Coal Wars
Antonia Felix, Special to The Gazette
Originally published 06:00 a.m., December 24, 2010
Updated 01:03 p.m., December 27, 2010
It’s nearly the end of the year, policy watchers — do you know where your Kansas secretary of Health and Environment is?
If you look for Secretary Rod Bremby, “the man who put a red state on the green map” and who has been quoted in this column over the past year and a half, you won’t find him in the state directory. As of last month, he’s out.
Bremby is the latest casualty of the coal wars, which over the past four years in Kansas have centered on Sunflower Energy’s bid to build two more coal-burning power plants in Holcomb.
With a new administration at the doorstep in Topeka, let’s look at the (d)evolution of the Sunflower controversy.
When Sunflower applied for an air quality permit in 2007, Bremby denied it on the basis of the potential plant’s carbon dioxide emissions, which the U.S. Supreme Court had recently declared as pollutants (along with other greenhouse gases, or GHGs) under the Clean Air Act. Bremby’s department was the first government agency to deny a permit based on GHGs, and environmental groups across the nation hailed the decision. The pro-Sunflower camp was livid.
Legislators wrote and passed four bills that would block the secretary’s decision. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed all of them.
In April 2009, Sebelius resigned to join President Obama’s cabinet as Secretary of Health and Human Services and Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson was elevated to governor. Before the name on his door was dry, Parkinson struck a deal with Sunflower Energy and its supporters in the Statehouse to build one coal plant in exchange for legislators enacting a new energy package that included renewable energy standards.
The new energy compromise bill, passed in May 2009, eliminated Bremby’s ability to reject a permit based on GHG concerns: a gift to Sunflower that got that pesky, health-obsessed secretary out of the way. In return, alternative-energy enthusiast Parkinson won new standards requiring major Kansas utilities to generate 20 percent of their power from wind and other renewable sources by 2020.
Fast forward to September 2010. Leaked e-mails show that a Sunflower vice president told his allies that Bremby was “gaming the process” in order to slow down the permit review and suggested that they communicate with Bremby and the governor to try to “positively change” the situation.
A few weeks later in early November, Parkinson offered Bremby a different job, requesting that he swap his position for that of helping manage Gov.-elect Sam Brownback’s transition. Bremby turned down the offer — and he was out. Many believe Bremby was fired in order to expedite a Sunflower permit before a looming deadline that would raise the cost of building the new plant.
Sunflower had until Dec. 31 to gain a permit under existing standards before the revised Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules kicked in on Jan. 2, 2011. If it got a permit after Jan. 2, Sunflower would be required to tool the plant with the cleanest technology available.
A flurry of activity, including nine state agency staffers who are not eligible for overtime working late nights and weekends, enabled the permit review to be completed last week. Opponents of the coal plant claim that Sunflower and its supporters pressured the agency to work fast, but acting Secretary of Health and Environment John Mitchell denied any such outside manipulation.
On Dec. 16, Mitchell granted Sunflower the permit to construct the 895-megawatt coal plant, which will sell the majority of its electricity to Colorado.
Ironically, the announcement came one day after Colorado declared that it was shutting down several coal plants and would have no coal-burning power plants in the Denver area after 2017.
That’s where Kansas stands in the coal wars. Coal-burning plants are on their way out in Colorado, California, Arizona, Oregon and elsewhere, but here in Kansas we’re staying old school, at least in part. The 7 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions produced by the new plant will contradict the state’s clean energy incentives, but no one said we Kansans aren’t complicated.
Will Gov. Brownback’s energy deals be just as irrational? I doubt Mr. Bremby will stick around to find out.
ScottA (anonymous) says...
Great ongoing coverage. Some important facts to keep in mind:
It is not accurate to state that much of the power from the proposed coal plant will be sold to out-of-state utilities. It will be owned by those utilities - there is no sale involved. The plant itself will be phased for the western grid, not for the eastern grid (which serves Kansas).
Sunflower essentially defaulted on hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funded loans for their first coal plant, and then created a shell-company to contain the unpaid debt (now probably about a billion dollars) and walked away from it - and from its responsibility to repay taxpayers.
There is no question that Secretary Bremby was forced out - fired, in fact - simply because he was attempting to ensure an airtight and credible permit process. To do so, would require more time than plant supporters wanted, so they got the governor to get rid of him. The previous round of comments on a prior permit for Sunflower took 18 months and involved fewer than 800 public comments. The public process that just ended took six months and involved around 6,000 public comments.
Neither Sunflower nor Tri-State - the primary Colorado owner of the plant - have any real need for the electricity the plant will produce. Sunflower reports no gap between demand and capacity for at least 8 years, and then only a tiny fraction of the plant's capacity. Tri-State just concluded a resource planning process in which they modeled around two dozen scenarios, and only one showed any need for coal baseload - only 300MW, by 2027.
The proposed Sunflower plant would be built on top of the 5th largest natural gas reserve in the continental US, and in the midst of the second best wind resource in the nation. Both are fuel resource Kansas has in abundance (and both are much cleaner than coal and would create more long-term jobs, a more robust industry base for the state, and much more widely distributed income and revenue than coal). All the coal used for the plant will be imported from Wyoming - enhancing that state's tax base and revenues, at the expense of Kansas fuel producers, landowners, and communities.
This coal plant is almost certain to retard wind development in Western Kansas. And any transmission infrastructure will be only to move electrons from the plant to Colorado, and so will not be of any benefit to wind developers in Kansas.
And of course, there are the deaths and disease in Kansas that will be caused directly by the emissions from this plant, but that will be paid by individuals and taxpayers in the form of urgent health care costs.
This project has never been about energy - that is an incidental pathway to money and power. It has always been about money, mismanagement, and partisan political games.
December 24, 2010 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
And yet our ex-governor Seblius banned all development of clean renewable wind energy in the scenic Flint Hills. Something that made the nature people and a few wealthy landowners happy. Maybe by 2027 the smog from the coal burners will obscure the scenic Flint Hills and change their minds.
December 24, 2010 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
scole2009 (anonymous) says...
Just 45 miles away from Emporia is a shining example of what this state and country should be looking at. A nuclear power plant. We have come a long way from the 1970s (3mile island, chernobyl) The Wolf Creek Plant is clean, the water used for cooling is host to some of the best game fishing in the midwest. The nature preserve attached to the lake houses many different tyeps of birds as they transition through our ares via migration. There are so many redundant safety systems built into to modern nuclear power plants that if all of the workers left the plant could safely shut itself down. Why are we building more coal plants. They are dirty, the coal being used is produced from some of the most enviornementally damaging minong processes known to man. I am not some tree hugging hippy that thinks all power production that is not natural is bad. I just think coal is.
December 24, 2010 at 9:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jasper007 (anonymous) says...
I have just recently been watching this "very news worthy" event. It's nice to read that other people are more "educated" on this matter then I am, but I am learning. Why do people think since Kansas is in the middle of the U.S. that we should dirty our State with their needs/wants. I prefer the nuclear power, wind energy, etc. As a matter of fact, people have been talking wind and solar energy fo 30+ years. Why are we so behind at establishing these types of energy? The correct answer is POWER and MONEY. It's time more people got a little more educated (people like me) and talked more about the more simpler, cleaner ways to produce energy for our OWN state, then possibly others.
December 24, 2010 at 11:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
You're so right, scole and jasper. However, I remember when Wolf Creek was looking for a home. I thought the peeps of Emporia would have ten cows. They fought against it tooth and toenail. Now the people of Coffee County reap those great benefits.
December 24, 2010 at 1:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
You're so right, scole and jasper. However, I remember when Wolf Creek was looking for a home. I thought the peeps of Emporia would have ten cows. They fought against it tooth and toenail with all the horror stories that accompany nuclear anything. You'd think we were all going to melt right off the face of this earth. Now the people of Coffee County reap those great benefits.
December 24, 2010 at 1:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
Its a good thing that all of you are great sponsors of wind energy. Why don't you just go and buy one and get your tax credits, unhook from the power grid and see how long it takes to come back to reality. For every Megawatt that is produced by wind it must be backed up by fixed power, coal, gas, nuclear. If it wasn't for the subsidies which we pay for also, the windmills wouldn't have ever been built. Just ask the Companies in SW Kansas how much power is being produced and they will tell you it is a very poor investment.
How many birds are going to die when they fly into the turning blades in the fog or after dark. The power plant should have been started several years ago, but we had politics that was being played out. This power plant will create a tie with Col. that will tie the Eastern part of Kansas in with it.
The windmills are very expensive to own and operate, when we have four inches of ice we will see how well they fare. Our electric rates will go up to pay for them, and to maintain them. Everyone will find out the only people whom will gain from them will be the builders and the sales people. Just another farce brought on by the current administration to take more of your money.
It takes years to build a power plant, hope your lights stay on until its completed. I am sure the windmills will provide all the electricity you need when its zero degrees or one hundred degrees.
December 24, 2010 at 5:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
marko (anonymous) says...
wonders how many pigeons will die when they fly through the sooty output of a coal powered plant
December 24, 2010 at 6:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
How many fish will die when the rain washes the acid out of the air and into the water?
December 24, 2010 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justaflushaway (anonymous) says...
You are so right-on Wirewatt. But there always be those who will differ with you. Oh well,
December 24, 2010 at 7:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
booker5m (anonymous) says...
Better stop driving cars, all those birds and coons that are killed!
December 24, 2010 at 9:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Not to mention the bugs
December 24, 2010 at 9:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
wirewatt,
Merry Christmas !
I am a proponent of wind power but I didn't say just wind power. Throw some Nukes in the mix and oh- boy. Solar, where applicable, neato. Your arguments against wind have been proven wrong in Europe where wind along with nuclear are huge sources of clean power. Some may think a huge windmill in the mountains of Germany or the Swiss Alps would take away from the scenic beauty of the area.
I would counter that at least you can see the beauty, it's not hidden behind a cloud of smog.
Of course wind power is expensive, all newer technologies are. But when you consider the costs of fossil fuel itself, along with pollution costs, health costs from pollution, not to mention the costs of defending supplies of fossil fuels, (think wars), the cost difference would be lower.
Coal, natural gas and oil are needed now, but we need to wean America off of this dependency. Safe nuclear, wind and solar are all ways to do this. And we should have started decades ago during the 1st oil embargo. Fossil fuels are a finite commodity, there is only so much of it. How much will these commodities cost in 30 years? Will we send troops to secure them? The time is past for America to wean itself from these power sources. Come on,
IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN !
December 25, 2010 at 7:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
We have all the energy products we need right here in the US. We have oil, and have discovered how to make synethic gasoline. We don't need stuff that doesn't work. The global warming has gone down the tubes. Just how do you know that CO2 does what these nuts say it does? We have more trees that we have ever had. Yes some windmills work, however they exist where the wind blows all the time at a given speed. Its funny how if the government would get out of the way, we would have people find ways that you wouldn't believe. Things would be cheaper, and cost effective. Reward people for their idea's and developments and you will see a great many new developments. We have more oil and other resources that the muslin nations, but we have an administration that will not allow us to use them. DO IT FOR OUR CHILDREN.
December 25, 2010 at 8:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Wind power has been generated off the coasts of the Netherlands for years now. Strange how they don't get iced up there, and they are far north of us and on a coastal plain where there is a great deal of moisture.
I am not only for wind power, but I am for a mix that includes nuclear power too.
You must own oil wells, wirewatt.
Do you have proof that the administration is not allowing us to use our own oil resources? Is this your own little political statement? What about the gulf oil spill that spoiled those waters for years to come? A few dollars from BP won't cure that one iota.
There are a great many natural gas contracts being signed, even around here with people who own the land where it is being pumped. Contracts abound in Texas and Oklahoma. What are you talking about?
I agree that we should reward people for their ideas and developments, but only if they are carefully screened by engineers. This prevents every nut from coming out of the woodwork with ideas about becoming millionaires overnight by turning water into gasoline or other such crazy notions.
December 25, 2010 at 10:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jasper007 (anonymous) says...
wirewatt. I have a friend who for years has had solar panels in the roof of his house. My understanding is, the energy supplied by the panels also have storage batteries where excess energy is stored. And though his panels may produce enough energy for his home, excess can be sold back to the energy company. Wouldn't it be amazing if Lyon County, or Kansas or the entire U.S. could generate enough power for re-sell to WESTAR, how nice our electric bills would be. As I am just learning about alternative energies, isn't some power generated by windmills also stored for future use, or capable of storing excess energy? I'm just trying to understand all this, but it does seem like there are so many NEW ways to produce clean energy that haven't been put to use or have been slow in getting started....
December 26, 2010 at 12:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
Create First of all I don't have any oil holdings or stock, I just try to read and talk to people in the business. The BP mess was caused by our government people not doing their job, just as the stock market mess was caused by people not doing their jobs and politicians passing laws to let everyone own a home without proper credit or income. J007 you could have storage batteries for your roof panels, but where will you put them so you don't have air and venting problem, and would take inverter and other equipment to make it work, would be very expensive. To my knowledge they don't have any way at this time to store energy from the windmills. In the early 1900's the rural area's had windmills to provide power they used lead acid batteries to provide power when the wind quit blowing, and the same problem still exists. Once the power is made it is gone if not used at that moment or stored. Popular Mechanics three or four months ago had great articles on the five new gasoline replacements, and the cost is coming down. I think that our children will have fuel cells that will provide their electric needs that will set outside of their homes next to the ac.
I don't know what the difference is between the natural gas that comes out of the ground or low sulfur coal, as the scrubbers and other air cleaning equipment takes a lot impurities out of the air. I don't even begin to have the answers, but you can find out what costs us millions and whether it works or will provide a pay back, all without huge government payments. If it will make a profit someone will build it.
December 26, 2010 at 8:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
wirewatt, Ever heard of the nickel metal hydride (NiMH) battery? We would love to replace oil with electric but the oil companies purchased the patents and refuse to allow anyone to use the NiMH technology until after their oil holes are empty.
December 26, 2010 at 11:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
wirewatt, I have two friends who work for Westar Energy and who have windmills on their rural properties. They use what is generated and store the rest. Once every so often, Westar comes to their house and collects the stored energy for which they are paid. If they can do it, anyone can do it provided you are allowed to build a windmill.
Not all of the BP mess was caused by government people not doing their jobs. Haliburton, or at least one of its subsidiaries, had very dirty fingers in that mess because they greedily wanted to hurry the job.
December 26, 2010 at 12:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
Create, I beg to differ with you, but they probably don't store one kilowatt hour but use what little they make, and are paid for the other kwh's sold back to Westar. However they have to take it whether they need it or not, more government. They will after ten years will not have made enough to pay for their expense, If it wasn't for the $10,000 tax credit they received. T Boone Pickens got out of the windmill business, if it is that great I am sure he would still be in it. We are paying the money for the tax rebates, and for the electricity whether it is needed or not. I don't think that is a great deal for anyone, just looks good to people whom don't understand.
The batteries needed to store the electricity would be huge. Just to make a car run a hundred miles takes 1500 lbs or more of batteries. Increase that by over one hundred times you can see the size of batteries required to store the power, plus then a building to house the equipment to convert it back to ac from dc and to phase it in with power grid to use it.
December 26, 2010 at 12:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Buy 10 of these: http://cgi.ebay.com/12v-6v-Repair-Rec...
Buy 1 of these: http://www.harborfreight.com/45-watt-...
Buy 1 of these: http://www.harborfreight.com/400-watt...
Buy 2 of these: http://www.harborfreight.com/2000-wat...
Buy 1 of these: http://www.amazon.com/Arrow-Sentry-St...
You spent a total of $1469.35 and will be able to use electricity generated off of it to power your home for about 15 years.
How much money will you hand over to the electric company in the next 15 years?
December 26, 2010 at 1:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
Just do it, and see how long you will be off of the power grid, there is not enough power here to run your electric dyer for one hour, good luck. If it was that easy everyone with an engineering degree would be doing it. That is what the green people think can be done. Charging those batteries with a windmill would be find, however the last two or three days your house would be cold. If you were to buy an electric car you could charge it off of the windmill for free if the wind is blowing, but you might have a hard time getting to work every day. In 1974 the electric industry ran a wind study, it showed that east of US Hwy 81 it was not even close to being cost effective and west of US 81 would have a problem making a pay back, and guess what that is happening at this time.
December 26, 2010 at 2:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
OK Then let's not do anything at all. Let's just wait until oil is 500 dollars a barrel and there is no place left to dump the ashes from the coal plant without destroying the places we grow food. There is a thermal power source below our feet that is being ignored because it is cheaper to burn dinosaur bones...For now.
Eventually (10-20 years) fossil fuels will be so expensive that farmers will not be able to afford to apply fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. We will be forced to ask Cuba for assistance to teach us how to live after peak oil causes starvation.
This is neat:
http://www.metaefficient.com/news/11-...
Sure, it is only 11 megawatt. Not the 700 megawatt coal fired plant at Holcomb, but it doesn't pollute the air and water either.
This is neat too:
http://www.metaefficient.com/architec...
Sure it takes up 7 acres and only generates 2.3 megawatts but, wouldn't it make a great welcome center/doggy poop park?
December 26, 2010 at 2:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Besides, who runs their dryer for a whole hour? Someone hates clothes.
Simply add panels batteries and wind turbines as needed to meed your usage requirements. Divert the excess power to a water heater filled with propylene glycol and circulate it under your floors throughout your home using a low voltage pump for radiant heat.
You don't need an engineering degree. You just have to like to tinker with stuff.
December 26, 2010 at 3:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
The cost per kwh from the windmills stands at $0.28 per kwh. The cost from Westar costs you around $0.08 per kwh. Tinker with those costs, and you can afford the coal plant until the free market comes up with something better. I am sure you want big brother to lead the world. I believe that the free market will come through when the prices begin to get to high. Yes I am sure the wind power is a joke.
December 27, 2010 at 7:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Actually, it is a little over 9 cents per kwh after they charge me for their poles in my alleyway and their environmental charge and other crap they dream up.
I don't care. I like to fool around with stuff and if I have to pay $40 per month to grow a tomato in the winter, so be it! I'll do it anyway. Just because I can.
I'm pretty sure that my electric rate will not drop as a result of a coal fired plant that is being built under the old standards really quickly before the law changes.
I am confident that the revised (EPA) rules that kick in on Jan. 2, 2011 will give Westar and other energy bandits another reason to break it off in everyone though.
December 27, 2010 at 10:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
The only people breaking it off in the consumers will be the EPA whom are so illegally side stepping the congress the way they operate. You will soon get your way, if congress doesn't shut the Obama nuts down who are trying to tear our country apart. Because of the great EPA we have moved all our factories and their jobs to third world countries, whom will pollute the air and the waterways more than you can ever believe. When your electric bills, food bills, water bills, and clothes cost thirty and forty percent more, we will see who cries the loudest. Our electricity is some of the cheapest in the nation, just check the internet if you don't believe me. Be careful in what you wish for, as you make get a lot more than you really want.
December 28, 2010 at 8:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
marko (anonymous) says...
What? no mention of Al Gore????
December 28, 2010 at 8:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mslater (Matt Slater) says...
wirewatt,
I think you need to recheck your facts re: the wind farms out west. They are paying for themselves within 5 years, however that is accounting for tax breaks. According to the State of Kansas, wind farms are not required to pay sales tax, however most set up a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) program with the respective counties they are in.
Matt
December 28, 2010 at 11:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
wirewatt, In order to break something off in something, you first must stick something into something.
I get my monthly bill from the electric company who has spend at least a hundred million dollars more than me when it comes to purchasing elected officials.
Don't get me wrong. I like using the electricity that is made by the hydroelectric dams, nuclear power plants, and coal fired generators that were built with my grandparents tax dollars. I also like using the power distribution grid that my parents tax dollars paid for.
Sure, the private electricity distributors are required to maintain the grid but the only time the grid breaks is when there is a natural disaster like an ice storm or a hurricane and then FEMA kicks down hundreds of millions to fix what broke.
Here is how I see it. Taxpayers build America's grid. Private individuals purchase lawmakers. Lawmakers give the taxpayer owned electric to the corrupt owner of lawmakers who in turn sell the electric back to taxpayers who they call customers.
NATIONALIZE ENERGY and imprison the thieves who screw us front and rear. I can't wait until Armageddon starts!
December 29, 2010 at 1:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I was pleased to see that a federal Bill has passed to investigate fraud happening on Native American lands. I hope this one works. Who has all the money? A brief quote:
"Josephine Wild Gun lives with her son's family in a run-down house on the Blackfeet reservation in Heart Butte, Montana. Like many of her neighbors, she owns several tracts of reservation land that are held in trust by the US government. Federal officials manage her nearly 10,000 acres, leasing much of the property to private interests for grazing and oil drilling. In return, Wild Gun is supposed to receive royalties from the Indian Trust Fund, created in 1887 to oversee such payments to Native Americans.
But despite the lucrative leases, Wild Gun has never received more than $1,500 a year from the trust fund. A few years ago, the payments began trickling off; one check totaled only 87 cents. When her husband died in 1994, Wild Gun had to borrow money to pay for the funeral. Now in her early 80s, she survives on less than $400 a month in Social Security. "I think they're cheating her really big," says Wild Gun's daughter-in-law, Diana.
Wild Gun is one of approximately 300,000 Native Americans who are suing the Interior Department, claiming that they are owed at least $10 billion in payments on some 10 million acres. The fund is in such disarray, the government concedes, that it doesn't have any way of knowing how much it actually owes - or to whom. "
Something is dreadfully wrong, and I hope this new Bill will find the thieves because you know damn well they're there helping themselves to federal money -- taxpayer money!!! This makes my head hurt!
December 29, 2010 at 10:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
create,
You may have just given another reason while the government should not be in charge of health care.
December 29, 2010 at 10:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nutsaboutools (anonymous) says...
Another thing to keep in mind about coal fired generation is the radioactive gases and toxic waste (and stored) generated.
By the way, I'm a "nuke". Before we moved to Emporia, I worked at a nuke plant in NY, about 30 miles east (and sometimes down-wind) of a coal generating station. We could always tell when the coal station was on/off line by the indications of our effluent radiation monitors (they would show a peak when the plant was on-line and the wind was from the west).
Although I'd like to see more nuclear (most "bang-for-the-buck"), I don't think we will see it happen. Too much regulation (and thus extremely costly) and there still is the waste issue. Another possible choice is Pebble-bed reactors, however, the government (NRC) is the biggest roadblock (they don't know how to regulate them).
Fuel cells would be the best possible alternative (Utilities don't like this choice, because if each individual home were to convert to fuel cells, they wouldn't generate any profit).
Coal is just plain not the best choice.
Dave R.
December 29, 2010 at 11:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
I disagree that government is the problem. The problem we have in every sector in our society is unbridled greed.
Government is really good at making stuff happen. So good in fact that every sector in our society turns to government when they want something done.
Health care in America is great for the wealthy but is sucks for everyone else. For the poor, health care is available at the health department if you qualify for a government medical card. If not, the words "heal thy self" take on a new meaning.
If you're rich, private energy is making you more money but if you're poor, private energy tells you to run to the SRS for assistance heating your privately owned government subsidized apartment.
Am I the only person who noticed that the private markets on wall street screwed poor Americans out of trillions yet the only person who got any real jail time was the guy who screwed rich people?
It's a good thing that it was a British oil company who spilled all that oil in the gulf. Had it been an American company we would still be listening to reasons why the taxpayer should clean it up.
We need to amend the constitution to allow for a public hanging of corrupt congressmen and senators instead of censorship. That way we won't have a need for campaign finance reform. jmo
Why not privatize the military since the government is so inept at everything?
December 29, 2010 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
REWBA, your post made a lot of sense.
Although I think GREED IS GOOD, but a few good public hangings would go a long way in cleaning things up.
And ask anyone currently serving, the military is being privatized. From the chow halls and housing to the special ops boots on the ground.
December 29, 2010 at 6 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Don't ask don't tell has been repealed. Chow halls will start looking fabulous, housing will smell wonderful, and the boots on the ground will be more stylish than ever! :-)
December 29, 2010 at 7:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
REWBA,
I know it bites, doesn't it. It all started back in the late 40's when they,( the military) ,started letting blacks and Mexicans die along side the whites. Then they actually allowed Philipinos into the services. Then in the flower power age, God help us, the military really started the push to allow women in combat roles. Combat Roles? We all know that women are good cooks and cleaners and make good secretaries, but combat? Come On! What is the military thinking?
I sure wish we were back in the good ole day's . Everybody knew their place back then. ;>)
December 29, 2010 at 7:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Actually, I think it all started back in February 1778 when Ensign Anthony Maxwell was brought before a court-martial charged with "propogating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutenant Frederick Gotthold Enslin. After Ensign Maxwell was acquitted of the charge, Lieutenant Enslin was brought to trial before a court-martial. According to General Washington's report: "...Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcolm's Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy ..." Washington's secretary continues to describe the results of the trial: "His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence & Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning...
It's funny how someone would use their rank and position to try to have sex with a subordinate. I'm sure glad that doesn't happen today.
December 29, 2010 at 8:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
some days it just pays to stay in bed.
http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/German-...
December 29, 2010 at 9 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wirewatt (Ken Bazil) says...
REWBA call Westar and ask them how many FEMA dollars they received, and they will tell you that they received zero. The only ones to receive FEMA money are the states, counties, cities, and nonprofit electric companies, which are like the cooperatives and the public power districts. Investor owned utilities don't receive the monies you are talking about.
December 29, 2010 at 9:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Here you go wirewatt, wind power for less than 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. I bet Westar won't be giving me that rate.
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/...
December 29, 2010 at 9:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
"Investor owned utilities don't receive the monies you are talking about."
Nineteen million dollars is just chump change. We're the chumps.
http://www.energy.gov/recovery/ks.htm
December 29, 2010 at 9:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )