Last Updated Projects in Alternative Energy
|project id||project title||project type||project status||project scope||address||zipcode||city||county||state||country||description||desired outcome||published by||publishing date||forwarded by||forwarding date||creator||creating date||archived||featured||page id||page title||issue ids||agency ids||official ids||last modified||latitude||request||longitude||initiator cover photo||allow moderator photo upload||pinned solution id||sponsored||banner image||profile image||step ids||active step id||archetype||group id||person id|
|910431||State’s Progress on 5 Million Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV) by 2030||Active||Global||Sacramento, CA, USA||Sacramento||Sacramento County||CA||US||As part of the AB 32 climate change program, Executive Order B-48-18 administratively created a goal of 5 million zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) on California roads by 2030. This action expands on the prior Executive Order B-16- 2012, which set a goal of 1.5 million by 2025, with a sub-goal that their market share is expanding at that point. While these goals were set administratively, they are embodied in the state’s climate change strategies, and both public and utility ratepayer funds are being used to create the refueling infrastructure required for these motorists.
Rather than only true ZEVs, the numbers in the Executive Order and previous interpretations by the agencies indicate the goal is to be achieved by both BEVs that run only on electricity and combustion PHEVs that run on both electricity and motor fuels. Consequently, only a portion of the vehicles being counted to meet the zero emission goal—roughly half based on current sales volumes—will in fact produce zero emissions when driven. Additionally, FCEVs (fuel cell electric vehicles) also would count towards the ZEV total, but CNCDA data show total market share for these vehicles to date at around 0.1%. Using this more flexible interpretation that includes both true ZEVs and combustion PHEVs, total PEV sales since 2009 account for 11.9% of the 2030 goal. True ZEV sales, however, account for only 6.7%.
In addition to the distortion that comes from including combustion vehicles in the ZEV total, the Executive Orders also refer to ZEVs on California roads while the agency accountings rely on sales as the measure of progress. Using prior Energy Commission reviews to account for ZEVs no longer on the roads as a result of accidents, moves out of state, and other factors that over time remove vehicles from the active fleet, the actual progress rate consistent with the Executive Order language of “vehicles on California’s roads” would be 11.0% rather than the 11.9% shown in the chart below.
|0000-00-00 00:00:00||0000-00-00 00:00:00||2019-11-05 23:48:31||no||0||320678||Proj:989409||100||60010,500||51168,546||2019-11-06 04:17:37||38.5815719||No||-121.4943996||Yes||950264||no||Project banner 910431.jpg||0||97||7074449|
|158207||Who's Stealing Los Angelenos Water Supply?||,Fictional||Active||Local||Los Angeles, CA, USA||Los Angeles||Los Angeles County||CA||US||Since 1913, the Owens River had been diverted to Los Angeles, causing the ruin of the valley's economy. By the 1920s, so much water was diverted from the Owens Valley that agriculture became difficult. This led to the farmers trying to destroy the aqueduct in 1924. Los Angeles prevailed and kept the water flowing. By 1926, Owens Lake at the bottom of Owens Valley was completely dry due to water diversion||0000-00-00 00:00:00||0000-00-00 00:00:00||whiterabbit331||2018-05-17 10:13:35||no||0||314932||Proj:267981||100||60017,15611||51184,51185,51195||2018-10-04 04:51:09||34.0522342||No||-118.2436849||Yes||565110||no||Project banner 158207.jpg||0||0||0|
|13140||Stop CA's Unfair Solar Tax on Low-Income Housing||Active||State||Sacramento, CA, USA||Sacramento||Sacramento County||CA||US||Requiring solar panels on all new housing is a highly inefficient way to expand solar energy. University of California, Berkeley economist Severin Borenstein told the commission that he and the vast majority of energy economists "believe that residential rooftop solar is a much more expensive way to move towards renewable energy than larger solar and wind installations."
No kidding. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory figures that on a kilowatt-hour basis, electricity from home solar panels costs 2 1/2 times more than electricity from large solar facilities operated by utilities.
The California approach brings to mind Mao Zedong's call in the 1950s for Chinese peasants to build steel furnaces in their backyards. Many vital tasks are done best on a huge scale, and generating electricity is one of them.
Another drawback is that it will aggravate the state's most notorious problem—astronomical housing costs. The median home price is now $524,000, in large part because of regulations that make every attem
|0000-00-00 00:00:00||0000-00-00 00:00:00||Justin Hartfield||2018-05-14 17:14:33||no||0||314677||Proj:349043||100||60010||51168||2018-06-08 11:53:06||36.778261||No||-119.4179324||Yes||358852||no||Project banner 13140.jpg||0||0||0|
Top Agencies in Alternative Energy
Top Officials in Alternative Energy