Eric Geisel

Northern NY. Carpenter By Day; Assistant Varsity Football Coach By Night. DBs/TEs/WRs. 3 sons, 1 wife. This is the good life.

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@RocCityBuilt @constantino CO2 and CH4 are not air pollutants. No acute toxicity at atmospheric levels, nor do they cause deforestation or ecosystem destruction. No need to rely on solar/wind to keep agricultural lands profitable if we strengthened our generational agriculture policies

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@RocCityBuilt @constantino NYS already experienced a period of profiteering and land exploitation, hence ratification of Article XIV in 1894. NYS legislature is mandated by Section 4 to put forth policies that incentivize growth of food and agricultural products on farmland. NYS is not a libertarian state

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@RocCityBuilt @constantino The way they sited solar is the issue, not solar itself. Solar didn’t belong on agricultural lands. These corporations bribed landowners and took the easy road. The current state government allowed it because they couldn’t even manage a hot dog stand in San Fransisco

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@RocCityBuilt @constantino Yeah because Republicans are the ones blocking natural gas fracking along NYS southern tier, potentially creating 140,000+ full time long term jobs in one of the most economically depressed regions in our state…these solar arrays promise a fraction of that type of employment

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo *proof, not propf. My apologies…I’ll at least concede that I made a typo…

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo is propf. Your battery storage facilities are being roundly rejected statewide, you’re now attempting to lobby the state for floating solar. This is an absolute joke of an energy policy, bud. Reduce carbon emissions to 85% 1990 levels without mostly banning natural gas!? Idiotic

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo You’re an arrogant SOB, I’ll give you that. Pride cometh before the fall…..most of the 10 people who will end up reading this can decipher for themselves if I actually conceded or if you’re just wishing that I did. Til next time…I recommend you come better prepared

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo One more thing…2050 gives time for most current ratepayers (and voters!) to die off in order for them to keep pushing back short term compliance dates since this isn’t scaling up the way they dreamed. In the mean time they condition future ratepayers to accept their terms

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo 1990 baseline levels. 2040 is their attempt to establish a goal post that they themselves can move. 2050 is the hard date. You really can’t just admit the math AND the hard data are there that as “renewables” scale up and gas scales down we see a massive hike in user energy price

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo You assume too much. The CLCPA effectively bans gas generation by 2050. Research current state laws before engaging in debate. This drives the price of your “renewables” up as they take on larger capacities. Keep pretending that you won the debate if it makes you feel better

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo I didn’t concede. You just want me to. I believe the word “shall” puts a stronger mandate on the legislature to put forth policies that conserve farmland for agriculture than you do. That’s a difference of legal opinion, not a concession on my behalf

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo And you’re wrong, I’m not a blind environmentalist. I believe proper silviculture would help preserve the integrity of the Adirondack Park much more efficiently than current policy. I also believe localized food sources are much more stable than the current globalized market

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo The Section 1 ban has teeth due to the decades of lawsuits that have been filed in order to uphold the integrity of the Catskill and Adirondack Parks, which are also currently being threatened by this era of land exploitation. Section 4 can grow teeth with the correct lawsuits

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo I honestly thought you understood more economic theory…a nonprofit ISO that’s funded by the government and ratepayers (taxpayers), but that’s opposite of a state model? What do you think happens to the owners of gas generation over time when the state bans their generation?

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo You’re leaving out the final portion of the mandate, very disingenuous debate tactic. I agree that they are unconstitutional without a constitutional amendment, which there have been some passed for state highways in the past, so there’s precedent.

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo This isn’t a viable theory for our privatized market, unless the same corporations operate all generation across the entire market, which puts us in a very similar situation to communist China. We’re going to see mass market collusion in the future. Very poor economics

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo LFSCOE-95 drops “renewables” by 50%, which still factor 5x higher than gas. You’re also basing our future energy policy on China’s where the state operates both the solar/wind and coal facilities, so economically they are more flexible to dial back coal generation to fit demand

[Eric Geisel @esgeisel]

@77flickrt @AlbertCamels @alex_fasulo “The policy of the state shall be to conserve and protect its natural resources and scenic beauty and encourage the development and improvement of its agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products.” I know “shall” is a big word, but it’s there