Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
27. Maybe you're onto something...
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 03:38 PM
Oct 2013

The situation seems to be one where there is a series of papers, written by professional staff at a high level of expertise, reviewed and contributed to by an array of involved major industrial organizations and various stakeholders specializing in the field.

The number of highly qualified professionals involved in the production of this policy and paper is very high.

You say they've made a fundamental lexical error in spite of the fact that they define their usage with precise, unambiguous language on the first page of the document being adopted.

I thought it was just a matter of laziness towards reading combined with a preference for disruption over discussion, but after reading your post 25, I'll admit you raise a real possibility I hadn't considered.

Storage is key to expanded deployment of renewables and, interestingly, to new transportation. NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #1
We have pumped hydro near here. madokie Oct 2013 #2
I know which one, I think. NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #3
You got it madokie Oct 2013 #4
No but it sure looks pretty. NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #5
We just call it the pump back madokie Oct 2013 #6
I just went and read the PDF... phantom power Oct 2013 #7
Sad, isn't it, what passes for technical journalism these days. oldhippie Oct 2013 #8
So you think of CPUC documents as "technical journalism"? kristopher Oct 2013 #11
The document I read was from greentechmedia .... oldhippie Oct 2013 #12
The document (PDF) PP referred to is from the CPUC kristopher Oct 2013 #14
The .pdf document from the CPUC referenced in the article ..... oldhippie Oct 2013 #15
California's Public Utility Commission doesn't know the difference between energy and power? kristopher Oct 2013 #17
The trick is inductors and capacitors... hunter Oct 2013 #20
The Flux Capacitor One_Life_To_Give Oct 2013 #9
Something you might look up is "Vector Inversion Generator" and similar technologies. hunter Oct 2013 #26
Like this one? One_Life_To_Give Oct 2013 #28
Why would they need to discuss "watts X (unit-of-time)" specifically in this document? kristopher Oct 2013 #10
Maybe because the whole article is about "energy storage" ..... oldhippie Oct 2013 #13
How does prescribing the depth of capacity assist the CPUC effort? kristopher Oct 2013 #16
Obsfucate much? oldhippie Oct 2013 #18
I posed legitimate questions related to the actual policy under discussion. kristopher Oct 2013 #19
[sigh] ... I really need to get a life .... oldhippie Oct 2013 #21
Or you could just be civil... kristopher Oct 2013 #22
Because the goal is to mandate storage requirements for their grid. phantom power Oct 2013 #23
Their goals are well presented in the papers kristopher Oct 2013 #24
Too bad we're not as smart as kristopher ..... oldhippie Oct 2013 #25
Maybe you're onto something... kristopher Oct 2013 #27
Kick kristopher Nov 2013 #29
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»California Passes Huge Gr...»Reply #27