The Long Island Power Authority said higher fuel costs are forcing it to install a 2 percent rate hike starting in October.
The charge isn't much. The average customer will pay about $3 more per month.
But the announcement came only one month after Hurricane Irene knocked many Long Island residents off-line for a week. Power-starved customers were infuriated by their inability to reach LIPA, which tried to communicate with customers through Twitter. The response on the social media site wasn't always friendly. In fact, it was far from it.
LIPA said the latest increase does not take into account the $176 million it cost to restore service in the wake of Hurricane Irene. Some good news: The federal government is expected to reimburse LIPA for 75 percent of that cost.
Well, Duh.... . Of course this country would have been better off without the Affirmative Action Marxist in the White House.. .
AND we are finding out every day, now, "solar power' is just another Democrat word for "SLUSH FUND". Like everything else Democrat Progressives grasp as an "issue", they CORRUPT with semantics and GREED.
When our oilmen Bush and Chaney were appointed it was closer to $1.50 a gallon. A few months ago oil was running about $80/barrel and the price of gas was about $4/gallon. In 2008 a barrel of oil was about $150/barrel and we were paying about $4/gallon. There is no coorelation, it's all about greed and speculation. We need to put an end to oil speculation and prices will go back down. That being said I drive an economical car, keep my place heated no higher than 65 in the winter (I wear layers and have a lot of blankets) and use fans to supplement the summer a/c so I can keep it at 77 degrees in the house and still be comfortable
When President Bush took office on January 20, 2001, the national average gas price was $1.46 per gallon. Six and a half years later, on August 27, 2007, the national average gas price had jumped to $2.76, roughly 89% higher. Compounded annually, this represents about a 10% jump each year Bush has been in office. 89%...that seems like a lot.
Also incontravertable, are these few considerations. 1. Up until some recent technologies and still, most plastics do not ever biodgrade. 2. Fossil fuels DO, incontravertably, pollute our environment. 3. There is only so much oil in the ground. What will we do when it's gone, if we don't invest in new technology now? (Nuclear power, if safe, would be nice, but since it's conception, it's been relatively dangerous...) IF you think Chernobyl and Fukushima can't happen here, you're wrong! They already have.
Without those policies you hate so much the demand for fuel would be much much higher and therefore prices would be much much higher.
with our traffic and population density,burying most of the system underground would take decades,cost billons and result in 20-30 of noise,dust,road closures,rodents galore. $3 a month here, $3 a month there adds up. oil is at $79a barrel. once again we see LIPA's poor planning. Did they lock in the best possible price? Do they take care of their infrastructure? The answer is obvious:NO. read a previous post- where the fellow from colorado pays 8 cents per kwh and has an underground network- if they can do it why cant we?
What is you state license in? Have you ever taken an accounting class or finance class that deals with inflation and cost of money? When was the last time you had a qualified engineer run the numbers? There have been a number of advancements in the last five years. In twenty years when it is $10/kwh what are your cost savings? Have you installed alternative lighting in the halls or are you still using incandescent bulbs because they are cheaper?
Let me guess you voted for Bush and McCain and will vote for whoever the Republicans put on the podium because they are not a democrat. This type of ridiculous thinking is why the country is going down the tubes.
I suppose you can make assumptions and investments based on what you project future fuel prices will be, and that is how salesmen sell this stuff to ill informed home owners. If I felt I was good at guessing future economics I wouldn't bother with any of this and I'd just buy futures options. They would pay me more and I wouldn't have to worry about solar panels ripping up my roofing. Right now, today, at these prices solar energy is a loser. Without significant tax credits - taken from other people's pockets, and without significant gains in the cost of utilities without accompanying gains in the cost of maintaining the solar installation, solar energy will only add costs for a building owner. And yes, as most folks who own and operate significant commercial ventures I'm fairly well versed in economics. I didn't get here with my good looks. We have studied and tried the "screw in" florescent replacement bulbs, and unfortunately the only ones we could find were Chinese crap that failed very quickly, negating any savings. Further, the hazard of abating mercury from a broken one is very costly in a commercial environment. We're hoping LEDs improve to a point where they are economic alternatives to incandescents.
Yeah you just proved my point thanks. Eddie you are the prototypical penny wise pound foolish business manager. Enjoy your failure.
Oil is a disappearing commodity. You are promoting a failing policy that will only cause the failure of the US economy. Calling Green Energy a "Democratic Progressive" policy shows a true lack of knowledge of the subject and self-promoting short sightedness." "GREEN" policies are based upon proven FAKE, PHONY FRAUDULENT SCIENCE ! Read the headlines of how scientists and government entities have faked data for DECADES to promote their failed political ideologies, all over the world. http://www.prisonplanet.com/ipcc-scientists-caught-producing-false-data-to-push-global-warming.html Democrat Progressives in this country have used this fake data and FEAR to forward their political agenda and their personal pocketbooks, like ALGORE has. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html This country and the World, have PLENTY of natural resources to exploit for our personal comfort, and profit. "GREEN" is also being proven to be a license to steal money from Tax Payers, and get them kicked back into political "slush funds" created by the Federal, State and Local governments ! http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-10-07/solyndra-investigations-likely-to-hurt-green-jobs-not-obama.html Just read the recent headlines, if you dare !
AND HE DID THIS WITHOUT THE APPROVAL of the NYS Legislature ! It was an agreement between Cuomo and LILCO and for the price of $1.00 from LILCO ! http://www.nytimes.com/1989/03/01/nyregion/cuomo-and-lilco-sign-a-new-accord-to-shut-shoreham.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm The people had NOTHING to do with the decision !
Here's an excerpt from the article: The Governor's action today was praised by many politicians on Long Island who had feared being associated with the rate increases inherent in closing the plant. The Suffolk County Executive, Patrick G. Halpin, applauded Mr. Cuomo for making ''the tough decisions in order to assure the health and safety of the people of Suffolk County.'' 'A Hard Look' All of Long Island did not greet the plan warmly. ''We want to take a hard look at this, but if it's the same proposition with a different suit on, we'll oppose it,'' said John V. N. Klein, chairman of the Long Island Association, the region's largest business group.
First, there is NO reference to what Cuomo thought or didn't think in your quotes. Second, don't presume because LILCO is a public authority and it is called same, it doesn't necessarily mean that "the public" has ANY substanitive input into it's operation OR that "the public" supports whatever LILCO mandates. The only thing the public has any "power" in relation to LILCO is in having the privilege to pay it's rates and it's rate hikes ! This history has a different take on Mario and the establishment of LILCO...go to the middle of the page, starting with paragraph the words "Governor Cuomo's mobilization.." Page 224 http://books.google.com/books?id=DJkZgWKZaCUC&pg=PA224&lpg=PA224&dq=mario+cuomo+nuclear+power&source=bl&ots=iLWdoBGPTY&sig=y5M-TsDuIi6eEilDtJQoPu0X9KY&hl=en&ei=qUqPTtz3J4ro0QHsmIxD&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&r
Here's an article that states that one of the contributing factors was the Lloyd Harbor Study group that didn't like. Mark. Drop it. I can find articles that say it was the public and you can find articles that say it was Cuomo's fault. The reality is it doesn't matter who was responsible for killing it, just that it died and we are still paying it.
ANOTHER personal ATM Machine of Tax Payer Dollars ! When it comes to MONEY, THIS is where "bipartisanship" is genuine between Pols !