Goleta City Council Approves the County’s First EV ARC 2020

And whatever their efficiency/capacity, it's essentially free energy.

And when people stop worrying about the spent fuel which is tremendously toxic for millennium. Hmmm. Maybe people are right to worry about that.

100% agreed. It is the green future once people become better educated / less propagandized about the technology.

Im conservative and have had solar on my home for 10 years, Wind and solar on my boat for longer than that. How could that be?
The first environmental groups were sportsman who are mostly conservative. Research who they are and how they are protecting the lands. Check out how much time and money the they contribute. Then buy a hunting or fishing license and enjoy what the conservatives have helped with.

Sac, I appreciate your candor but you are not supposed to admit you are supporting a faith based energy policy. You should refer to it as “science based” at all times.

CHIP - the good news is that renewable energy development is a relatively new technology and is becoming more and more "green" (in production, not use since it already is) every day. I have faith that we'll soon be able to produce panels, turbines, etc in a cleaner way and move towards fully clean and renewable energy. With coal and oil, that will NEVER happen. You pick which you'd rather have. The rest of the world has.

Chip don't forget the "green" biomass reactors which are supported by all the tree hugging groups, yet their is nothing "green" about them, they literally just burn wood and call it a green reactor. Below is a must watch portion of a Michael Moore documentary on these "green reactors" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmIzaNLXo0Y

Sac, your viewpoint is likely to prevail for the foreseeable future. We will still build tons of new nat-gas power plants. However, we will also build tons of batteries, and solar panels and windmills. We will burn all the fossil fuels that we would have without the “green” stuff anyway since “green” energy can’t stand on its own. However, in addition to making all that CO2, we will also contaminate the Congo with uranium, support child and slave labor overseas, cover 10s of thousands of acres of our picturesque countryside with solar panels and windmills and much much more. And then after about 20 years we will ship all that “green” equipment out of the country where it will be dumped on the land and in the sea. It’s a colossal waste, but it will be done in the name of saving the planet. I thought I was a bit of a conservative, but you’re making me feel like some kind of radical environmentalist rebelling against a government-industry complex hell bent on soiling the planet for “green” profit. The times they are a changin...

"We need to make power, what I’m suggesting is doing it in the least destructive way possible." - Yes, agreed, and that is wind, solar, and hydro. And Chip, please.... conservatives support policies that rape our planet. You mad that Biden rejoined the Paris Accord?

I don’t understand where this stereotype that “conservatives” want to trash the planet comes from. They also believe in responsible environmental stewardship and have a lot of helpful perspectives to offer in areas dominated by “liberal” conformity culture. Solar comes with natural gas power plants, or coal, or nuclear or some other 24/7 power source. For example, the solar arrays in the desert on the way to Vegas run in conjunction with a nat-gas power plant. Every night, the nat-gas supplies the power the sun can’t and the nat-gas power keeps all the molten salt from solidifying. This constant on and off if the gas plant reduces its efficiency. It would be more efficient to skip the solar array and just rely on the nat-gas plant. But, by building the solar array, the power company can make more money, and people who don’t think through the full life cycle environmental consequences of the system are led to believe it’s doing some good. The point is, it’s all a scam. Wind and solar is being used as a “green” facade to cover nat-gas energy production. It makes the uninformed feel good about higher power bills, and it is less efficient and more environmentally destructive than just building a new nat-gas power plant. In the name of environmentalism, “liberals” are unknowingly supporting unethical rare earth mining practices overseas that result in widespread contamination, bulldozing vast acreages of land right here in california to make room for solar and wind arrays, blasting off beautiful mountaintops in the Dakotas to extract the high grade silica needed to construct solar panels, etc. We need to make power, what I’m suggesting is doing it in the least destructive way possible.

** opps, I meant "ZERO emissions or pollution during USE"

I love how conservatives all of a sudden get "environmentally conscious" when it comes to complaining about renewable energy sources. Folks, ALL energy production has waste and pollution associated with it, wind and solar just have WAY LESS. Just because that's not zero, doesn't mean it's not better than coal and oil plants belching a steady stream of bile into our atmosphere. You see, production and use are 2 things. Wind/solar, etc have some negative byproducts associated with production, but have ZERO emissions or pollution during production. Coal, oil, gas, etc pollute BOTH during production and use. You'd have to be an absolute simpleton to think coal or oil is better for our environment than wind/solar/hydro.

Please spare us the "concern" for the environment.

Uh Chip that unit a a large battery that allows it to be used at night and in bad weather. Everything, everyone, is 100% disposable I suppose that we should go back to living in caves.