City Commissioner Mike Rundle says if Lawrence really wants to be known as an environmentally friendly community, it should start drumming up opposition to a major coal-fired power plant complex proposed for western Kansas.
Rundle hopes to get his fellow commissioners to submit an official letter to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment opposing a nearly $5 billion project by a Kansas-based cooperative to build three power plants near Holcomb.
"I think we really have the responsibility as a city to be fostering further development of alternative energy," Rundle said, mentioning that Lawrence is part of the Sierra Club's Cool Cities program, which includes a pledge to combat global warming. "Creating these power plants in western Kansas will work directly against creating new alternative energy."
The plants, which are being proposed by a group led by Hays-based Sunflower Electric Power Corp., must receive an air quality permit from KDHE before the project can begin construction. KDHE is holding hearings across the state on the permit application. It will hold a hearing at 6 p.m. Nov. 16 in Lawrence at the Malott Room in the Kansas Union.
Rundle would like commissioners to craft a letter and approve it so that it can be presented to state regulators at the Lawrence hearing. Whether that will happen is still an open question. The item has yet to be placed on a future City Commission agenda. Mayor Mike Amyx said he's not sure he's supportive of Lawrence becoming involved in the issue.
"My personal feeling is we probably ought to worry more about what is happening here at home," Amyx said. "But we'll have to see what Commissioner Rundle brings forward."
Rundle, though, said much is at stake for the community and the rest of the state. Rundle said he was concerned that the plant would create serious environmental issues, such as increasing mercury emissions, which can cause health problems for pregnant women and young children.
The Sierra Club also has expressed opposition to the proposed plants for many of the same reasons.
But Steve Miller, a spokesman with Sunflower, said critics have a misunderstanding of the plant. Miller said the project actually will help spur wind energy projects because it involves building transmission lines to Colorado and Oklahoma. Miller said the biggest impediment to new wind-energy farms in western Kansas has been a lack of transmission lines to transmit the power to metro markets outside the state.
Miller said his company also is partnering with Kansas State University and the state's Bioscience Authority to build a unique alternative energy center in Holcomb that will include a dairy and livestock processing facility, which will produce methane that can be used in adjacent ethanol and biodiesel plants.
On the environmental questions, Miller said the plants would be using the most updated air quality systems available. He said the three new plants were expected to produce no more mercury emissions than the existing plant in Holcomb. He said federal law also would require the existing plant to be retrofitted with the new air quality equipment.
Miller also said much of the debate has centered on carbon dioxide emissions and how that contributes to global warming. But Miller said current federal and state laws don't regulate the amount of carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants.
"You're almost Satan himself if you say carbon dioxide may not contribute to global warming as much as some people think," MIller said, "but what we are saying is that if it is ever regulated, we will fully comply with any regulations that ever come forward. We're doing everything by the law with this project."
If approved, the plants are expected to come online in 2011, 2012 and 2013. They are expected to create about 2,000 construction jobs and an additional 140 new jobs to operate the plants.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
Sigmund (anonymous) says…
Not satisfied with controlling everything in NE Kansas, Rundle now wants his "vision" to include Western Kansas. I wonder if those 2,000 construction jobs and 140 new production jobs pay a living wage? Has the Bozo Business Czar done a market study? Maybe they don't need more electricity in Western Kansas? Will they take Boog dollars?
I wonder what the people 8 hours away from Lawrence in Holcolmb think? Maybe when the Merc goes out of business when the new WalMart comes in and Lawrence is broke from paying the legal fees maybe Rundle can move to Holcolmb, form a PHC and run for the Holcolmb City Commission!
lunacydetector (anonymous) says…
i read this article and my eyes started to roll. i think these progressive commissioners are giving me some sort of medical condition. maybe i should call the new england journal of medicine to report this 'rolling eyeballs' condition. then i can make that new section in the JW about lawrence making the news.
hipper_than_hip (anonymous) says…
Lawrence and it's city commissioners need to stay out of Holcomb's business.
middleoftheroader (anonymous) says…
I am from Holcomb originally, and I can tell you that if Mike Rundle ever ran for city commissioner or mayor of Holcomb he would lose by at least 3to1. I'm not saying he'd be a bad mayor but the people of Holcomb would definitely think he would. oh and btw go longhorns!!!!
KS (anonymous) says…
I guess Rundle doesn't mind watching a wind up TV or a shake em up computer. Pick your battles and this is not one. Stay out of this one.
Informed (anonymous) says…
Rundle, are you for real? Or is this yet another joke?
merrill (anonymous) says…
Steve Miller,
Did you choose western Kansas because it will be easy to pull the wool over the eyes of innocent Kansans? Have you ever put integrity and the health of citizens ahead of the Hays-based Sunflower Electric Power Corp bottom line? Why do you want to abuse your neighbors and potentially their respiratory systems?
Mr Miller YOU need to do some homework you before begin messing around with methane. Not good for the atmospere anywhere. It affects the atmosphere in general.
and I believe Steve Miller knows that. It is not just a problem for western Kansas. The exhaust from both sources drifts and drifts. Just because you cannot see it does not mean the pollution is not in the air. Yes it can affect northeastern Kansas.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:a...
On coal fired plants, Steve Miller, I believe you know those too are not good for the atmosphere.
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/a...
I challenge Steve Miller and the investors to get ahead of the game. Contact Rep. Tom Sloan to discuss using the interstate rights of way to install wind turbines and/or solar panel/collectors. The technology is ready and waiting.
KSMan (anonymous) says…
For info on the project see, www.holcombstation.coop
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Do you idiots really think that this issue is only a local Holcomb issue? Are you unaware that we are downwind from western Kansas?
The British government just issued a report saying that global warming will have an economic impact equal or greater than the Great Depression or the World Wars. The world's insurance underwriters have been understood the same for several years.
But all of that is irrelevant to you because Rundle, one of your favorite bogeymen, has proposed that the city of Lawrence do the right thing.
You pitiful, ignorant simpletons.
middleoftheroader (anonymous) says…
easy Bozo, let's not get into name calling please, i certainly understand your being upset but if you'd like us to understand your concerns please try to keep your emotions in check.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
2 issues.
1. Rundle a City Commissioner has NO businesss dictating to the State about power generation.
2. The Company that is going to build the plants here did so because KDHE is a bunch of DA's that cannot understand the basics of air emissions. The Air section just got done "pencil whipping" all the air permits that were behind.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
I wasn't namecalling-- just accurately describing.
clarkentsman (anonymous) says…
Bozo, my father always told me that when you point a finger at someone that you always have three pointing at yourself.
Do you have any idea what he meant?
blue73harley (anonymous) says…
PLC = Pretentious League of Crackpots
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Do you have any idea what he meant?"
Sorry, can't help you with your confusion. Why don't you ask your father?
riverat (Joe Hyde) says…
We've seen a proliferation of huge confined feedlot operations and pig farm sewage lagoons in western Kansas over the last two decades. We already know there's an ongoing and near-critical depletion of fossil water in the Ogallala Aquifer. The feedlot operations aggravate that impact by diverting even more surface water from nearby streams. Surface water and groundwater resources in western Kansas are being systematically degraded and polluted.
That's not enough damage apparently. Now let's pollute the air out there with...not one but THREE coal-fired power plants!
It is obvious that political, corporate and industrial interests have quietly designated western Kansas as an "environmental Free Fire Zone" -- a geographical area of our state (and our nation) they are willing to condemn to long-term ruin, to include de-populating the area, for the benefit of short-term economic gain.
Is this what we want? I know it's not what I want. There are alternatives to ruining the environment. We have only one environment; when it's gone we're gone.
It's a long look into the state's future, but I'll ask anyway. Do we want naturally arid western Kansas to be fit and healthy for a (prudent) sparse human population 500 years from today? If the answer is Yes, it's best we start protecting that area's depleted and increasingly endangered environment.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Coal plants also need huge amounts of water to operate, which makes them a really bad choice for semi-arid regions.
consumer1 (anonymous) says…
Hey mr. Rundle, you are a city commissioner, the entire state of Kansas didn't vote you "state commissioner" stick to screwing up Lawrence and leave the rest of the state alone. They already know Lawrence is a bastion of liberal screwups. Just mind your business which is screwing up Lawrence for the rest of your term.
oldgoof (anonymous) says…
Mr. Rundle's involvement will only serve to reinforce in the minds of many Kansans the stereotypes they already have of Lawrence, oft-referred to as "the Peoples Republic of Lawrence" in the Capitol halls.
..
Be they good or bad, those plants enjoy wide support in Holcomb/GC area because of the local economy...The Douglas County one is a land of plenty in comparison.
..
If Mr. Rundle wants to do something, let him take a look at the City of Lawrence's electricity consumption from its Coal generated plant and manage that... If not he is being a total hypocrite on this issue.
..
When Dolph writes his next front-page editorial wondering why the state legislature doesn't further enrich his community with more tax dollars to KU, he should remember this incident, instead of attributing it to bad KU PR.
oldgoof (anonymous) says…
Or since he seems to be doing this out of an interest in energy conservation in general, lets see some data on Lawrence citizens patterns of energy consumption, and see what we can do to control those.
..
jayhawktownie (anonymous) says…
approving this project is morally wrong.
the Stern report just issued by the British government made front page news all over the world...except in the United States where people like Steve Miller still suggest that global warming doesn't exist. if you have not read or heard about the report, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6...
educate yourself and then think about the moral implications of continuing to ignore or deny the problem.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
You make a good point, oldgoof.
But what it means is that if the city commission does make such a resolution, they should include in that resolution a call for the state to support the building of transmission lines and wind-farms in western and central Kansas. Dolph should do the same in his editorials.
pelliott (anonymous) says…
It sickens me to read the knee jerk barage of comments on any subject which mentions certain commissioners, that certain people feel hatred for. A barage of mindless really stupid remarks, personal attacks usually unrelated to the topic. The eye rolling is a really good image, head bobbing, spittle down the side of the mouth, making hatefilled comments. No embarassment or sense of responsibility, no civility in what or how you speak. You have developed a goofy hate group, a Lawrence political version of Fred Phelps feel alike political cult.
Topeka has fred and we have you. Oh ain't it great, the diversity.
I have liked some commissioners, disliked others but most have been people not feathering their own nest, presenting valid views representing different visions of guiding this community. I am glad to say, they are treated civily by the adult citizens. It is an unhealthy downright creepy behavoir pattern that is going on in these comment forums.
I wish to thank all the present comissioners for their service and efforts.
In case you guys are missing this, I am condemning your behavoir for both content and motive. If you can't remember your manners, you should not enter in adult conversations.
I considered nitpicking the logic of many of the comments, like the one that stated That Rundel suggesting a letter is Rundel dictating his will over Western kansas. That is a good example of bad writing and bad thinking. It is like saying because I say the barage of comments are hate driven drivel I am making you stop, think and find thoughtful civil ways to express yourself. I am sure that result would never even enter your mind.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Well said, pelliot.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Esq2eB--
Got any more fantasies you want to share?
packrat (anonymous) says…
I believe that the Lawrence City Commission has enough problems without bringing in ones from across the state.
conservative (anonymous) says…
Bozo, funny that you agree with pelliot since his comments pretty well describe your reaction to anything Bush.
Bottom line for me. I don't like the idea of this power plant and hope it gets rejected. However our city commission should not be involved in this topic. If Rundle wants to have his opinions on something like this be taken into account from an elected office point of view then he needs to run for a state office.
Packman (anonymous) says…
Marion is right - the electric grid is big and complex. What he doesn't mention, however, is that Colorado is on a different electric grid than Kansas - electricity generated in Col. cannot come to Kansas or vice versa. Two of the proposed units at Holcomb will have dedicated power lines built directly to Col. without any interconnection to KS. So we're exporting the electricity (like we export so many other things).
As far as closing down smaller, more polluting plants - has anybody from Sunflower said this will happen? Given specifics? I'm not aware of it.
We're also exporting our water. The Colorado utility determined that they would have more difficulty building these plants in their own state than they would here. Why? Most likely - water issues and regulatory ones. As someone else mentioned, we just settled a lawsuit costing millions of dollars to ensure that Arkansas River water would flow from Col. to KS. So now, without enough water in Col. they'll build their plants here and we'll use water that exists under our state. If the state of Colorado doesn't want the "jobs and economic development" from these plants, why should we?
Maybe because of how the wind blows - West to East (or Southwest to Northeast). Why aren't the citizens of W. KS and E. Col. more concerned about the emissions? Maybe because they're upwind?
When it comes to CO2, however, there is no upwind or downwind. Everybody but the fine people of the Western Fuels Association, the Greening Earth Society and contributers to the anti-global warming "research" of New Hope Environmental Services should be concerned about this (and I'd argue, they should too). Obviously not everyone is, but just because you're not paranoid, doesn't mean Global Climate Change isn't going to affect you.
You'd think drought-stricken W. Kansans would worry a little more about polluting their own nest, but obviously the false promise of "jobs" and "economic growth" holds a lot of sway.
75x55 (anonymous) says…
"Do we want naturally arid western Kansas to be fit and healthy for a (prudent) sparse human population 500 years from today? If the answer is Yes, it's best we start protecting that area's depleted and increasingly endangered environment."
Now we get closer to the heart of the radical/leftist viewpoint.
Has anyone been to western Kansas lately? It would have a tough time getting any more 'sparse' with it's population.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
I disagree, conservative. None of our local officials have exhibited any of the murderous, corrupt and lying behaviour that BushCo have. While I occasionally react with some emotion to that fact, the vast majority of my comments about BushCo are about their actions and policies, about which there is nothing to be complimentary.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
http://www.primezone.com/newsroom/new...
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
There goes bozo on his bus posting drive-by conclusions, waging personal attacks, spouting emotional jibberish without providing a scintilla of factual corroboration.
Godot (anonymous) says…
Unbelievable. The Rundle man has delusions of grandeur.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Are you stalking me, RA?
sourpuss (anonymous) says…
Coal-fired power plants are terrible for the environment, especially the environment of the Great Lakes and East Coast. We all live on this planet together and we all have the right and responsibility to try to prevent damage to our collective home. There are other ways to create electricity rather than burning stuff. In fact, burning things for power is very crude and we can certainly do better. I applaud anyone who sticks up for the environment, especially if it is between having a nice planet to live on, or a few people making a few more dollars.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Did you read pelliot's post, Godot? She was talking about you.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Don't flatter yourself bozo. Although it is mildly amusing you equate, albeit in your own narcicistic way, a call for factual corroboration as "stalking". While there is a famine of factual support on your posts, you do have a sense of humor. I'll give credit where credit is due.
bd (anonymous) says…
Lets see:
1. control city
2. control county
3. control rural water districts
4. control power suppliers
5 what next!!!!!!!!!!!!!
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
What, exactly, do you wish corroborated, RA?
Godot (anonymous) says…
This is not the end of the over-reaching of the PLC three. Before the inevitable demise of their reign in April 2007, they will waste the time and money of Lawrence taxpayers to support their leftwing organizations and agendas.
I would not be surprised if they soon draft a resolution to have Lawrence secede from the US on the grounds that the US is evil. The name of the city will be changed to Larryville, the international capitol of the global network of nations that comprise Sorosland, and the PLC will rule as a not-so-benevolent dictatorship.
Andini (anonymous) says…
PLC = Pretty Lame Commision
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Tell us what is on that "leftwing" agenda, Godot. Let's see a list, and explain why each of those items is "leftwing."
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Look bozo, I'm trying to help you out here because I see real potential in your skill of rhetoric. However, I am led to believe you fail to understand the basic elements of making an argument and instead substitute those basic elements with circular conclusions, name calling and personal attacks. My suggestion is to find a good source on crafting an argument and thoroughly study it. You really could be a masterful arguer if you got the basic elements down, i.e. premise (which would include a specific factual corroboration), premise, premise, acceptable inference from prior premises, etc, therefore, conclusion or conclusions. I'm really not being condescending here. I sincerely believe you could have more persuasive arguments and therefore add more meaningful insight by just adding a little bit of form to your substance. "Though our friends be near and dear to us, we have a sacred duty to the truth."
Yours truly,
RA
homechanger (anonymous) says…
Well finally Rundle TUTU is making headlines again. Since the PLC is really controlled by the likes of Melinda H. and Steve R. and their ilk, you can bet TUTU did not form this thought on his own.
Rundle is and has been pretty ineffective on the commish. He votes only with Melinda/steve/plc agenda in mind. At least Booger tries to appear to think outside of the plc box once in awhile. Lets show the bozo commish the door in April. Rundles career commish position is over. Hope the merc gives him a raise.
tkmoore (anonymous) says…
All I can say is next time get out and vote and stop this.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Gee, RA, you're making me all verklempt, (but now I know you really are stalking me.)
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Did Marion tell you that, homechanger?
roger_o_thornhill (anonymous) says…
Coal power in Kansas is like Nuclear power in Iran. Neither makes sense unless you look under the surface. Both have other indigenous potential sources of power, but want something else for some reason.
Just so everyone knows, most coal comes to Kansas from Wyoming. The wind grows here naturally.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Like I said bozo, don't flatter yourself. I'm merely making a kind attempt to improve the substance of your posts so you can be the best that you can be. There is something great about engaging in real debate, even if one disagrees with the other's point of view. You really could be a masterful arguer with a little modification. Seriously, I am being totally sincere.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
RA
Flattered I'm not, and I remain undecided as to whether or not you are sincere.
Do you really believe honest debate is possible on this forum? I view it as stricty for entertainment, but if you wish it to be more, I suggest your comments would be better directed at some of your "conservative" comrades.
monkeywrench1969 (anonymous) says…
Bozo...people will complain about everything. YOu can't please everyone especially you.
We need to stay out of others business and fix our problems here first. As far as Global Warming and the next natural disaster. Here is what they were saying int he 70's. So which is it...Are you a pawn in the someones political agenda?
A Newsweek story from 1975 about the coming climate change:
It has been more than 30 years since Newsweek magazine warned readers of what it called "ominous signs that the earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically" and a "drastic decline in food production."
Now Newsweek's Web site is offering an explanation for what it calls a "spectacularly wrong" prediction - along with the one in 1992 that said a new Ice Age could be triggered by the greenhouse effect. It says the stories weren't journalistically inaccurate - they were just premature.
And it cites a British scientist who says fears of global cooling never approached the widespread scientific consensus that supports the greenhouse effect today. Still, Newsweek says it's just as well that one of the possible solutions from the 1975 story was not followed - that we pour soot over the arctic ice cap to help it melt.
Original Story Pretty alarmist:
http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"We need to stay out of others business and fix our problems here first."
It is our business, and it is our problem here.
nbnozzy (anonymous) says…
It would be very kind of rationalanimal to unbunch bozo's panties and give it an 11 o'clock feeding to soothe it's temper.
Coal plant in Kansas? Why not. Let's use the USA's natural resources instead of relying on foreign countries to provide us with our needs.
And let's build a million windmills across the state to harness that power too.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
bozo, you're truly a skeptic as you should be. I am sincere. Take my suggestions under consideration though, and I am confident you will arise a greater rhetorician as a result.
homechanger (anonymous) says…
No Bozo, I just have a great ability to remember. Plus having been privy to much inside info its easy to see who controls his strings.
oldgoof (anonymous) says…
Bozo:"...if the city commission does make such a resolution, they should include in that resolution a call for the state to support the building of transmission lines and wind-farms ..."
Goof: The bottom line is public $$, so the resolution impliedly must also call for public support for the public investments from Lawrence taxpayers.
My point is don't point the finger at SW Kansas or Colorado until *we in Lawrence* clean up our own electrical power consumption patterns and sources.
.
.
Packman: Your point about the nations two-grid system which is demarcated in part by the colo-ks line is one not understood by most, and is entirely correct.
Your comment: "You'd think drought-stricken W. Kansans would worry a little more about polluting their own nest" is a little paternalistic. Those people are not stupid, and they have children and aspirations too. But they do not live in the land of milk-and-honey growth like Lawrence. They are trying to economically survive while they pay taxes to support your economic engine, the sacred university..
..
Lawrence citizens and commissioners have absolutely no moral or policy standing to discuss this this issue until they address their own situation: continuing to suck electricity in increasing per-capita volumes, in large part from the coal fired plant in their own backyard. To do so otherwise is preaching economic apartheid.
.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Again, you have a valid point, oldgoof, but if these plants were being built here in Lawrence, they would just as bad an idea, and that idea would have both regional and global implications.
I think it would be appropriate for residents of any affected locale, and their local representatives, to officially lodge their protest over that bad idea.
gccs14r (anonymous) says…
Continuing as we have been guarantees disaster. We don't have the resources to satisfy every whim of every human on this planet. We must make fewer humans and teach the ones already here how to live with less. If we don't do this ourselves, the planet will do it for us.
Packman (anonymous) says…
oldgoof:
I didn't say the folks of Western Kansas were stupid, but do think that this is an issue of the tragedy of the commons - that for them, the gain of having a coal plant in their back yard (jobs, tax revenue) exceeds any of the negative stuff - such as mercury and CO2 emissions. They're just adding a little bit more of each to the atmosphere, right?
I don't blame Western Kansans for thinking this is a good idea, but I also don't think that the rest of us should just leave it to them to decide since all of us are effected - even we Lawrence-based folk.
Any mercury that is emitted from Holcomb will deposit somewhere downwind. Even if it doesn't land in Lawrence, it will enter our lakes and rivers and fish and be yet one MORE reason not to recreate on the Kaw and other bodies of water.
If we as a global society decide to get serious about atmospheric CO2, then we need to focus on local (regional/state) issues, too. Building more coal plants right now in light of what we know about global climate change is irresponsible. Citizens of Lawrence - including Mike Rundle - have every reason to care and speak out on this issue. We live in the commons and are/will be effected when it is sullied.
Further right now there is a rush to build more coal plants and it doesn't match sudden, new demand for electricity. It does appear that the goal is to build these plants before any carbon-limits are mandated by the government (and many in the industry think these limits - whether as a carbon tax or other mechanism) will come. In Texas, the utility TXU is planning to build 11 coal fired plants. In Kansas there are 5 units planned in Kansas and 1 on across the border in Missouri for a net gain of 3,000 MW of new coal (the Lawrence Energy Center is around 500 MW). This is around a 60% increase in KS coal capacity and a 30% increase in KS overall electrical capacity.
Nbnozzy - more coal-fired power plants will not relieve one barrel of foreign oil. Oil is used for motor fuels (and increasingly less for electricity) and coal is used almost exclusively for industrial purposes including electricity generation.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
The sad thing is that our state and federal officials are so derelict in their duties that it requires folks in Rundle's position to show some leadership.
monkeywrench1969 (anonymous) says…
Bozo
30 years ago they thought Global cooling was the end of the world.
No one can agree on what is wrong witht he climate. SOme of their original claims was the world was cooling and we were at the height of our eco-unfriendly industrialization.
Read the article. They were wrong about global cooling but all the Reps and Dems started using it in their political agendas how many of these people do you really trust to have accurate info on any subject. You seem to be suspect of everything except when it fits your agenda or opinion.
Stay out of Holcombs business.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
It must gall you that nearly everyone who knows anything about the subject of global warming disagrees with you, monkeywrench.
Or is your name really Quixote?
packrat (anonymous) says…
"Coal plant in Kansas? Why not. Let's use the USA's natural resources instead of relying on foreign countries to provide us with our needs.
And let's build a million windmills across the state to harness that power too."
I find myself actually agreeing with someone.
If I had more time, I would research the "air quality permit " the plants must receive.
Since Lawrence is part of the "Sierra Club's Cool Cities program" why doesn't our enlightened commission turn off the air conditioning in all city/public buildings. OR better yet, totally outlaw a/c to conserve electricity and mandate thermostat settings of no higher than 55 degrees during the winter. That would save a considerable amount of energy.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
RiverRat;
"We've seen a proliferation of huge confined feedlot operations and pig farm sewage lagoons in western Kansas over the last two decades. We already know there's an ongoing and near-critical depletion of fossil water in the Ogallala Aquifer. The feedlot operations aggravate that impact by diverting even more surface water from nearby streams. Surface water and groundwater resources in western Kansas are being systematically degraded and polluted."
I agree with everything you state, and the sentiment of your posting as well, however this statement is wrong:
''We already know there's an ongoing and near-critical depletion of fossil water in the Ogallala Aquifer."
That aquifer is NOT a *fossil water* aquifer, that would be the Dakota Sandstone formation BELOW the Ogallala, which cannot recharge. The Ogallala is an aquifer that can recharge IF Colorado releases more water.
THis business with Coal Fired PP's is a big issue. Western Kansas is already under the gun with irrigation demands on the water, then the *new* demand of producing corn and ethanol, and now a coal fired PP. I think we need the power, but the limiting factor is always gonna be.....the WATER!
I would rather see 3 Nuke plants in Western Kansas. Very good location for them, not seismicly active, security can be had by maximum visibility. The limiting factor again is ....the WATER!
It is NOT air quality. WIth the very low pollution levels from Kansas, and the prevailing winds, there is no way for pollutants to get up to the levels.
That is the sole reason that KDHE *pencil whipped* all the air permits for corps that they were behind on.
But Rundle needs a wake up call. Just whom does he think he is?
I do like the illegal alien powered Very Large Treadwheel Array power plant design. At least we get more economic benefit, and there seems to be an unlimited source as long as dictators in other countries fail to treat their citizenry as well as the US of A does, and then exports them to us. We might as well use 'em!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BOZO:
"30 years ago they thought Global cooling was the end of the world."
That is a fact. In 1978 the Geophysical Conference was predicting a Global Cooling just like today's idiots are. That at the time was because Buffalo got 2 years of Heavy snow, and then got 58 inches I believe in 1977-78.
If you want Global Greenhouse emission reduction, you then must vote foe Nuke PP's.
Can't have your electricity and no bother BTW.
Wake UP!
oldgoof (anonymous) says…
Bozo:" but if these plants were being built here in Lawrence, they would just as bad an idea"
That is my point. When Bozo and Rundle need to clean up their side of the street. But until they tackle Lawrence energy consumption and sources, their prattle just adds to the CO2 problem.
BuddhaDude (anonymous) says…
Monkeywrench is right about one thing, someone will always complain.
Coal power plants smell.
Oil - we are running out and depending on foriegn suppliers.
Wind - they are so big and might kill a bird.
Hydro - a fish might die and the lake will silt up in 300 years.
Nuclear - where's the spent fuel going and Three Mile.
Solar - Ugly!.
They all cause the global warming.
They all have good and bad points. I don't know why coal was chosen, but I hope they did a throrough study to see that it was best.
Personally, I would have the coal plants. I also want all state buildings (the non historic ones) to have solar panels on on the roof and a small wind generator on each corner of the building.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"But until they tackle Lawrence energy consumption and sources,"
And what makes you so certain that they are not?
snowWI (anonymous) says…
I think it is an excellent idea to protect the people of Kansas from these huge electricity and energy companies. The state needs to take a stand and demand that the new transmission lines be built for wind farms only. It is morally wrong to be building coal plants when global warming is a reality, and will only get worse. We need to be leaders in innovative technologies in Kansas, not backwards thinking.
I applaud Mike Rundle for taking a stand against the coal plants because he knows that only 140 pemanent jobs would be created. Wind farms and other froms of enegy generate far more jobs while generating far less pollution and carbon dioxide. We need to protect all the citizens in this state from businesses like Sunflower that will export >90% of the power produced at these plants. Rundle is a leader and is protecting Kansas people from a clear lack of regulations that big industries take advantage of like Sunflower.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Another fact is that other states have a carbon cap, which further helps to diversify the types of energy that is produced. Kansas does not have a carbon cap and is not invested enough in wind energy like other states are. If you ever travel through rural areas in Iowa and Minnesota many new wind farms are going up all the time, and providing many new permanent jobs.
I hope that a letter does get crafted by the city commissioners because these coal plants have a local, national, and global effect on the environment. Miller needs to get with the times and realize that almost everyone believes that global warming is occuring. Once again, he proves how backward the thinking continues to be in Kansas about our future energy needs. Our future electricity needs to be generated with almost anything but coal.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Patriotman,
I do not appreciate your nasty comments. I am originally from Wisconsin and love winter weather.
You must be someone who works for the big electricity/energy companies and is trying to shove these plants down the public's throat. The citizens are far smarter than you think.
Wind is already becoming king in Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, and many other states. The majority of all new projects that are being built to generate electricity in these states are wind farms.
Coal will only be king for those who refuse to think outside the box and realize that wind energy technology advances everyday and becomes more efficient.
homechanger (anonymous) says…
I hope the Commission crafts a letter stating their dedication to lowering property taxes, bringing more jobs to lawrence and improving our infrastructure, here in lawrence.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Rundle for supreme commander of the universe. That way he won't have anyone in his way to solve any problem facing the inhabitants of the universe. And oh, by the way, you guys that think you have figured out the complexities of global warming, the earth prior to fossil fuel emissions has undergone significant periods of climatic temperature fluxuations. So before you hoist a screaming Al Gore over your shoulders you might want to consider that science has historically shown a tendency to be fallible (e.g. no, not even one, major or even significant hurricane struck the U.S. this year despite all the doom and gloom talk by Al Gore and his enviro-wacko followers following Hurricane Katrina). Before you hemp clad posters jump all over this, I will fully stipulate that the global temperatures are changing. But, the precise cause being a foregone conclusion is not something that science has adequately explained based on the very major flaw that the earth has undergone such warming and cooling fluxuations in the past. Studies even suggest a 10 year cycle of cooling and warming. No one seems to want to acknowledge that point. Lastly, I would rather not have a coal plant in Western Kansas, but look around folks, the Sierra Club is going to protest a nuclear plant, any hydro-plants, and everything else except means that don't meet the energy needs of Kansans. So, it seems to stand to reason that we meet the needs of immediate energy demands while we dig around for alternative sources. Furthermore, a big line of gigantic windmills out in Western Kansas would look absolutely hideous and detract from the sublte beauty of the high prairie. Anyone that has driven on I-80 across Wyoming knows how hideous these things are.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
The battle is only starting to heat up. I am sure there is going to be a huge turnout at the meeting on November 16. Both sides are going to be battling it out with the KDHE.
With all this anger on the forum, I am looking forward to my Wisconsin vacation. Tempers are already flaring up, and the meeting is still a couple of weeks away.
Patriotman- no offense taken....
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Rationalanimal,
I would much rather look at a large wind farm than a outdated coal plant. Wind energy provides farm more jobs per terawatt hour than coal ever will. All of the wind turbines need routine maintenance, and this provides jobs for many people in the rural counties of Iowa, Minnesota, Texas, and other states.
Also, wind farms do not generate any pollutants or carbon dioxide which is a good thing. We need to be innovative and counter some of the effects of increased carbon dioxide around the globe. China has been building coal plants like crazy, and they are a developing country. The United States needs to become more innovative with the wind technology we already have and use it to produce electricity.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
snow, we agree on the basic premise that we need alternative energy. But, as long as were looking for the end all be all, let's find something that isn't an eyesore viewable from space. My general predisposition is work with the resources we already have and mitigate or eliminate (if possible) its environmental impact. The US is literally sitting on a unexhaustable supply of coal. But, I also share your immediate concerns of building a coal facility in W. Kansas. I personally prefer a pristine landscape as I shoot pheasants out there.
dacs23 (anonymous) says…
"but what we are saying is that if it is ever regulated, we will fully comply with any regulations that ever come forward. We're doing everything by the law with this project."
Way to be proactive there Steve and look out for the people. You will do it if and only when you're told to. Is that really supposed to be a pro environment argument.
As for Rundle sticking his nose out there didn't is state that KDHE is holding hearings across the state on the permit application. Seems to me there looking for input.
Long live the Peoples Republic of Lawrence
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Rundle for supreme commander of the universe. "
"let's find something that isn't an eyesore viewable from space."
This space-alien theme you have going it quite interesting.
Is that an example of how I could improve my debating skills?
Packman (anonymous) says…
Rationalanimal, just curious, what energy sources are you referring to that are visible from space?
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
ah, bozo, nice to have you back in your traditional fine form, circular conclusions, name calling and personal attacks. But, like always, very little, if any, substance to add otherwise. Although, I am heartened you find my post "quite interesting". There is hope in the heartland after all.
monkeywrench1969 (anonymous) says…
Budaha
I have seen specific people argue every excuse you listed for each form of energy.
Bozo is one of these complainers. Quick to point out the negative without offering a solution. Before you shoot back. these are things you need to think about when you try to implement a plan:
What's your budget (does it come yearly or one time payment)
WHat happenes when the cost exceeds the original estimate to implement.
How are you going to budget for repairs (Many alternative resources are expensive to implement and expensive to repair due to supply and demand-its a speciality product)
Will the supply of power legitimately meet the true demand (without requiring people to conserve this new alternative energy source because they can't keep things running- We don't want all of the people here without energy and other resources to like those people in Iraq who are without now due to the War and would have been better under Saddam)
Also will these alternative energy source run everything we need run like the systems that generate power, to produce and transport, water eletricity, gas and other things many need for day to day life...lets also think about those with special needs who are in hospitals, retirement facilities and special care facilities who use a lot of energy for specialized equipment for their day to day life...can we truly count on alternative resources who have had a track record of causing brown outs in California...
Lets research the alternative methods while using the current methods until we know the alternative resources can be counted on.
BuddhaDude (anonymous) says…
Marion. Now that you put WalMart in the mix, I'm buying their stock. Wal Mart Power & Electricity, I can see it now.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Sunflower is only interested in making maximum profits for there shareholders. Steve knows that there is no carbon cap regulations and Kansas, and is getting around that little loop-hole. Carbon dioxide emissions keep increasing while the US takes little action. Well, have to be the innovaters and show the developing world that we can advance beyond coal plants.
Steve must be watching a lot of Fox News and going to junkscience.com in order to believe that global warming is not occuring.
oldgoof (anonymous) says…
Bozo: "And what makes you so certain that they are not?"
Goof: Ok. I can play Bozo's level of debate: And what makes you so certain that they have?
Jeeeez Bozo... I now understand others' posts here regarding your discourse style.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
monkeywrench1969, It is now time to enter the 21st Century. Wind Farms will continue to provide an ever increasing share in our energy mix. Every large scale wind-farm project that is built in Iowa or Minnesota provides enough electricity to power 50,000 homes. And, these wind farms are being built all the time to serve an ever increasing amount of people. This energy has already been proven reliable, because the wind farms are built in locations that are climatologically favorable to have strong average wind speeds throughout the year.
Western Kansas has some of the strongest average wind speeds in the entire country, but lacks the necessary transmission line infrastructure.
Sunflower only wants to increase there bottom line by building transmission lines to Colorado, and then export 92% of that electricity generated at the proposed plant to other states. The proposed plants would be the largest new sources of carbon dioxide in the country. That is why most people in Kansas oppose the plants.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
The alternative energy center that is proposed along with the coal plants is a disgrace. Methane is a very potent greenhouse gas, and is worse than carbon dioxide. Ethanol and biodiesel plants are also the wrong energy choices for our future. Ethanol and biodiesel plants need to use a lot of water in order to operate. The Ogallala aquifer can not handle these extra demands. There simply is not enough water.
Hopefully, with a new change in administration, carbon dioxide will be a regulated pollutant. Until then, we have to stop these proposed coal plants.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Posted by Packman (anonymous) on November 1, 2006 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Rationalanimal, just curious, what energy sources are you referring to that are visible from space?"
********************************************
For starters, a small hydrogen energy source we on earth like to call the "sun". Just for FYI, its also visible to the naked eye from the earth. Any more questions?
snowWI (anonymous) says…
The new transmission lines that would be built in Colorado and Oklahoma will only benefit Sunflower, and not rural landowners. Many rural landowners in Texas have leased their land to wind energy comapnies, and have enjoyed a fianancial windfall as a result of the wind farm projects. The transmission lines will not benefit Kansas, as nearly all the electricity generated at the proposed plants will be exported.
In summary: a few permanent jobs generated, millions of tons of carbon dioxide generated, and increasing profits for a large electricity company. the people of kansas deserve wind power now, before it is too late.
bd (anonymous) says…
As long as Oklahoma BLOWS and Nebraska SUCKS, wind generators should be used to produce power here in Kansas!
Shelby (anonymous) says…
bd = comic genius........joke of the day
I'm honestly unsure about my "position" on this...I can clearly see both sides of it.
As far as Rundle getting involved, I don't think it's a big deal at all...sure, he should focus on the here and now with regard to lawrence ks, but according to one line-of-thinking he *is*...since we're downwind, etc.
As far as the smokescreen tactic suggested by Marion...that is well within the realm of possibility. But I've met Mike and he's a nice guy. Not sure I could see him as the dirty politician type...
Packman (anonymous) says…
RationalAnimal: "For starters, a small hydrogen energy source we on earth like to call the "sun". Just for FYI, its also visible to the naked eye from the earth. Any more questions?"
So if you stare at it long enough, it becomes an eye sore. Guess that makes sense.
Still don't understand how that relates to your 1:49 post, however, unless the sun's reflection off Wyoming strip mines and Canadian tar sands operations hurts the ol' peepers.
hk45 (anonymous) says…
Western Kansas needs every bit of help it can get with their economy. I really believe Rundle and the City of Lawrence needs to stay out of Western Kansas business and focus on how to handle Lawrence.
Rationalanimal (anonymous) says…
Shelby,
I'm with you, a bit undecided and can see both sides. Being said, there seems to be a trend of Rundle and the other fab-5 expanding their duties as city commissioners. For example, the fab-5 recently took a taxpayer paid trip to D.C. to "lobby Congress". In another example, the fab-5 have made attempts to influence KDOT to not put an I-70 exit in Eudora. In another example, the fab-5 are sending letters to KDOT regarding the K-10 trafficway. In another example, the fab-5 is contemplating drafting a resolution condemning the war in Iraq. etc, etc, etc.
My problem is, the duty of a city commissioner is to make decisions that immediately affect this community. What immediately affects this community at a certain level is admittedly arguable. But, lobbying Congress (while their at recess no less), drafting resolutions regarding international politics and conflict, etc, etc seem to fall way outside that domain. So, I take this in a broader array of actions that are outside the duty of making decisions that immediately affect this community. If Rundle truly wants to have a larger scale impact, and the other fab-5 for that matter, then they need to obtain an office higher than what they hold, i.e. supreme commmander of the universe, although they might want to try something a little lighter like state representative, governor, congressman, senator, or President of the United States of America. Otherwise, they are being distracted from what they were elected to do. In an era of unprecedented growth, the current fab-5's gawking over other communities, agencies, national and international politics serves to draw their attention away from what's going on at home. That stands to hurt Lawrence more than it stands to help us.
ilovelucy (anonymous) says…
Shelby: I know the man as well, and used to think he was nice. That's before I saw (up close) how he double talks to his constituents.
He is soft spoken and dances a mean clog dance. But he talks out of both sides of his trap. He also whines and tends to lay blame on innocent parties.
I think this ploy is to get his name out in public again, before he announces his tired candidacy yet again.
I guess one way that I have a minute ounce of respect for him is that he continues to try to serve the community. Why anyone would want to put up with the crap that is stirred up every day is beyond me.
What a fool.....
monkeywrench1969 (anonymous) says…
"Every large scale wind-farm project that is built in Iowa or Minnesota provides enough electricity to power 50,000 homes."
How many climate perfect areas are there in each indivdual state which would allow for the US to totally go WInd power. Not enough.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
monkeywrench1969, The high plains region is an excellent place to put large-scale wind farms because of the consistantly high average wind speeds found in the area. The high plains area of Western Kansas has some of the most reliable winds in the entire country. This area has the potential for many large-scale wind projects that could power unthinkable amounts of homes and businesses. Kansas could export this electricity to other states while generating no pollution or carbon dioxide.
Sunflower, on the other hand, only wants to build transmission lines in Colorado and Oklahoma so that it can export electricity to other states. What needs to happen is that the transmission line infrastructure needs to be built and constructed first, and then we can analyze our options. Right now, Kansas does not need to generate electricity that is not needed in our state.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"Jeeeez Bozo... I now understand others' posts here regarding your discourse style."
You're the one making an argument based on an assumption (what is your basis for that assumption?)
Perhaps you need to join RA in being more substantive in your own arguments rather than complaining about mine.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Actually SnowWI it is the Kansas Flint Hills that the best area in Kansas. The rest is fair to midland.
http://www.kcc.state.ks.us/energy/ksw...
An 8 meg file of wind resource in Kansas. Not validated by the US DOE
snowWI (anonymous) says…
asbestos,
Yes, everyone realizes that the Flint Hills is a superior area to produce wind energy. However, to be a leader in wind energy we need to develop the necessary transmission line grid in the Western counties where they need the jobs the most. Many of these rural Western counties are in sharp decline and would benefit greatly from the many new jobs large-scale wind farms would provide. T
his website shows the new projects that are proposed and already existing wind farms. The transmission line grid infrastructure is also shown. Notice how we need to add more transmission lines in the Western counties in order to build large-scale wind farms in the future.
http://www.kansasenergy.org/documents...
Godot (anonymous) says…
Marion wrote :"Don't you people understand that Hizzonerr Ex-Mayor Rundle has issued this pronouncement SOLELY to draw attention AWAY from the Wal Mart debacle?"
Brilliant, Marion, as usual. My hat if off to you.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"Miller said his company also is partnering with Kansas State University and the state's Bioscience Authority to build a unique alternative energy center in Holcomb that will include a dairy and livestock processing facility, which will produce methane that can be used in adjacent ethanol and biodiesel plants."
Once again, the proposed coal plants are not enough to satisfy Sunflower. They will build the "alternative energy center" that will suck even more water from the Ogallala Aquifer than was previously used for other projects. That mitigates the whole purpose of the alternative energy center. Also, methane has been proven to be a much more lethal greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. The thinking from Sunflower could not be more backwards. Every move they make is economically, environmentally, and morally wrong for the future of Kansas.
Godot (anonymous) says…
Sorry. My hat IS off to you.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
The city of Lawrence has every right to be involved in the case against Sunflower. The prevailing winds during most of the year come from the south and west through the state of Kansas. These proposed coal plants would still dump mercury, sulfur dioxide, and radiation over the entire state of Kansas. Therefore, the highest concentrations of poisonous chemicals and mercury will most likely be found in northeast Kansas. In the future, no one will probably eat any fish that comes from any body of water in the whole region because the mercury contamination risk will be to high.
none2 (anonymous) says…
This really makes no sense to me. Why can't they build more wind generators and punt the coal plants. I know all about Western Kansas as I grew up there. There is no coal out there, but there is PLENTY of wind. Why they cannot justify putting more transmission lines out there for wind power without adding a coal power plant is something I just don't understand. Likewise, as one person pointed out, coal power plants require WATER. Where are they going to get all this water? The Ogallala Aquifer is drying up. If you plan on getting water from the Arkansas River around there, then we better start blowing up dams in Colorado because otherwise most of what comes out of that riverbed is SAND. Colorado probably won't be very interested in this power plant. It may be nearer them than Nebraska or Oklahoma, but Colorado is on a different grid (western) and there are few interconnects between them and Kansas's grid (part of the eastern).
FYI, there are three primary grids in the US: Eastern, Western, Texas. Here you can see maps:
http://www.solcomhouse.com/uspowergid...
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim, Mercury concentrations in the any lakes or other bodies of water would increase if the new coal power plants were approved. Even with modern technology coal plants emit mercury into the atmosphere. Remember, the proposed plants would be the largest new source of carbon dioxide in the United States.
none2, You are right that the transmission line infrastructure in Western Kansas is not very sufficient right now. However, Sunflower only wants to build transmission lines to other states to export even more electricity out of Kansas.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Posted by Pilgrim (anonymous) on November 2, 2006 at 4:20 a.m.
"Man, Chicken Little has been very, very busy."
no pilgrim, i am exposing all of the facts against Sunflower, as stated in this article and previous articles. The fact of the matter is that these propose plants effect Kansas, the United States, and the world. Global circulation patterns also distribute these pollutants and carbon dioxide around the world as well.
Many climate studies have shown that global warming will likely lead to a warmer and drier Kansas. Sunflower is part of this problem by proposing plants that emit millions of tons of carbon dioxide every year. The public must force Sunflower to build more transmission lines that will serve to build new wind farms and not coal plants.
gccs14r (anonymous) says…
I don't care what it costs, keep the second Sino-Mart out of Lawrence. As for the coal plants, the U.S. already dumps 48 tons of mercury in the air each year from its existing plants. It's unconscionable to add to that total on purpose.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"Rundle would like commissioners to craft a letter and approve it so that it can be presented to state regulators at the Lawrence hearing."
This letter be generated soon by the commissioners if the state of Kansas has any chance of keeping Sunflower from getting the permit approved. If the permit is approved by the KDHE than there will prbably be a legal battle between Sunflower and the Sierra Club. Luckily, someone is out there to protect Kansans from large electricity companies that generate very few jobs over the long run in rural Kansas.
Godot (anonymous) says…
"Western Kansas needs every bit of help it can get with their economy. I really believe Rundle and the City of Lawrence needs to stay out of Western Kansas business and focus on how to handle Lawrence."
I've changed my mind. They should start meddling in other cities' business. I hope it commands 100% of their attention, at least until April.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Does that air that you breath, the water that you drink and the climate you live in belong to Holcomb, Godot?
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Godot, the citizens of Kansas and the United States need to be protected from 3 proposed coal plants that emit mercury, radiation, and large amounts of carbon dioxide. The citizens of Kansas need the help of Rundle and other commissioners to draft a letter to be presented to the KDHE at the November 16 meeting so that all sides of the issue are represented. We need all the help we can get to convince the KDHE not to approve Sunflower's permit.
KSMan (anonymous) says…
Looks like this proposal addresses mercury well. See http://www.holcombstation.coop/Enviro...
Godot (anonymous) says…
Where in the charter of the City of Lawrence does it say that the city commission is authorized to involve the citizenry of Lawnrece in advocay of statewide, nationwide, and international policy?
If this point is not addressed in the city charter, it should be, and soon.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
KSMan, The proposal might address the mercury problem, but it will never address the carbon dioxide emissions that the plants generate. We would have to remove up to 2 million cars from the road just to compensate for the increase in carbon dioxide.
Also, the mercury concentrations across the state will increase because of the prevailing winds from west to east. This will still occur even with more stringent regulations.
These proposed plants would retard the growth of wind energy in Kansas and in other states. We need the transmission line infrastructure to be built now, and not down the road.
KSman, you sound like you work for an electricity or energy company because you are always trying to put these proposed plants in a good light. Once again, if you look at the facts you will find that wind farms provide far more permanent jobs than coal plants.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"If this point is not addressed in the city charter, it should be, and soon."
Yea, Godot, you should get on that, and soon.
"The Sierra Club and other enviro-Nazis"
I hear they've even taken up waterboarding to carry out their nefarious agenda.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Wow, Pilgrim and Bozo have such hatred for the Sierra Club. Your statements do not suprise me in the least. If it wasn't for the Sierra Club there would probably be hundreds of coal plants being built everywhere without any kind of regard for environmental protection, or regulations on any type of polluting industries.
Pilgrim, the wind turbines that they build now have very little chance of killing any birds at all. Advances in technology and design of the wind turbines is happening quickly, and other states have far more wind farms in operation than Kansas does.
"The Sierra Club and other enviro-Nazis are working as hard as possible to degenerate the economy to the point where we'll all be back to living in mud huts and riding horses (assuming they don't ban those because of all the horse excrement that would be generated)."
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
"Renewable Portfolio System"
That sounds like a scam.
I think a nuke plant or 3 would be best for Kansas,... and much more long term jobs than WInd farms. Much more power generation too.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
It was sarcasm, snowWI.
RE- Nukes
Uranium supplies are finite, and take a good deal of fossil fuels to mine them (leaving behind quite a mess from the process) and transport them to nuke power plants. Once that uranium has been processed and expended as fuel, large quantities of permanently highly toxic radioactive material are produced, and there is and will not be any means of safely transporting and storing it anywhere.
Wind, on the other hand, will last forever, and produces little in the way of pollution.
wheatridge (anonymous) says…
Hey Mikey, how green is that big apple computer you use every week, and you want to talk about what's good for the enviornment, and how much do the folks who assemble it make, and where is it assembled, and what's done with all the toxins used to produced uprocessor based electronics?????
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim, The renewable portfolio system is a reality in at least 20 states across the country. The system lays out requirements saying that a certain percentage of the states electricity has to be generated from renewable sources. The reality is this system has proven to be very effective at increasing the total percentage of electricity that is generated from renewables, including wind. The future energy needs for Kansas should not include coal because we have not even developed our transmission line infrastructure network to lay the ground work for future wind farm projects. You need to travel more and see all the new wind farms they keep building in the states near Kansas. You might not like to look at the wind turbines, but they do not generate any emissions or carbon dioxide. Coal is a 19th century energy not a 21st century solution to meet electric demand.
Asbestos, your statement is also correct. Any power source other than coal has the potential to generate a much larger number of permanent jobs. Sunflower's project is only about short-term gain and greed. This project will provide very few permanent jobs that Western Kansas needs.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim, NO the Renewable Portfolio System is not a scam because it has allowed a greater expansion of wind farms to be built, encouraging greater job growth in rural farm counties. I would much rather have states mandate increasing the percentage of electricity generated from wind power than have more coal plants built. That is where you are wrong. The states that do not have the Renewable Portfolio System have even fewer jobs in the rural counties than the states that have already adopted the system. If you want to look at some population figures by county in Kansas go to quickfacts.census.gov. It shows that many rural Kansas counties are losing population at ever faster rates. This is why we need to create new jobs in larger numbers of rural counties by building wind farms.
The states that are leading the way in generating rural jobs through wind power are Texas and Iowa.
If we let the free market economy dominate everything in the US in the energy sector than the electricity and energy companies would likely take control of all the decision making, and supress newer technologies. Sunflower is an example of an electricity comapany that does not really care about the long-term effects that coal power plants have on the population or the world.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim, I was agreeing with Asbestos statement that other forms of energy would create more jobs than coal plants will. I was NOT agreeing with Asbestos statement that the Renewable Portfolio System is a scam. I never said that I did not trust capitalists. The people who I do not trust is Sunflower Electric because they are clearly taking advantage of our lack of regulations compared to other states. They are also clearly taking advantage of the citizens of this state by laying out the transmission line network to export 92% of the electricity generated at these proposed plants to other states. I am sure most people would agree with me on that point.
This is why I believe that the Renewable Portfolio Standard should be adopted across all states. This would create greater demand for newer large-scale wind farms that are very efficent, while lessening demand to build out-dated coal plants that have no available technology to capture carbon dioxide.
This is an interesting article highlighting all of the previous points that I have mentioned:
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/re...
Another article citing huge investments in a rural Iowa county for a new wind farm. I believe the project has already gotten approval. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2...
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Another article has just been released today, and the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are at the highest levels ever recorded. Kansas does not need to contribute more carbon dioxide to a growing worldwide problem. The United States can not continue to operate like a developing country by building more coal plants.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/unwmoclim...
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"The market potential for wind also depends on the cost. The cost of producing wind power has fallen by as much as 90 percent since 1980. By 2010, electricity from new wind power projects will be cheaper than electricity from new conventional power plants, according to the DOE."
This factual evidence from the DOE was taken from this website: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/re...
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
For all you wanting to oppose this project you may want to read this:
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/busi...
Remember that $500 million "bioscience money bill the KD legislature passed. Supposed to go to something like the Bio Sciences, but it appears to have been diverted to the energy and agriculture lobbyeys. Am I the only one to catch these scandals and misappropriations?????
Energy from *beef tallow* (from the packing plants) and from the *methane* (cow flatulence) and *ethanol production* (corn and water).
This is a specials interest (agriculture) and buzzword free for all and will probably pass. This program will
1. end energy dependance
2. create jobs
3. use up cow farts and beef tallow
4. use a helluva lot of water
5. Milk and honey for everyone
KDHE will pass this in a minute stating that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread. And it will cost the KS taxpayer millions. The coal plants I can take with the pollution, but this BS
it states this program:
"An additional forum will be Nov 16 in Lawrence. KDHE also will take written testimony until Nov. 30. Officials said a decision on whether to issue the permit will be made by January.
The bioenergy center, still in the planning stage, will integrate several renewable energy technologies with the coal-fired power plant to develop a bioenergy center that generates electricity, makes ethanol and biodiesel, and generates valuable byproducts.
Sunflower is working with the Kansas Bioscience Authority and the National Institute for Strategic Acquisition and Commercialization to develop the center.
Miller said the new Sunflower projects will result in the construction of more than 1,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines, an infrastructure development that he thinks will also encourage more wind farms in western Kansas.
The bioenergy center will use tallow from nearby beef processing plants as a feedstock for the biodiesel plant, and it will use manure and wastewater from nearby dairy operations in an anaerobic digester to produce methane gas that will be used as fuel for the station."
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Someone might want to ask where the money comes from in the "Kansas Bioscience Authority" and was it absconded from other programs for medical or biological purposes at the Nov. 16th metting in Lawrence.
WHERE is the money coming from???
show me the money!!!
This looks like a *pipe dream*, ie hooted too much smangie!
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"For instance, the new units will run at much hotter temperatures than existing plants. The result is that the plants will burn 212 fewer tons of coal per day for each unit than existing technology."
This technology still emits large quantities of carbon dioxide. In fact the amount would still be 14 million tons a year.
"Miller said the new Sunflower projects will result in the construction of more than 1,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines, an infrastructure development that he thinks will also encourage more wind farms in western Kansas."
Miller is trying to undermine the future of wind energy in Kansas. The proposed coal plants would lessen the demand to build wind farms in Kansas, and for the state to compete economically with other states. Miller also does not even believe global warming exists. He must be a spokesman for the Bush Administration.
Wind energy creates far more permanent jobs than coal plants.
However, we have a "brain drain" in Kansas and we will continue to be bypassed by other states.
1) Ethanol Plants need large quantities of water to operate. This means a continued depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer
2) Methane that would be produced at the "Alternative Energy Center" is an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is.
3) Sunflower will still export 92% of the electricity generated at the proposed plants while proposing "construction jobs" These are not permanent long-term jobs. Wind energy creates far more permanent jobs.
4) The excess waste heat (carbon dioxide) and mercury will be transported across the state and around the world because of the prevailing wind currents across the state.
In summary, hardly any permanent jobs will actually be created in Western Kansas because of these proposed plants.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Snow WI you need to see the scarsam! Did you not get the "Milk and Honey" reference? I have stated oh I don't know ALOT about how much water ethanol production takes.
I believe I was the first to report here that the City of Russell is running out of water and has to import to provide for the plant. The other plants in Centeral and Western Kansa hae bought up LOTS of water rights already.
that was the point!
On your statements:
"1) Ethanol Plants need large quantities of water to operate. This means a continued depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer"
Already said that and agree with that, except Ogallala is NOT fossil water, as it can and does recharge
"2) Methane that would be produced at the "Alternative Energy Center" is an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide is."
Said that in the AL Bore Movie debate that Methane and water vapor are BOTH more prevelant and more potent greenhouse gases. Can't have it both ways though, as CH4 and H2O are not CO2. Coal PP do not produce those particular gases... well some steam maybe.
"3) Sunflower will still export 92% of the electricity generated at the proposed plants while proposing "construction jobs" These are not permanent long-term jobs. Wind energy creates far more permanent jobs."
Unsubstanciated. The long term jobs from bio and alternative energies has yet to be shown. There are a lot of people that work at a power plants, and it takes a bunch to keep it running. ALl the Wind turbines need is some maintenance on the rotors and transmission lines. There is alot more involved in a Coal or Nuke plant, and it produces much more energy.
"4) The excess waste heat (carbon dioxide) and mercury will be transported across the state and around the world because of the prevailing wind currents across the state."
CO2 is NOT heat. Equating the 2 is stupid and ignorant of the facts. YES there is waste heat, and there is CO2 produce by the burning, but CO2 is NOT thermal.
The mecury thing depends on the source coal. Blanketing it to include all coals is dis honest.
The point is MORE jobs will be created with older technology, ie coal.
If yu want to argue this monstrosity, argue it on the point of a false proposal of all the sidebar issues. HELL they promised everything! DID you even read the whole article???????
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Asbestos, I did read the entire article and have extensive knowledge of these kinds of issues because I used to live in a high plains city. First off, Kansas does not need to build a power plant like Sunflower says. Second, they provide very few permanent jobs for Western Kansas. Third, Sunflower will build transmission lines to export electricity out of state, while beneifing few Kansans in the long term. Fourth, this project only looks at short-term benefits, and does not analyze the long-term consequences of carbon dioxide emissions and depletions of the Aquifer.
1) Carbon dioxide is a heat trapping Kansas. This is a proven fact.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/...
2) Waste heat is still heat. The 14 million tons of carbon dioxide that will be realeased every year from these plants have heat trappping components. Carbon dioxide is still a greenhouse gas. An increase in carbon dioxide is linked in the overall rise of atmospheric temperatures.
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/re...
3) Water vapor is a naturally occuring gas that is always present in Earth's atmosphere. Methane is not a naturally occuring gas in the atmosphere, and has increased because of human influenced agricultural practices.
4) Wind farms provide far more jobs per terawatt hour per year than coal plants. Wind turbines require a lot of maintenance on large-scale wind farms. An example would be the new 40,000 acre wind farm that they are building in Iowa.
5) Kansas should work together to find ways of generating new jobs without building coal plants. The solution is to build wind farms in a large NUMBER of rural counties. This helps out more rural Americans to supplement their income.
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/re...
6) 140 permanent jobs added in exchange for 14 million tons of carbon dioxide generated per year is unacceptable for a developed country.
7) Sunflower would never put these plants in Hays or Ellis County because they no how hazardous they are. Instead, they take advantage of a poor immigrant county and promise to offer temporary jobs. As soon as these temporary jobs leave they will still need more jobs. That is why building wind farms is so important.
8) Sunflower treats the Ogallala Aquifer as a non-renewable resource. They could probably care less if the aquifer is depleted in 50 years as long as they make their shareholders happy.
9) Climate models predict that Kansas will become much warmer and drier because of global warming in the future. Sunflower is only making this problem worse.
10) An estimated 20 million MW of wind power could be tapped worldwide. That is an unthinkable amount of untapped electricity that we are not using.
none2 (anonymous) says…
To correct the ignorance about the Ogallala aquifer being replenished: (from http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/...)
"Groundwater recharge
The rate at which recharge water is currently entering the aquifer is limited by several factors. Much of the plains region is semi-arid with steady winds that hasten evaporation of surface water and precipitation. In many locations, the aquifer is overlain, in the vadose zone, with a shallow layer of caliche that is practically impermeable; this limits the amount of water able to recharge the aquifer from the land surface. Many of the playa lakes on the plains are surrounded with caliche or clay that likewise limits the amount of water that seeps into the aquifer. However, the soil of the playas is different and not lined with caliche, making them one of the few areas where the aquifer can recharge. The destruction of playas by farmers and development then decreases the available recharge area. The caliche is partly due to the ready evaporation of soil moisture and the semi-arid climate; the aridity increases the amount of evaporation which increases the amount of caliche in the soil. Both mechanisms reinforce the difficulty recharge has in reaching the water table."
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
None2,
The ogallala IS a rechargable aquifer. SnowWi was saying it is "fossil water" which it is not. Good cut and paste....put pretty generic. The Ogallala is NOT a generic aquifer, it is pretty unique and the recharge areas are sandstone. That's why the water tastes so good! I once lived in Western Kansas too, wouldn't care to live ther today, too much cow poo! everything smells like cow POO!!! We need to get KDHE to enforce those regulations too, instead of caving in to the KLA.
Recharge rate as you are talking about...well it is a different issues altogether. ANd yes we know what effects groundwater recharge. I do after all work on Groundwater remediation. I am not the enemy here. Just trying to straighten obviously STUPID and ignorant statments.
Snow WI I know you like wind power, but most of what you say is totally off base like treating AL babies movie like a religious experience, Yes we have to do something.
If you want Global warming to be over the US is NOT the answer, and never will be no matter how much someone hates the US of A.
We currently cannot get the world to agree on disarming 2 countries ran by madmen on the pathway to nuke weapons. Additionally, these 2 countries care only about power and force, do you think for one minute they care about Global warming???
China and India together is 6 USA populations. They are developing. They do not care about Global warming, they are chasing the "western dream" as they think it exists. In just 2 decades gasoline is going to be in short supply because of actual supply and refining capacity. Yet in thos 2 countries there is no switch to other forms of energy. China in the 2-3 decades will burn twice the amount of coal that the US of A has burned in our existance of a country.
Do you understand the scale yet! It is China and India. What WE the US needs to do is get off the oil and coal, get off the pie in the sky *alternative sources* and get on Nuke Plants and protect them like our daughter's honor and maintain them impeccabely.
WInd farms are going to offset not too much. Can they help? YES! are they the answer you seem to take it as? NO way!
Again, NONE of these environmental issues or solutions make any difference if.................
you do not enforce the environmental regulations. otherwise it is meaningless and just window dressing.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
Asbestos, Kansas does not have many regulations compared to other surrounding states concerning the percentage of our electricity that is generated from alternative resources. Sunflower is taking advantage of this lack of regulations because Kansas does not have the Renewable Portfolio Standard. This RPS would help Kansas develop our wind resources, instead of allowing a compnay like Sunflower to do whatever it wants to.
The proposed plants are not what Western Kansas needs to create permanent jobs in the future. Western Kansas would be a great place for companies to locate to build alternative energy technologies.
The problem with the Ogallala Aquifer is that some areas are being depleted far faster than are being recharged. The Aquifer is being depleted rapidly in Finney County because there are so many center pivot irrigation systems in use, that are using billions of gallons of water.
Kansas should be a leader in the development of wind energy technology, but a few big energy companies are controlling our energy future in this state. There are global consequences when we continue to build coal plants, and the US must also work with developing countries to promote cleaner forms of energy.
kpm (anonymous) says…
You also need to take into account the energy required for the production and transmission of the coal itself as well as the associated environmental impact.
nytemayr (anonymous) says…
In the long run this will hurt our city. The action is not wise nor well reasoned. The current pollution standards require new coal fired plants to purchase emissions rights therefore the net emissions will remain the same and will not increase. 400 miles of coal transportation is eliminated thereby reducing our electric utility cost here in northeast Kansas and in Wichita.
Asbesto usage was eliminated by law in the '80s
Water usage planning in Kansas is a real concern and these plants do impact this problem.
I know the commission "feels" it did the "morally" correct thing but the commission is a political organization charged to serve interest of the Lawrence community. This letter reflects the personal needs of two individuals on the Lawrence commission using their public office to express their private concerns. This is not an appropriate use of our city money, reputation or a politically smart action for our community.
That all I have say about it.