** AN OBSERVATION: If Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative Democrats want the infrastructure bonds package to pass, they are going to have to campaign hard for it. This is the post-Prop 82 (Reiner Initiative) environment.
** 5 PM UPDATE: California electric power demand has already crested and begun subsiding for the day, over 1000 megawatts below the forecast peak.
** 3:30 PM UPDATE: California electric power demand has again just broken last year’s state record. But demand is running under today’s forecast on the current trendline, and power supplies are more than ample enough to meet the demand.
** Global and national energy price watch, updated continuously in near real time, courtesy of Bloomberg.
** Continuous coverage of the Israel-Hezbollah War from Pajamas Media. Israeli forces have found the going tougher than expected and need more time to establish their cordon sanitaire in Lebanon. No ceasefire in sight.
** Follow California’s peak electric power demand throughout the day in near real time from Cal ISO. After 11 days of record heat, the extreme weather event has subsided, but we’ll monitor the power situation for the next two days.
Read 
| Comments (0) |
Sorry, did I miss something? What was yesterday’s 10pm newsbreak?
The PPIC poll.
off topic thoughts.
I was turned off reading this morning’s articles in the Sacramento Bee and the Chronicle in Poochigian v. Brown race for Attorney General. This is from the Chronicle news story:
“Oakland’s violent crime problems — with homicides now up to 78 this year compared to 41 at this time in 2005 — are providing ample fodder for Poochigian’s campaign, which has sent out news releases with headlines such as “Oakland Bleeds While Jerry Brown Refuses to Lead.”‘
I don’t know if this is the first-ever macabre campaign, but I fear Poochigian’s campaign is dangerously close to cheering every homicide in Oakland.
Why, if Brown wants to tout his “tough on crime” stance, should his lousy record be off-limits?
Thanks Bill. So many polls make me forget they’re actually viewed as news…
Phil:
You are free to grab some pompoms and cheer along.
I personally don’t feel comfortable rooting for killers to succeed.
Mr. Poochigian hopes for murders, Mr. Angelies hopes for blackouts. It is the way of the loser.
It’s simply stating a record. To think that Pooch roots for murders is macabre and wrong.
Have either of you folks ever worked on a political campaign? Brown has tons of money and a lousy record. Pooch needs to point-out the differences between himself and the guy he’s running against.
If a newspaper wants to do that for him, that’s working the press pretty effectively I say.
So he get’s bitched at for being pro-life on one hand, but then ya say he’s pro-murder (of non-fetuses)?
Brown simply wants to remain on a government payroll…
They’re both pros.
The candidate that is pro Three Strikes , pro Jessica’s Law and pro PORAC will win. I consider AG a non partisan play.
What are the Jerry Brown and Chuck Poochigian positions there?
Um, and what does this have to do with the war and the energy situation(s)?
To answer your questions — Bill — Jerry and Chuck both agree with Three Strikes and Jessica’s law, but only Brown has the endorsement of PORAC.
With Armageddon nigh and the Governors race (barely) overshadowing all else in state politics, Pooch is gonna be as popular as a red-headed stepchild come November. On the issue of crime, he’s like a boxer who can brag that he never lost a fight — because he never stepped into the ring.
…watch the red headed stepchild stuff…:)
Redheads are great.
There’s also nothing wromg with stepchildren.
Bill:
your comment – on the bonds. I’d heard, just in general gossip with others who followed this stuff, that they were in decent shape. I know the affordable housing one is not in too good shape, but I thought the other 3 were OK – is there polling that shows they’re not? What’s your thinking behind the comment? I’m curious. thanks
Every time the candidates talk about securing enough power, they avoid the issue and talk about renewables (which don’t generate much electricity), or talk about low GHG emitting sources (which can’t possibly significantly affect global GHG output). The two are totally separate problems – getting enough for next July – converting to eco-friendly in the long run.
My head is going to explode the next time I hear someone confuse “renewables” with reducing GHG. We can use the 100 dairy cows which die daily in the Fresno heat for biofuel to power our cars – that would be “renewable” since we can grow new cows, but burning cow parts still emits GHG. Ethanol is also a renewable fuel which emits GHG, though less than gas.
The housing bond is in very bad shape.
The others all require campaigns.
Athlon, you’re wrong, renewables can generate a lot of electricity, and without emanating greenhouse gases.
Our thinking seems to be curiously limited. Of course renewables can generate a lot of electricity. And that is more likely to come on individual rooftops, rather than large central facilities. It’s the same limited thinking in regard to gasoline and automobiles. We don’t need a substitute for gasoline, we need a substitute for the internal combustion engine. Neither of these are quick fixes. Solar power is feasible now, and will gradually be put in place. A new kind of engine should be the subject of a Manhattan Project-type effort.
Large-scale solar arrays also have tremendous potential.
Wind farms may not generate much electricity on a dry, windless day, but using wind power at other times saves natural gas for when it is needed.
…Not to mention tidal power. If we properly harness the Pacific, the megawatts could be rolling in … especially when those seas start rising. And let’s not forget the power of poop. I do believe San Francisco is investigating ways by which to turn dog doo into energy. It’s amazing how many energy production methods we simply ignore in this country.
Can’t we power the state with all the crap that spinners and opposition researchers toss at journalists and the Capitol Morning Report, but strangely never find fit to air in public (instead relying on innuendo and implications in news articles and columns)? One could only wish.