142
California regulators cut incentives for rooftop solar even further
(www.canarymedia.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2023
142 points (98.6% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5239 readers
293 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I may be misinterpeting but the tone of your comments seems to imply frustration towards the financially secure. If this is true, I am suggesting that your frustration should be directed towards those who are actually wealthy and not those who have enough money to buy a house and solar panels.
Thanks for the consideration and explanation. I'm definitely not supportive of the ultra wealthy. What I would offer you in return is the idea that perhaps "the rich" aren't a small clandestine group of the 1%.
What if they are the homeowners in California with solar panels who prevent low income housing from being developed in their neighborhood because it might impact their property value?
Certainly Jeff Bezsos sucks, but he and his friends cannot be responsible for all the inequities we see.
Touché
Jeff bezos laughed so hard at you calling people earning 150k rich that his life extended by 5 years
who said 150k?
No one I just took a guess. What income were you thinking?
id probably start with one half a standard deviation above mean income for a particular region and then make adjustments for dependents