Question 6 would cost Nevada money and jobs

We warned in an editorial days before the 2018 election that if voters approved Question 6 — a constitutional amendment mandating 50 percent of Nevada’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2030 — that it would cost Nevadans money and jobs while producing no discernible benefit.

The measure passed with 60 percent of the vote.

In order to become binding, the voters must approve Question 6 again during this General Election.

Perhaps the voters didn’t believe the dire warnings from opponents two years ago, but Nevada voters should now pay heed to what already has happened in neighboring California, which has embraced the renewable energy false promise.

A Wall Street Journal editorial today recounts the damages incurred due California’s renewable decisions.

Not only did Californians suffer rolling blackout this past summer because of over reliance on unreliable renewable solar and wind power, but they are paying more for power when it is available.

The WSJ editorial notes that since 2010 power rates in California have jumped 30 percent for homes and 37 percent for manufacturers. Meanwhile, in Nevada, which gets three-fourths of its electricity from natural gas-powered generation, household rates have fallen 3 percent and manufacturing rates are down 17 percent.

As for jobs, the editorial recounts that due to higher power costs California in the past decade has seen manufacturing jobs increase a mere 6 percent, compared to an increase of 55 percent in Nevada.

Locking renewable power requirements into the state constitution will assure Nevada will experience the same loss of money and jobs as has happened in California.

Smoke blocks the sun from photovoltaic panels at a California power plant in September. (Bloomberg pix via WSJ)

17 comments on “Question 6 would cost Nevada money and jobs

  1. Rincon says:

    The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Sorry Thomas, but here in the Midwest, we don’t go bananas if a few hundred thousand people go without power – especially if it’s only for an hour or two. When thunderstorms barrel through the area, we don’t blame the power company or the coal people. We blame the thunderstorm. So far as I can tell, the power outages in California were only during an extreme heat wave, and were fairly short for most residents. At the time, Death Valley recorded possibly the hottest temperature ever recorded on the planet. Other power outages have occurred due to wild fires, but that has nothing to do with renewable energy. Why don’t you check out Iowa? 42% of their electric power comes from renewables. I haven’t heard of any blackouts there.

    That being said, I agree that a Constitutional Amendment dictating a certain percentage of renewable energy by a certain date is a bad idea. So why did 60% of Nevadans vote for it? I suspect it’s because they’re tired of obstruction by political conservatives who never compromise on anything – ever.

    Economists agree that getting rid of subsidies for fossil fuels along with reducing income tax and instituting a slowly increasing fossil fuel tax is the most efficient way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, the average voter is so afraid of taxes that they don’t ever want to modify our present ludicrous system for fear of an increase, and Conservatives continually egg them on, even as their heroes in Washington spend more than Democrats ever have. Those same voters and Conservatives are strangely mute when all of the money is being spent, as if the bill will never come due. So unfunded mandates are psychologically more palatable. Too bad they’re also more expensive.

    If you still think global warming is a hoax (are you still saying that global warming is over?), please consider that the 2 out of 3 (and growing) majority are going to do something regardless of your minority view, so why not focus on getting people to embrace the least costly way instead of screaming that coal is great or that the scientific community is engaged in a vast conspiracy?

  2. Athos says:

    ” they’re tired of obstruction by political conservatives who never compromise on anything – ever…”Nor will we ever agree to boneheaded ideas that cost money and change nothing.

    “….Economists agree….” there’s a BS statement if ever there was one! Does Thomas Sowell agree, Rinny? Walter Williams?

    “…If you still think global warming is a hoax…” now, who could ever argue with that, Rin? I’m always impressed by the sheer arrogance of you greenies. That you think man has anything to do with the warming of the planet (as compared to the Sun and it’s rays) is the epitome of hubris.


    it’s another big snake oil salesman treatment for the rubes with the money. But once the Government steps in, Rin, there’s no more choice, is there? Do you like that ’67 Vette? Too bad. California says electric cars only in just a few more years. Do you really think Americans LIKE a heavy handed government? That we want to give the Big G more power??? Have you EVER read the constitution, Rin? Do you have any idea what it means (or do you really care?)?

    And how ’bout Solyndra, (back in the Zero years). What a great way to bilk the tax payer out of $500 million big ones! And how many electric cars will we sell (they have 2% of the market now) when the G removes the $7500 tax deduction?

    And how elitist are you, dude? Have you kicked the tires of a new Tesla, lately?

    I voted no on #6. I think people were hoodwinked in the ’18 election, or all the illegal maids from the casinos were told to vote for it by the Union bosses. (probably the later) NOBODY I know wants to pay double their electric bill (renewables do just that) except for the elites that can pass off the costs to us flunkies.

    Of course, if Sleepy Joe wins President, and he shuts down the nation (with Sisaluck beating him to it in Nevada) its’ all moot. Las Vegas will be dead.

    Thanks for the topic, Thomas.

  3. Don’t forget Crescent Dunes.

  4. From that 2018 editorial:

    “But recent reports out of Europe note that carbon emission actually grew by 1.8 percent in 2017 despite a 25 percent increase in wind power and 6 percent growth in solar. Part of this is explained by the fact idling fossil fuel plants must be quickly brought online when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, and, just like cars in traffic, idling engines produce more carbon emissions. Also, maintaining both power sources increases infrastructure costs. The cost of electricity in Europe has increased 23 percent in the past decade.

    “So, Europeans are paying more and getting no emission decrease.”

    Producing no discernible benefit.

  5. Anonymous says:

    That’s a really unsupported conclusion and that’s being kind.

    I mean how much did energy usage increase during these years? Obviously since alternative contribute fewer emissions than fossil fuels the fact that your source claims emissions increased can ONLY mean that usage increased so why attribute the alleged increase in emissions to something other than the obvious cause; seems disengenuous to me but hey what do I know.

    And the important question is less whether emissions increased than one about what would the increase have been but for alternatives. There’s your discernible benefit. If you were inclined to really be interested that is.

  6. Rincon says:

    “….Economists agree….” there’s a BS statement if ever there was one! Does Thomas Sowell agree, Rinny? Walter Williams?”

    While I cannot find a survey of economists, I did find 14 Nobel prize winners and 15 former chairs of the Council of Economic Advisors who said, “A carbon tax offers the most cost-effective lever to reduce carbon emissions at the scale and speed that is necessary.”

    “More than 3000 economists have since signed the proposal.”

    See if you can find more than a couple of economists of distinction who are against it. I didn’t think you could. Well, where are they?

    I note that none of you had anything to say about Iowan outages. I also think that wringing one’s hands over a few hours of power outages while minimizing the deaths of 200,000 Americans is inconsistent to the point of lunacy. You might want to reexamine your values.

  7. Athos says:

    “… I also think that wringing one’s hands over a few hours of power outages while minimizing the deaths of 200,000 Americans is inconsistent to the point of lunacy. You might want to reexamine your values…” Rin, what an absolute asinine statement, but fully in line with your lying leftist beliefs.

    Who, repeat, who is minimizing 200,000 American deaths?? It must be the Chicago corruption that makes you such a vile creature. And you’ve obviously never lived thru a black out. Especially one that is self inflicted, California style.

    Well I, like any sane human being, do not want to be subjected to black outs and extremely higher energy bills so some idiot in Chicago can self righteously claim to be “saving the planet”. And where is your outrage over mingling religion and state?? Precious Gaia, Rin?

    Oh, I forgot. You’re a leftist and the truth is no where to be found in you. “The ends justify the means” was NOT the basis of the founding of America.

    And God help us if you win, next week.

  8. Anonymous says:

    And, AFTER we win, you’ll find that Trump taught us some things like not playing by the Queensberry rules no more.

    So when Joe comes out and says “The Constitution says I get to do whatever I want” this time it will be DEMOCRATS that cheer. And when he declares a “national emergency” and starts “grabbing guns and worrying about due process later” it will be DEMOCRATS cheering.

    And when…ah, you get it even Trumps favorite uneducated voters will get it cause that’s how they wanted to play it.


  9. Athos says:

    Honesty from a leftist. Now there’s something you don’t see very often, Thomas.

    Thank you, Anny. Now tell me, doesn’t that feel better?

    Who needs that rotten old constitution, anyway?

  10. Anonymous says:

    “the Constitution says I get to do whatever I want”
    -Donald Trump

    “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander”
    -Thomas Mitchell

    “Owning cons”

  11. Rincon says:

    “… I also think that wringing one’s hands over a few hours of power outages while minimizing the deaths of 200,000 Americans is inconsistent to the point of lunacy. You might want to reexamine your values…” Rin, what an absolute asinine statement, but fully in line with your lying leftist beliefs.”

    Given your supine acceptance of a death rate 17 times that of Australia, and then wringing your hands about power outages (“And you’ve obviously never lived thru a black out.”), means that you are either minimizing the deaths, going totally ape over a loss of electricity for a number of hours, or both. BTW, I’ve been through DOZENS of power outages. They’re pretty common during and after thunderstorms here. Big deal!

  12. Athos says:

    If Australia’s your bag, Rin, by all means move there (although their immigration policy is much stricter than ours)

    FYI, there is a world of difference between a mid west power outage (for a few hours) and being without power for 24 hours in a 90+degree California town. And your outages are natural (or “acts of God” as we used to say). California is self inflicted.

    How much wind and solar energy powers Chicago’s electric grid, Rin? I know how much you folks want to save Mother Gaia.

  13. Rincon says:

    Yeah, I’ve heard the love it or leave it mantra many times. It sounds as stupid in print as it does through a mouthful of chewing tobacco. Suffice it to say that I wouldn’t leave everyone who is dear to me just to seek a better governed country to live in. We’re one of the BRICS now, but if we continue our descent, I will seriously consider moving, especially in the event of a civil war.

    I am unaware that any substantial number of people went for 24 hours without power in California. Can you provide a reference? That being said, outages of more than 24 hours are common in Illinois. My wife’s apartment building was without power for three days after a storm. The line from the utility pole to the building had been severed. Since only one building was affected, it was given low priority. This occurs to thousands of people with every major storm system.

    So you don’t consider a record breaking heat wave an act of God? Or do you think California should have been totally prepared for something that had never occurred to date, but that Illinois power companies can be excused for allowing damage to occur over and over again, when they know storms are going to cut off power every year?

    Illinois ranks sixth in the nation for wind generating capacity. Wind supplies 7% of our power. Solar power is only beginning to become feasible here. We have lots of clouds.

  14. Athos says:

    Nuclear is the way to go clean. We have an economic advantage with gas (because of it’s abundance). Both are more reliable that wind or solar. When the battery storage problem is solved, we can talk again.

    Till then……..

  15. Rincon says:

    Surprise, surprise! You and I agree on nuclear. China has already overcome the “storage problem” with ultra high voltage DC transmission, but we can’t. Why? Because Republicans are funded in large part by the fossil fuel industry. They intentionally hobble clean energy. China is pretty awful in many ways, but we certainly aren’t angels here.

  16. Athos says:

    Why do leftist need to tear down the US? We are “no angels”, eh? Must be why so many people are trying to enter our country illegally. Next you’ll be preaching about “The 1619 Project” or the need for critical race theory!

    They don’t seem to be trying to sneak into China or Russia, are they? Wonder why that is?

    It’s only the leftist that decry America is Evil and must be fundamentally transformed!

  17. Rincon says:

    America is not evil, just unfortunate in that our system has dragged our performance down in several ways relative to other nations. One of our biggest faults is that we cannot admit that other countries are doing some things better than we are. Our hubris prevents us from seeing clearly. Only a narcissist thinks they’re superior to everyone in every way.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s