Title IX and California's energy regulations

Title IX has been applied to colleges to mean that equal numbers of men and women should participate in sports, regardless of the relative interest between the genders towards participation. As a result, and in order to meet the number-of-women = number-of-men requirement, schools have been shedding men's sports. Not increasing women's, but for the most part cutting men's volleyball, wrestling, etc. (This is one reason why colleges are having trouble recruiting men and are more-and-more women-dominated. Schools with strong sports and engineering programs tend to be more equal in male/female campus ratios than ones without strong men's sports or an engineering focus.)

This is one of those shocking, surprising, startling, and utterly predicable outcomes of this sort of numbers game.

Now, let's turn to California's power-market regulations which state that by 2020--just 11 years from now--one-third, 33%, of California's power must come from renewable sources (but don't you dare use the dreaded n-word....I mean nuclear, of course.)

Which one of these two paths is the easiest way to meet the 33% goal:

1. Build lots of expensive and inefficient wind and solar plants that can not produce cost-effective energy, and must rely on government subsidy to lower the price to where consumers can consume it.
   
   
2. Or shut down the non-renewable and poluting gas- and coal-fired plants, reduce over-all supply, but meet the 33% quota?

The answer, of course is #2. So, just as with Title IX, we are likely to see some increase in renewable energy, but a much bigger shut down of non-renewables. This in a state which had rolling third-world-style blackouts a couple of years back, and which barely makes enough power to meet current, pre-recession demand.

California's self-inflicted damage and stupidity is really a sight to behold.

I only wish I was beholding it from outside the state!