To the editor:

In the Nov. 1 article “Commissioner opposes new coal plant,” Sunflower Electric’s spokesman Miller said that heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions are not currently regulated, but that if ever they are, his company will comply. The rush to expand the Holcomb power plant seems driven by lax pollution standards and by the relatively cheap cost of diesel fuel needed for mining and shipping coal.

Certainly this coal rush project can’t be because Kansans need the extra power, since Kansas consumers will only get 8 percent of the expanded plant’s electricity. According to Miller, the transmission lines from the coal-fired power plant expansion would encourage Kansas-generated wind power. However, if those new lines are packed with dirty, cheap, coal-fired power, it will eliminate any financial incentive for building alternative energy resources.

At the local level, the prevailing winds are west-to-east bringing mercury pollution our way. Furthermore, in March 2006, the Lawrence City Commission unanimously approved the mayor’s signing of the U.S. Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement. Since then, the city’s Energy Conservation Committee is availing itself of the best technology to measure Lawrence’s carbon dioxide emissions and craft a master plan for its reduction. Also, Lawrence is launching an EPA Green Power Community Challenge campaign to offset its carbon footprint with regional, renewable energy certificates.

Given such proud work, it seems only fitting that the city has the right to ask utilities to not undermine progress by emitting more carbon dioxide. Kansas doesn’t need to become the poster child for global warming. Like Lawrence, Kansas needs to help the nation toward a clean energy future.

Carey Maynard-Moody,

Lawrence