Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, August 24, 2006

Too spoiled?

August 24, 2006

Advertisement

To the editor:

Every few years people come up with an answer to all of our problems like building more nuclear plants. Have you forgotten Chernobyl? We nearly had a meltdown at Three Mile Island not too long before Wolf Creek was built.

The more atomic plants we build, the bigger chance we will create for us to wipe out a large part of our population. Are you willing to take that chance? I am getting older and do not have nearly as much to lose as you young folks, but it is a selfish attitude to think that I need all the electrical energy at the sacrifice of future generations.

When I was in school, we had no electricity. When I was 15, I sent off for blueprints for a wind generator. I built it with all the crude tools we had while sneaking around working at it in the evenings so my father didn't see me. I put it up and it worked, but the generator was too small. It would light two or three car bulbs. My father said it was noisy and I had to take it down. It was as noisy as an air conditioner. No more electricity for us.

I am all for the other sources of power before one more nuclear plant is built. We can do a lot better with wind power, and every person should not buy any bigger car than they really need. In World War II, everybody learned to make sacrifices. Can we do it again or are we too spoiled?

Ray Schott,

Lawrence

Comments

Richard Heckler 8 years, 4 months ago

If we are so concerned about terrorists why even consider anymore devices such as nuclear power plants that could do irreparable harm to large numbers per incident. Consider how much might be added to your electric bill to absolutely secure a nuclear power plant.

Radiation exposure causes immediate death, expensive long term illness and birth defects as many of our soldiers in the mideast have experienced from OUR use of low yield nuclear weapons. The dust is breathed in or ingested unknowingly. Radioactive liquid has no odor and cannot be seen. Radioactivity is invisible.

Speakout 8 years, 4 months ago

Wow, what a bleak picture you two paint. Yes, by all means, lets turn back our clocks and use wind power to supply our electric needs, better yet, lets forget electricity all the way around. I lived without television and radio my first years and I can do it again. I am old, gonna die soon so its no big deal for me. But I ask you one question:

What price and inconvenience do we put on progress?

Jamesaust 8 years, 4 months ago

And yet the lefties in our country exist in a wholly different dimension from their Gauloise smoking doppelgangers - a land where the vast, vast majority of electricity is produced from nuclear power with noisy justification based precisely upon ... safety! Which leftists are wrong? I guess it would depend on whether one defines "global warming" and "addiction to oil" as "safety."

laughingatallofu 8 years, 4 months ago

Mr. Schott also had to walk 10 miles to school (uphill, both ways) in a blinding blizzard (even in the summer) with nothing more than a hot potato in his pocket to keep him warm.

Ahh, the good ol' daze!

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 4 months ago

people the letter is to make you think not attack or make fun.

laughingatallofu 8 years, 4 months ago

mommaeffortx2,

I've thought about it. So, where, in your backyard, would you like these wind turbines to be placed?

Just thinking out loud.

Linda Endicott 8 years, 4 months ago

He DOES have a point about us being too spoiled anymore to sacrifice. What would we all do without our "stuff"?

During WWII, practically everything was rationed, including gasoline, and though I'm sure some people complained, it seemed to work and nobody was worse off for it.

Well, if we can manage to sacrifice during war time, then why not the rest of the time?

And the more nuclear power plants we have across this country, the more targets terrorists will have.

laughingatallofu 8 years, 4 months ago

crazyks,

I'm willing to "sacrifice" your back yard so that we can put an additional wind turbine in.

I'm not disagreeing with you. But the 1940's were the 1940's and, I'm sure you'll agree that things have changed a little since then.

So, what are we going to do with all of our "stuff"? If you figure it out, I'll vote for you for president.

Regards.

P.S. The World Trade Center wasn't next to a nuclear power plant.

Linda Endicott 8 years, 4 months ago

Maybe we need to be less addicted to our "stuff". If people didn't think that computers, iPods, cell phones, TVs, etc., etc., were necessities in life, we'd be using a lot less energy.

Wind turbine in my backyard? I rent, but if you can get the ok from my landlord, go ahead. I doubt it would be any louder than the idiots in my neighborhood who think it's hunky dory to sit in their cars gunning the engine all the time. Or the loudmouths who live next door who have barbecues all summer and sit drinking beer and talking til the wee hours.

I've lived in an era without all the fine, electronic toys we now have, and I was just fine. People could be again. They just don't want to give up their "stuff". So, the letter was right. People don't want to sacrifice anymore in order to make a difference.

staff04 8 years, 4 months ago

"where, in your backyard, would you like these wind turbines to be placed?"

One modern wind turbine can power 1,000 homes. There are countless places throughout the farm belt (west Texas, western KS, NE, the Dakotas) where you could put up 100 of them that would be 100 miles fromt he nearest road. THAT'S where, in my backyard, I would like these turbines to be placed. There is enough harnessable wind energy in remote areas of Kansas, OK and Texas to provide for all of the electricity needs of our entire nation. Yes, folks, that means no more coal and gas fired plants, an end to worries about nuclear waste, and a 100% clean solution to our nation's energy problems. A nuclear power plant in your neighborhood is going to do a helluva lot more damage to your property value (and ultimately, your quality of life) than a wind farm 20 miles away...

Speakout 8 years, 4 months ago

So Why, Staff04, hasn't this happened? because we want to need oil. Your solution won't make the OIL Giants rich. It makes sense so it must be debated for another 10-15 years. Bushco needs to sell oil and make big profits...this is why electric cars have failed and other forms of energy in the USA. The hopes are dashed by oil interests. I have little proof of that, but just a hunch. Lets find out though?

laughingatallofu 8 years, 4 months ago

"where, in your backyard, would you like these wind turbines to be placed?"

"There are countless places throughout the farm belt (west Texas, western KS, NE, the Dakotas) where you could put up 100 of them that would be 100 miles fromt he nearest road."

Find me that place. I want to see it. I'll drive.

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 4 months ago

well there is this pesky part of my yard that just always floods when it rains we could put it there:)

laughingatallofu 8 years, 4 months ago

OK, mommaeffortx2. When they put it up, I'll buy the light bulbs :)

KsTwister 8 years, 4 months ago

For those of you ready for a Kansas road trip here they are:

http://www.awea.org/projects/kansas.html

Please note that the electric companies are buying the energy produced. I have to agree with LTE writer, I would jump for this choice; more money for the community and draw for industry.Mount Blue would be a perfect place here. But alas, more roundabouts please.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/2006/Update52.htm

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 4 months ago

no light bulb in back yard please bedroom on that side but the corner could use some light. laughin just get happy all will stay the same in this world to much money at stake.

KsTwister 8 years, 4 months ago

Not so:Studies at more recently designed wind farms tell us that bird mortality at windmills is very low. A summary indicates that the average number of birds killed annually across North America is between one and two per turbine. No meltdown either.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

Wind turbines kill many times fewer birds than do planes and automobiles, and considerabley fewer than the loss of habitat caused by global warming. That red herring just doesn't fly.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

"In the entire history of nuclear power there has been exactly one reactor meltdown."

The results of that meltdown were extremely catastrophic and fully justify everyone's fears.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

"Finally, unless someone can come up with a way to suck billions of tons of carbon dioxide out of the air and change it into a different compound, then global warming is going to happen no matter what you generate power with."

There are ideas floating around about how to do that, but there are many ways to generate power that don't contribute to global warming.

whistlestop75 8 years, 4 months ago

merrill wrote:

If we are so concerned about terrorists why even consider anymore devices such as nuclear power plants that could do irreparable harm to large numbers per incident. Consider how much might be added to your electric bill to absolutely secure a nuclear power plant.

Are you sure that due to Homeland Securtiy Regulations that this isn't happening already?...Consider the fact legislature passed a state statue that allows Nuclear Power Plants in Kansas to carry high power weapons in the last session...seems like you are worrying about something that has already happened....and I for one am glad they did...

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

It would take a full-time contingent of a couple hundred specially trained and armed national guardsmen, with a perimeter of several hundred yards, and a no-fly zone of many miles, with a couple of nearby f-16's ready to scramble at all times, to fully protect each and every nuclear power plant. And that does nothing to protect shipments in and out.

It'd be cheaper to decommission them.

estespark 8 years, 4 months ago

I think we should all have a reactor between our furnace and hot water heater.

KsTwister 8 years, 4 months ago

It is very very rare for no wind to blow at all. Many states have them,many countries too and they generate jobs and money with them.Cheap renewable energy.Others are just plain slow to catch on. Cattle can still graze,land can be farmed and the cost? About what you will pay for a new library.

gphawk89 8 years, 4 months ago

"...as many of our soldiers in the mideast have experienced from OUR use of low yield nuclear weapons..."

Wow, we've been using nuclear weapons in the mideast? That's news to me.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

"Wow, we've been using nuclear weapons in the mideast? That's news to me."

It's called depleted uranium. If you haven't heard about it, it's because you don't want to hear about it.

gphawk89 8 years, 4 months ago

OK, maybe I'm just splitting hairs here. I'm just not sure that I'd call DU a "low yield nuclear weapon" since there's no nuclear reaction involved. More like a "no yield heavy-metal weapon". DU's more dangerous because of its chemical toxicity than its radioactivity.

staff04 8 years, 4 months ago

Prospector stated:

"The largest wind turbines made produce 750 KW in optimum conditions."

Fact: The largest wind turbine in the world in 2005 was the Enercon E-112, rated at 6 MW, which is 8 times the amount of electricity noted by prospector. Small turbines easily produce upwards of 1000 kw each, even in shielded inland conditions.

Be part of the solution--don't rely on 15 year-old technology.

Linda Endicott 8 years, 4 months ago

While the killing of birds by wind turbines might be a tragedy to some, I don't see anyone proposing that we should ban cars because of the thousands of squirrels, possums, skunks, cats, and dogs killed by them every year.

ASBESTOS 8 years, 4 months ago

"The largest wind turbine in the world in 2005 was the Enercon E-112, rated at 6 MW"

It is 4.5 MW..not 6.0, it is the largest INSTALLED,but not common. The step down is the E-66 with 1.8 MW produced.

The more common ones are the .75 to 1.0 MW models in an array. Arrays are much more efficient than one big one.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 4 months ago

The single largest component of energy independence is conservation. Easily half the electricity we use is wasted.

Christine Pennewell Davis 8 years, 4 months ago

what not in my yard?? but I had my heart set on getting rid of that pesky flood area:(

imastinker 8 years, 4 months ago

Terrorists want to kill people, right?

Why not just put these things away from lots of people. There are so many better ways to kill people fast, like vaccine resistant smallpox strains. Why would they mess with this?

Commenting has been disabled for this item.