Patterico's Pontifications

1/12/2008

How Could Thermostat Madness Have Happened? Don’t Forget to Blame the Feds

Filed under: General,Immigration — Patterico @ 2:32 pm



Who is ultimately to blame for the fact that California tried to take control of homeowners’ thermostats?

Nanny-state Democrats? Power-hungry bureaucrats?

Well, sure. I’m happy to reserve plenty of blame for them.

But don’t forget to blame the federal government.

Why? Because the federal government has not done enough about illegal immigration.

Why do we have power shortages? Because demand exceeds supply. Now, there are all sorts of arguments about the reasons. Joe Somsel argues that we need more plants — particularly nuclear power plants. My argument is that we also need to fully deregulate pricing so that supply matches demand.

But there’s an elephant in the room: there are just too damn many people in the state.

Our infrastructure can’t take it. Supply/demand imbalances in energy are just one manifestation of a more general problem: overpopulation.

Every major problem we have in California is exacerbated by illegal immigration. When we hear about how the jails are overcrowded, don’t forget about the illegals. When we hear about how we must release state prisoners because the prisons are overcrowded, don’t forget about the illegals. When you read that emergency rooms are overcrowded and people with serious conditions wait hours for treatment, don’t forget about the illegals. When you sit in traffic on an overcrowded freeway, don’t forget about the illegals.

I don’t mean to make illegals the bogeyman for every problem we face — but I don’t want citizens to forget that they contribute significantly to every problem that is worsened by overcrowding.

But hey — at least your lettuce is cheap.

61 Responses to “How Could Thermostat Madness Have Happened? Don’t Forget to Blame the Feds”

  1. Yes, California’s infrastructure is overly burdened, but that is in large part due to government restrictions. Joe Somsel has described the effect of these restrictions on our power supply.

    Coal produces about 50% of the country’s electricity but there are no coal plants in California. Our distance from coal fields makes local coal plants uneconomic even if the air quality regulations didn’t prohibit them. A group of power producers recently proposed to build a complex of coal plants in Wyoming with a new transmission line into the state. The state’s regulators shot that down with a new rule that any electricity sold or re-sold by the state’s regulated utilities must meet the state’s air quality requirements. In other words, not only can’t we make electricity from coal within the state, we can’t even import it.

    (emphasis in original).

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  2. Upon rereading your post, I found I repeated some of your points. Sorry. My main contention is that there’s no evidence California is overpopulated. It’s overregulated.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  3. “Over-regulated” doesn’t appear to apply to the border.

    Banjo (b5278d)

  4. It’s regulated in the wrong places. Allow production. Accede to reasonable requests for rate increases. Punish severely shortcomings in the infrastructure and delivery. That’s what Illinois America does.

    nk (dda711)

  5. Right on. Over the past couple of years, I have come to see population growth as the greatest threat to our freedom that there is.

    Mark1971 (c92bfa)

  6. Even if you don’t count the children of illegal aliens who are citizens, illegal aliens cost California billions per year. I would guestimate 14 billion per year.

    tired (ef0bcc)

  7. My main contention is that there’s no evidence California is overpopulated

    Have you been on the 405 lately? Yes, I know that regulations prevent the building of new freeways. But America’s 12-20 million illegal aliens increase the demand for electricity, water, sewage, oil, gas, health care, etc. that the bureaucrats feel compelled to ration by a means other than price. One of the rationals for bureaucratic rationing is to help the poor – who are often here illegally!

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  8. We also saw a few months ago the human and economic costs of development being pushed out into more fire-prone areas.

    Mark1971 (c92bfa)

  9. We also saw a few months ago the human and economic costs of development being pushed out into more fire-prone areas

    Not to worry. Jerry Brown is busy trying to outlaw the single-family home.

    Darleen (187edc)

  10. I’m all for enforcing immigration laws and the illegal population causes serious problems, but overpopulation, per se, is not the problem. We clearly have the capability to produce enough energy but eco-nazis have made sure we can’t. Thank the NRDC, Sierra Club, DemocRAT party et al for the recurring energy “crises”.

    PeterW (d63e2b)

  11. Have you been on the 405 lately?

    Yes, and it was painful. But that doesn’t say anything about the population density.

    New York City has a much greater population density than does LA, and it still manages to function. That’s also true of much of Europe.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  12. New York City has a much greater population density than does LA, and it still manages to function. That’s also true of much of Europe.

    Yes, they still manage to function. But “still manage to function” is not a quality of life standard to which I strive. I would much rather have the ability to use my own car without excessive traffic than be packed like sardines and have to commute according to someone else’s schedule in a subway in order to get to work on time.

    Mark1971 (c92bfa)

  13. Rather than reminding people of the “illegals”, let me suggest reminding people of the corrupt racial demagogues who support illegal activity. And, let me suggest encouraging your readers to go out and discredit those leaders by pointing out their lies. Having an impact on their political careers would be a highly effective tactic, but not too many people are willing to try it.

    And, it’s not just overpopulation. It’s also that CA’s middle class has been moving to other states at the same time as we’ve been importing low-wage workers, leading to the two-tier system that some, such as DanWalters, have described.

    TLB (08032f)

  14. Re: 12
    Your point of view is yours but not mine. I would love to live in a place where I could commute or walk to work, instead of sitting in traffic every time I want to go for something further than the nearest supermarket.

    And, btw, in my area, we have plenty of traffic, too little water, and a few other problems, some of which LA has and some of which it doesn’t (replace fires and mudslides with hurricanes). We also have plenty of immigrants–most of whom are legally here. (In fact, the illegals seem to concentrate on the “rural” areas for agricultural purposes, and don’t impact the urban core that much. They are here, but in much fewer numbers than California.) We have overpopulation, but illegals are not a great component. Regulation and developer favoring politicos are the major factors in all this problematica.

    Or it could be all those lawyers driving around LA causing the traffic jams 🙂

    kishnevi (33bfb0)

  15. Looks like a couple of Assembly leaders (Levine – D and Keene – R) are giving it thumbs down, as I predicted:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/01/12/MNHDUDAQ3.DTL

    In any “compromise” on the thermostats, I think we must hold out for NO control. The reason is that the control logics are held in “firmware.” The reference design allows remote download of new firmware at any time by radio and with no indication to the “occupant.” In other words, complete override today could be NO override tomorrow if the state or utility changes its mind. I’m not being paranoid, I swear, just telling you what the design is capable of.

    There are two sides to Patterico’s argument about prices. He proposes that the end-user see the actual price so that they can defer consumption. I’m concerned that investors get price signals so that they can initiate investment.

    Unfortunately, real time pricing for the end-user will take 8 million changes in hardware – one at every home meter. It can be done, but there will be a big price tag and it will take maybe a decade. Then, will it be accepted? Look at cell phone service, a roughly analogous technology. Why are they advertising “anytime” minutes” so heavily.

    And remember, there will be winners and losers in any such change. How did the escalating rate tiers pricing plan work out for you? Singles won and families lost on that one.

    I’m not dead set agin’ it but the debate needs to run its course before we decide.

    As to Patterico’s original thread issue, there is probably a billion people who would move to California if they had the opportunity. Most of them as illegals would represent a decrement in education and income to the state’s current population (most legals are not). The current population would be carrying them to some extent until they acclimate and socialize to full Americans. That’s the work of generations.

    Joseph Somsel (f6bbbd)

  16. Hi Joseph,
    In any “compromise” on the thermostats, I think we must hold out for NO control. The reason is that the control logics are held in “firmware.”

    Would you point out the exact places in the reference design (and Web link to find it)? It’s important to cite chapter and verse on these issues. I’m going to contact the California Energy Commission again.

    Claudia Chandler of the energy commission told me on Friday that the PCT design does not specify a port that can be used for a WiFi-like hookup to other appliances that can receive the signals. Chandler said the PCT is just a “thermostat”, and can’t be used to control a home automation system. I went around the block with her on this a few times, and she was quite emphatic. I want to make certain there is no mistake.

    Joe, Kevin Murphy and any others who’ve looked over the specs . . . you find it, I’ll report it.

    Since I am trying to have a social life, I’ll be out this evening, but will check back with you in the morning.

    Thanks to Patterico for making possible this project in open-source journalism.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  17. Its all those illegals, with their airconditioned suburban homes. I think you’re just imagining this brownout.

    stef (0ee281)

  18. #11
    New York City has a much greater population density than does LA, and it still manages to function. That’s also true of much of Europe.

    “Manage to function” is a relative term. Furthermore, European cities are dense enough so subways/metros/underground and buses are efficient. For example, there is a metro stop within 300 meters of any address in Paris. But the trade off is living in a block apartment, with much less living space, no garage and no yard. I don’t think the average America would tolerate these dense living conditions.

    The Southern California freeway system was built for its 1965 population level. A major reason Southern California’s current population is far higher than 1965 is due to illegal immigration.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  19. Patterico – From your post:

    “Our infrastructure can’t take it. Supply/demand imbalances in energy are just one manifestation of a more general problem: overpopulation.”

    The fact that supply/demand balances in California have not evened out over time suggests artificial constraints on the process – read regulation of various forms – limitations on generation and transmission capacity, environmental restriction, pricing regulation. My guess is if you can name it, California has got it. In my experience it is one of the most unfriendly states for businesses to operate in due to the various regulatory and compliance burdens, which will vary by industry. Meanwhile, many Californians have an entitlement and instant gratification attitude toward life and an outsize sense of their worth relative to their contribution to their employers and society, again based on my experience and relative to many other areas of the country. California has itself to blame for its problems. Everybody is looking out for themselves.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  20. Its all those illegals, with their airconditioned suburban homes. I think you’re just imagining this brownout.

    Air conditioning is not the only way to use power.

    Millions of people are going to suck up plenty of power. Even the poor illegals.

    Patterico (4bda0b)

  21. My first job out of law school was as an aide to one of the PSC Commissioners in Nevada, writing utility rate opinions. While I don’t hold myself out as an expert on energy deregulation, I do understand it’s much more difficult to do than telephone deregulation, for instance, and for my money may not be efficient or practical.

    I would recommend a couple of recent reports from the left and the right on the issue:

    1) From the Cato Institute, “Vertical Integration and the Restructuring of the U.S. Electricity Industry,” by Robert J. Michaels

    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6462

    2. From Public Citizen, “The Failure of Electricity Deregulation: History Status and Needed Reforms.”

    http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/deregulation/

    JayHub (0a6237)

  22. This is just what the watermellon enviromentalist want regulate our power and control our lives

    krazy kagu (e22b83)

  23. Perfect Sense – “A major reason Southern California’s current population is far higher than 1965 is due to illegal immigration.”

    California Population in 1965 was approximately 18,000,000. In 2008, it’s approximately 38,000,000, a 20,000,000 increase. FAIR, the Foundation for American Immigration Reform, estimates that had 3,470,000 illegal immigrants in 2007. That’s a big number, 9% of the population, but it’s dwarfed by the 16,000,000 increase in CA’s population due to people moving in from elsewhere and births. There’s a reason that when I go to an Angels game where they’re playing the Yankees of the Red Sox, most of the fans are not rooting for the home team.

    JayHub (0a6237)

  24. Sorry, that’s California “had 3,470,000 illegal immigrants in 2007.”

    JayHub (0a6237)

  25. “Air conditioning is not the only way to use power.”

    You’re right. High technology businesses do too.

    Other places are denser than CA, more “overpopulated,” and yet they manage to avoid your brownout scenario.

    But perhaps you think the illegals aren’t paying for the power they use?

    stef (fe8ab9)

  26. I understand your point, JayHub, and I agree there are a lot of transplanted legal residents in California. But I bet there are a lot more than 3.4M illegals, too.

    DRJ (517d26)

  27. The number of illegals in California is unknowable. I would suggest it is higher than 3,470,000. The population issue has several components. In Europe, apartment living is the norm and may have something to do with the low birthrate. Children are more of a burden in those overcrowded circumstances. The welfare state requires population replacement because it is a form of Ponzi scheme. If the population of tax payers declines, and in Europe it is declining, the system collapses. The majority of the Muslim population of France and England are not part of the tax paying sector. They are mostly on welfare. Many quit their jobs when they decide to become more pious. These fellows are not supporting the welfare state; they are living on it.

    Texas has a lesser problem with illegals because the state relies on sales tax for its revenues. Illegals pay the same sales tax as legal residents. California is different and a large share of the illegals are part of the “cash economy” which does not pay taxes.

    California would be much more functional without the lunatic regulation but, with our rotten borough political system, not much will change until it goes bankrupt. Some will say that it impossible. California is too prosperous. So was Orange County.

    Mike K (86bddb)

  28. Perhaps if more of the public had reacted with appropriate outrage over Congress’ impending ban of incandescent light bulbs, the pinheads who came up with this plan would have realized that it was a nonstarter. Given this example, I’d like to see the presidential candidates asked about this sort of thing: “What is your view on banning lightbulbs and government controlled thermostats, Senator?”

    M. Scott Eiland (b66190)

  29. CORRECTION!

    Thanks to prodding by Bradley, I spent my Saturday and Saturday night reading in detail the current “Reference Standard” version 1.01 dated 10/29/07.

    (Yes, we engineers ARE the life of the party!)

    A statement in my above comment #15 is wrong. Above, I said that new firmware could be downloaded via the FM radio and its RDS datalink. The Reference Standard talks about uploading firmware but it would be done at the PCT or perhaps via an optional two-way communications device. Bluetooth is explicitly mentioned as an intended two-way protocol to go into the mandatory expansion/communications port.

    I’ve sent Bradley a four page analysis with text excerpted from the standard with URL and pagination references. I can provide to others if requested.

    Does this change my position that PCT should have NO control function within the customer’s home? It does weaken it a bit, I admit, by reducing the paranoia level but the premise that a large and expensive infrastructure is being built to sorta tweak your home temperature is still flawed. The Bluetooth function could later be made part of an offer your couldn’t refuse and could still control your household appliances.

    In any case, the core issue remains adequacy of supply vs. managing government-caused scarcity

    Joseph Somsel (0fff7f)

  30. Tbank you, Joseph!

    Despite my earlier statement, I am checking in from the party, while everyone else is dancing upstairs to “Brick House.”

    Sorry to make you spend your Saturday reading specs, but that will make for a more accurate followup story.

    The mandatory expansion/communication port is of highest interest to me. Claudia Chandler told me repeatedly there was no such thing in the PCT design. I need to definitively prove that this mandated PCT port would be able to communicate with the home automation-equipped appliances now being designed. If that is so, then Chandler gave me false information and my story becomes much more . . . interesting.

    Bradley J. Fikes (f55ec3)

  31. DRJ, Mike K, “But I bet there are a lot more than 3.4M illegals, too.” [and] “The number of illegals in California is unknowable. I would suggest it is higher than 3,470,000”

    Granted, it is impossible to have an exact figure because the illegal nature of their presence prevents any enumeration, but that does not mean that it’s impossible to estimate.

    However, for purposes of argument, I picked the FAIR number because it is the largest, and because FAIR is a conservative organization that has been staunchly opposed to illegal immigration for 20 years and is the organization that has been called to testify on immigration bills before Congress more than any other. I assume their natural bias would be to inflate, not decrease, the number since it would bolster their arguments (not saying they have). INS and Census estimates are far lower.

    On what basis are you claiming the number is much higher?

    Here’s the link to the full FAIR Issue Brief on how many illegal aliens there are in the country and state by state, compared to lower estimates.

    http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecentersb8ca

    JayHub (0a6237)

  32. Let me address Ms. Chandler’s assertions in more detail by quoting from the current Reference Standard.

    The “Title 24” design requirements explicitly require a “communications interface” and an “expansion interface.” (pages 4 and 5).

    On page 15, it states “The physical communications interface is has two components – a mandatory, internal interface supporting a widely available wireless communications technology such as the US Radio Broadcast Data System (RBDS – NRSC-4-A) standard ; or an optional one- or two-way communications interface connected through the Expansion Interface as selected and specified by a load serving entity”

    Page 14 calls out Bluetooth:

    “An example of a full featured device that could be supported by the SDIO interface is a BlueTooth radio”

    The Reference Standard (http://sharepoint.californiademandresponse.org/pct/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx click on the file icon but it’s 58 pages)
    is a joint document written for manufacturers and system developers to support both the CEC Title 24 requirements and the requirements of the individual investor-owned utilities. This describes what is intended to be built as of revision 1.01 dated 10/29/08. The standard appears to be a product of a working group of at least CEC contractors, utility participants, and probably interested hardware vendors based on lists of “stakeholders” at meetings. Hence, the CEC appears to share responsibility for the content of the standard.

    So Ms. Chandler is part-correct and part not – the CEC does not require in Title 24 a two way communications device but the standard calls the expansion option for such a device a CEC requirement. Such a two-way device is clearly and explicitly intended as something a utility may require in PCTs for their customers.

    A Bluetooth plug-in seems like a good way to control other appliances in the home from the PCT. Anyone care to expand on that notion or refute it?

    Joseph Somsel (4666af)

  33. I realize why this sort of technocratic oversight doesn’t happen more often.

    My employer would have charged $25,000 for the time I’ve put into this issue the last three weeks had he billed me to a client.

    Joseph Somsel (4666af)

  34. Joseph Somsel,

    I think your employer is fortunate to have someone like you who is meticulous about detail and disclosure.

    JayHub,

    I agree it’s a guess but there is reason to believe the illegal immigrant population is higher than anyone’s estimates, especially in the border states. For instance, this 2005 Bear Stearns’ report analyzes factors that indicate illegal immigrants in the US may be significantly underestimated.

    DRJ (517d26)

  35. Overpopulation arguments seldom sway me, and I don’t find them persuasive here; I agree with Mr. Fikes that the problems lie elsewhere. (Illegal aliens also contribute positively in areas; figuring out the net is difficult.)

    I’m of the very firm opinion that our current situation is untenable regarding illegal entry for a number of reasons; enforcing immigration standards is important. What those standards should be is arguable, and there are credible arguments from very tight regulations to “let anyone in who isn’t a criminal risk.”

    But our current schizophrenically inconsistent policies of maintaining laws against illegal entry as well as having a very porous border leads to a variety of rotten outcomes, whatever your view of what immigration should be permitted.

    Back to overpopulation: Oregonians have argued similarly about Californians, and neither of our states are anything like “overpopulated.” Build the infrastructure, and it’ll be fine. Adding productive new people to virtually any area in the U.S. is a good thing; the Zero Population Growth people were wrong then, and they are wrong now.

    –JRM

    JRM (355c21)

  36. I realize why this sort of technocratic oversight doesn’t happen more often.

    My employer would have charged $25,000 for the time I’ve put into this issue the last three weeks had he billed me to a client.

    And I am grateful that you are putting this effort into this analysis. Some things, like the right of the people to run the government, are priceless.

    Bradley J. Fikes (f55ec3)

  37. #23 – That’s a big number, 9% of the population, but it’s dwarfed by the 16,000,000 increase in CA’s population due to people moving in from elsewhere and births.

    Four comments:

    1) I believe your cited 3.47 million illegal immigrant total is low. Nevertheless, it accounts for about 18% of the 20 million increase in California’s population since 1965. A significant impact.

    2) The 20 million increase in California’s population since 1965 also includes the now forgotten 1-2 million illegal aliens that were made legal in the 1985 immigration reform act.

    3) The illegal aliens itemized in points one and two above have born millions of legal offspring, but whose presence in California is the result of illegal immigration.

    4) Consequently, since 1965 it is reasonable to believe that California has added some 8-12 million residents due to illegal immigration – or at least half the increase in California’s population since 1965. In summary, if you prorate this population segment to California’s current and strained budget, that “cheap” lettuce used to justify illegal immigration actually costs about $10,000 per head.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  38. it’s long (17 minutes) but really puts it all into a rational perspective you must watch it. I can’t get the link to work so please, copy and paste http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4094926727128068265.

    paul from fl (47918a)

  39. Joe and Bradley

    I have an interview of Mrs. Chandler by one of our local radio hosts, Bruce Maiman, on this topic.
    Podcast here.
    I don’t know if it will be helpful or not, but there it is.
    One of the perks of living in Sacramento.

    papertiger (3a3033)

  40. The number of blackouts NYC has been experiencing every summer for the last several years would indicate that we’re not really managing very well at all, our infrastucture is rotting away underneath; of course we live in smaller spaces than your average Californian so it’s easier to pretend that we’re in good shape.

    Plus, I don’t believe the illegal immigrants living in California do what they do here in NYC, cramming up to 12 families into single family homes; 12 families living in 1500 sq ft saves a lot on energy consumption.

    syn (9c2583)

  41. DRJ, Perfect Sense: Points taken.

    Practically, of course, I certainly agree that we need to build the fence, put the onus on employers, amend the constitution to exclude children of illegals becoming citizens, and put pressure on the illegal population to return home.

    I have been encouraged by recent reports out of AZ that illegals are increasing “self-deporting” (a great term) because of its tough new legislation cracking down on their employers that went to effect January 1.

    JayHub (0a6237)

  42. “Plus, I don’t believe the illegal immigrants living in California do what they do here in NYC, cramming up to 12 families into single family homes; 12 families living in 1500 sq ft saves a lot on energy consumption.” – Comment by syn

    Yes, they do, in Orange County at least. Overcrowded apartments and homes, people in garages, etc. are big problems in cities like Santa Ana and Costa Mesa.

    JayHub (0a6237)

  43. Developing the PCT system requires a consensual process between government, technical consultants, and the private sector. I’ve sat on such committees before and it greatly facilitates development of workable technical solutions.

    The downside, as we see here, is unravelling responsibilites and authorities.

    I’m listening to the podcast as I write and there are several mis-statement of facts by Ms. Chandler. The host is also needing some further research in energy issues. I’ll send him an offer to discuss.

    Joseph Somsel (b0e0f0)

  44. papertiger,

    Thanks for the podcast. Ah, the benefits of technology!

    Joseph,
    I’m very interested in what issues Chandler has mischaracterized. If anything material is being misrepresented, that in itself is worth a story.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  45. Developing a PCT system is undoubtedly a great thing….for the developers & consultants hired by Energy Commission.

    So far it looks like the ridiculous devices will only be installed in new homes that are already regulated to be the most efficient, or in homes that do significant upgrades or install new (more efficient) heating systems (also regulated).

    The vast majority of existing single family and multi-unit homes that are least efficient will be largely left out.

    I see this as an ongoing strategy by regulation oriented interests to “get a foot in the door”. Hey, how many people are going to object? after all, only a few will be impacted and anything that “might” save energy (and preclude having to plan & build more power plants) is good right???

    The best thing about the PCT idea may be that the increase energy cost to consumers due to developing the system, administration, permitting, inspection, enforcement, and installation cost will tend to reduce consumption. That could be accomplished by simply imposing a tax on energy consumption at the source, with taxes going to subsidize insulation of existing homes and other low-tech energy saving ideas.

    Another plus (for some interests) of the PCT idea is that it will make building new homes more expensive, complicated, and less attractive for developers.

    Here’s a link to some PG&E comments.

    Jim Elliot (7f881c)

  46. In the podcast, she explicitly stated that the PCT control functions were voluntary and explicitly denied that they were mandatory. The clear wording in the draft of Title 24 (page 63 and elsewhere) says they are mandatory. The podcast was on 1/8/08 I understand so this was fresh on her plate. I’ve worked with PR folks in a prior job as an emergency technical liasion and it would have been difficult for her to get the buried facts on this in that short of time – but not impossible.

    If she was STILL saying there are no proposed mandates for override on 1/11/08, she should be taken to the woodshed but I can cut her slack on her 1/8 performance.

    The issue of denying any further remote control of home electrical use certainly runs counter to the many research and development programs sponsored by federal and state governments and by private vendors.

    For an overview, see http://title24dr.com/Documents/DR_05.13_Inventory_of_DR_Technologies_Final.pdf

    For the Federal legislation to facilitate control electrical appliances within the home, see:

    http://opencrs.com/document/RL34288

    An article I linked to in my AT article and the one that motivated me to write it:

    http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=1622

    Again, my apologies for pirating Patterico’s thread!

    Joseph Somsel (b9763e)

  47. Studies of underground economies can be very difficult. One of my favorite writers on culture, Theodore Dalrymple, wrote a piece about the difference between Italy and Britain. I can’t find it right now or I’d link to it. His point was that Italy and Britain have GDPs very close to each other but if you spend some time in both countries, you quickly conclude that Italy is far more prosperous. The difference is the underground economy. The British civil service was founded in Victorian times to be incorruptible. In that Laissez Fair time, an honest government service led to efficiency. Now, since the Labour government has introduced all sorts of counterproductive rules, the incorruptible civil service is regulating the country into the ground. Italy, on the other hand, always knew that government was not to be trusted so they have hidden much of their lives from its eyes. The result today is that Italy has a thriving economy out of sight that adds significantly to national wealth while Britain is slowly strangled by the system. That is not to say that Britain is not seeing good times in the greater London area but the rest of the country is in trouble.

    Studies of the underground economy in Peru in the days of the old socialist governments show that estimates are far too small. Economists have suggested integrating the underground economy but this requires deregulation. I think California has a huge underground economy and, more important, a huge population that is not showing up on the books. Texas has a smaller government per capita and it is funded by sales taxes. California has a far larger welfare state that is funded largely by income taxes and these are paid by the legal segment of the population. The infrastructure is designed for the legal population of 1965. That doesn’t even take into account all of the foolish acts of state government since Jerry Brown took over.

    That underground population shows up in two areas I work with every day; the county hospitals and the emergency medical system, plus the workers compensation system. The vast majority of the workers comp claims I see are Spanish speaking and have no health insurance aside from the WC coverage. That doesn’t even include the guys standing in Home Depot parking lots and around lumber yards.

    You could see some of the effect last year when the illegals went “on strike” for a day.

    Mike K (86bddb)

  48. Joe

    When you contact Bruce Maimen could you do me a favor and mention who sent you?
    I’ve been working on him for about a year, trying to get him to do an interview with a scientist skeptical of global warming.
    I almost have him flipped, thanks to your article on PCTs. Just another mention will turn the trick for me (well it couldn’t hurt).

    Oh, by the way, he doesn’t know me as papertiger.
    Mention my name as Jim in North Highlands. He’ll know who you are talking about.

    Did you need an email address for Bruce?

    BRUCEMAIMAN – at – clearchannel.com

    papertiger (8349ff)

  49. I already made contact and agreed to an appearance at a date TBD but before 1/30.

    We will probably get around to global warming and I will state my skepticism even as it works against my economic self-interest.

    Joseph Somsel (ba212b)

  50. Joseph,
    I’ve worked with PR folks in a prior job as an emergency technical liasion and it would have been difficult for her to get the buried facts on this in that short of time – but not impossible.

    I don’t cut Chandler any slack for saying there was no mandatory control. A few minutes online with my story, published online the night of Jan. 7, would have informed her about the mandatory nature of the provision. Since I talked with the CEC for the story, Chandler presumably was aware of it.

    I wrote: The document, available at http://tinyurl.com/225htc, outlines the mandatory use of Programmable Communicating Thermostats on page 64

    “Upon receiving an emergency signal, the PCT shall respond to commands contained in the emergency signal, including changing the set-point by any number of degrees or to a specific temperature set-point. The PCT shall not allow customer changes to thermostat settings during emergency events.”

    The PCT specifications require them to include a “non-removable Radio Data System device that is compatible with the default statewide DR (Demand Response) communications system, which can be used by utilities to send price and emergency signals.”

    I included that hyperlink and language specifically so people could look it up on their own and wouldn’t have to take my word for it. BTW, no one from the California Energy Commission ever complained to me that the story was inaccurate. To my knowledge, no one from the CEC complained to my editors.

    Chandler didn’t call me until Friday the 11th, to tell me the supposedly nonexistent mandatory provision of the thermostat would be removed.

    After that, Chandler told me the thermostat was just a thermostat, and could not communicate with any other appliances in a home automation system. This directly contradicts Joseph’s statement that “. . .the standard calls the expansion option for such a device a CEC requirement. Such a two-way device is clearly and explicitly intended as something a utility may require in PCTs for their customers.”

    If this is just a thermostat, as Chandler repeatedly told me Friday, what is that mandatory expansion port doing in the proposal?

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  51. In my original AT piece I linked to the article in EnergyPulse.com that got me spun up in the first place. It included discussion of home automation interfaces to the PCT.

    http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=1622

    The authors are a consultant to the CEC and a vendor hoping to sell infrastructure hardware.

    Reporters do need to insist on high standards from the flacks they deal with in government.

    But “never impute malice when simple incompetence explains.” The CEC is generally a deep background bureaucracy and doesn’t make headlines too often.

    But you’re dealing directly with her and I’m not so I’ll leave it to your judgment. Clearly, she has repeatedly gotten the facts wrong.

    Lovely voice though!

    Joseph Somsel (0390f4)

  52. Joseph,

    Okay, I will be more charitable. Chandler wasn’t being deceptive about the mandatory control, she just didn’t know what she was talking about.

    The little-understood feature about this issue is how the CEC’s actions link up with the PUC to jointly do things neither has the authority or ability to do alone.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  53. CA is over-populated vs population density…

    I think the figures still apply, but, if you use the density of NYC, and the area of TX, you could house the entire world’s population there.

    I wouldn’t want to live there, but it could be done.

    The Progressive Elites have convinced themselves of the truthfulness of the mantra “If you build it, they will come“; or, more importantly, “If you don’t build it, they won’t come”.

    So, as has been noted by this commenter and others, we here in CA are burdened with a 1965 infrastructure courtesy of Gov. Moonbeam, who instituted this madness in State Government, with a population that has ballooned beyond all expectations – regardless of illegal immigration.

    But, hey, we’re on the cutting-edge of multi-culti. We’re a leading First-World city on the Pacific Rim that is slowly devolving into a Third-World Hell-Hole!

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  54. Can’t California use some of the illegal immigrants to build a new power plant, cheap? Of course the problem is that California could not agree where to locate a new power plant.

    Somebody’s gotta take pipe to solve California’s problems, but with everyone looking our for their own self interest, what are the chances? Patterico essentially nailed this in the lead in to one of his posts.

    Look at the professed love of the Kennedy’s for alternative energy until a wind farm gets proposed in their back yard. See Cape Cod Windpower.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  55. Ignorance can be self-evident; dishonesty can be more difficult to prove. I see that Ms. Chandler is not a just flack but an assistant executive director for media and public communications.

    I agree that the CEC/PUC connection is subtle and is probably an important part of the story. I just haven’t dug there.

    I noticed that 14 cents went to the CEC on my last PG&E bill. Is that all their funding or is there something from the general fund?

    The issue I see with real time pricing and other demand response measures is that on can make it work by how much one cross-subsidizes from regular customers. There should be some savings from reduced peak demand but how do ou quantify that? If you have a good number, then that could be divided amongst the time ‘o dayers.

    But you can’t know what was not used. It is the fundamental problem with “negawatts” – poor accounting.

    Here’s a piece I did on it and Enron’s application of negawatts during the 2001 problems:

    http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=488

    Joseph Somsel (d6ac67)

  56. Joseph (and others interested),
    I found where the latest revision to the Draft 1.01 reference design, datec Oct. 29, 2007, is located.

    The Bluetooth possibility in the expansion interface, mentioned on Page 15 of the PCT reference design (3MB download) (emphasis mine)

    The expansion interface shall be available to extend the communication capabilities of the thermostat as well as to provide an external means of memory storage / logging. The physical interface (Figure 1) shall be implemented by using the Multi-Media Card (MMC) format as defined in the MMC System Specification Version 3.311. The logical interface shall utilize the Serial Peripheral Interface (SPI) standard as defined in the MMC System Specification version 3.31). The MMC System Specification indicates that the SPI is optional for MMC devices, but it will be mandatory for the PCT Expansion Interface. PCT manufacturers may optionally support other physical and logical interfaces that provide backwards compatibility with the MMC version 3.31. Examples are MMC version 4.1 and SDIO version 2.0. It is desirable, but not mandatory, for the PCT to support the SDIO 2.0 standard such that off-the-shelf memory cards and other SDIO devices may be utilized by the PCT (if supported by the vendor). An example of a full featured device that could be supported by the SDIO interface is a BlueTooth radio built to Part E2 of the SD Specifications2.

    What’s the purpose of hooking up a BlueTooth radio to something that is supposedly just a thermostat?

    Take a look at the language revisions here (strikeouts in original document)

    5.4.1.1.1Emergency (Grid Reliability) Events
    This event class allows the controlling entity utility to issue specific directives to the PCT in order to address a grid reliability situation. These events provide a start and stop time as does a price event which allows them to be scheduled in advance. There are two flavors of the basic reliability event – change temperature and set temperature. Basically this allows the controlling entity utility to specify an arbitrary temperature increase or decrease from the PCT’s current setpoint or simply specify a specific set point. The ability to specify an explicit setpoint is required by Title 24 to have the flexibility to avoid mitigate the situation where customers change the setpoint just prior to the start of a reliability event in order to “game” the system.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  57. The strikeouts didn’t show up.

    “Utility” was struck out and replaced with “controlling entity”.

    “Avoid” was euphemized to “mitigate the situation”. They mean the same thing — the controlling entity can override the customer’s control of the thermostat.

    Bradley J. Fikes (1c6fc4)

  58. This will help CA out!

    Green groups sue over multistate power line
    Monday, January 14, 2008
    The Associated Press

    Eleven environmental groups sued the federal Department of Energy today over its creation of a corridor in the mid-Atlantic region that could smooth the way for construction of new power lines.

    Under a 2005 law, the federal government can approve new power transmission towers within corridors such as this one if states and regional groups fail to approve such lines. The law was passed following the 2003 blackout that rippled from Ohio to Canada and New York City.

    Last year, the Energy Department designated the mid-Atlantic corridor and another in the Southwest.

    [clip]

    TC (1cf350)

  59. I live in Anaheim, California. In a school district that was 100% white just 40 years ago, my son was one of only 6 students in a 40 pupil class who could speak English. In my neighborhood, there are way more than 9% illegal immigrants and children of illegal immigrants, and my children’s classrooms suffered. Anyone think my children deserved overcrowded classrooms and emergency rooms? Schools and hospitals use water, electricity and other natural resources, and in our district at least 50% of that use was from illegal immigrants or the legal children of illegal immigrants. My son’s biology teacher in high school said, “I wish I could teach the class to your son’s level, but I can’t”. Do any of you want that to happen to your kids?

    tyree (f31725)

  60. BTW, the CEC has been criticized for saying that state electricity consumption has been flat.

    Most people read that as obviously incorrect and that total electricity consumption has soared.

    Actually, the per capita consumption has been flat. With our growing population, the aggregrate consumption has grown.

    Funny how a simple statement be true yet can hide so much umpleasant and inconvenient insight.

    Joseph Somsel (7f4afb)

  61. The underground economy is also virtually unmentioned by mainstream media. Now that the gas prices are so high do we stand a chance of talking about it or the implications of illegal immigration on our population?I am also concerned about the water meters in our future,is anyone else out there worried too? What is wrong with the system we have now?

    Andrea Fong (00c48c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1048 secs.