buy solar panels, get an electric car. Stop subjecting yourself to the whims of the fossil fuel industry because you’re so afraid of change.
[deleted] t1_iumd5te wrote
[deleted]
OkMudDrankin t1_iume2wq wrote
Yes refining rates have dropped. Once again you blame Joe Biden and simply that’s not the case. I’m not going to bother explaining to you why something is the way it is because you just blame Biden for literally everything. Well you know why refining rates are down? Because I’m 2020 when the entire global economy shut down refiners started losing incredible amounts of money. Obviously this makes sense and hmm maybe if Trump did more to protect America then we wouldn’t have been hit so hard by Covid and refineries could’ve kept doing there thing. But since that wasn’t the case and refiners aren’t going to open up the old mothballed refineries when like I just said above they are turning record profits. And it makes no sense to pay for more refining when OIL IS NOT THE FUTURE.
[deleted] t1_iumfzq7 wrote
[deleted]
JoshSidekick t1_iumwfz5 wrote
> Well, then why hasn't this administration done anything to increase refining capacity?
Glad to see you're like two seconds away from getting on board with nationalizing the oil industry.
Joseph_Fidler_Walsh t1_iunhx7c wrote
You’re absolutely right, we should nationalize the oil industry.
[deleted] t1_ium1rax wrote
[deleted]
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.