Good.

You can pat yourself on the back? The article is about how the new rules make it hard for such groups to justify the cost of installing solar when the benefits look thin and potentially changeable.

You still get SOME money for adding power to the grid, but you’re basically getting paid a ‘wholesale’-like price and paying out the retail mark-up. I’m not sure how California’s grid works, but where I am, we have “line fees” for maintaining the infrastructure to cover that sort of thing.

They can’t afford any of it. Two points.

Point A) Renters. They’re renting. The new change will…

… make solar panels less economically enticing for apartment dwellers, farmers, schools and strip malls, solar companies say.

– there were harsher proposals, but this is a mid-way kinda where renters will get something but not as much as others.

renters will be paid much less than they are today for electricity generated by their rooftop panels above and beyond what they and their neighbors use — electricity that is sent to the larger power grid, helping the rest of us keep the lights on.

Point B) They’ve made it pointless for schools and farms:

other utility customers affected by the decision — including schools and farms — will still have to pay full retail rates for all the electricity they consume. Even if they install solar panels that cover some of their consumption, they’ll have to pay their utility for power during times of day when their panels are generating.

Under the new rules, “schools will not be permitted to generate their own power any longer. Instead, they’ll be forced to buy their own solar back from utilities at full price,” said Sasha Horwitz, a legislative advocate at the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Good catch!

For those who don’t know, when a legal doc says “shall” it means one MUST comply or get in trouble. If it says “should”, it means you don’t really have to care.

I am fine with medical schools taking in unclaimed bodies for the purpose of training future doctors, but it is disturbing that the number of such bodies has spiked so much. That can’t be good. This seems especially problematic given there are businesses out there who offer people free cremation through donation, but then sell the bodies off – often for parts – pocket the money, and let business decide what to do with them, such as bomb testing.

That is: family probably could have gotten a free cremation (with gruesome capitalism behind it), but instead, an increasing number of bodies are getting sent to schools. This says worrying things about the nation’s social and fiscal security.

Update: CNN says Kevin McCarthy is responsible for moving Pelosi and Hoyer out of their offices and it was done as ‘real estate revenge’ and Kevin is moving IN to Pelosi’s office. They say an anonymous republican source told them, “Kevin is on a revenge tour. Patrick would never do that on his own. This was Kevin’s call.”

I disagree. This is unusual and newsworthy. The ‘why’ is given in the article: Speaker Pro Tempore McHenry wants it for “speaker office use”. It is rare that news CAN contain any more of a ‘why’ because we rarely know actual reasons. Sometimes we get BS reasons like “I don’t pay taxes because I’m smart” when the truth is closer to “I don’t pay taxes because I lie to the IRS, but since those docs are private, you’ll never know.” Sometimes little birds chirp rumors about underlying reasons over drinks, but it would be negligent for reporters to wait until then to give the public notice that something is up.