Archive for Friday, October 12, 2007

Poll says Kansans prefer gas, wind power

The study, commissioned by a gas company, says only 8 percent want energy from coal

October 12, 2007


— A majority of Kansans oppose the proposed coal-fired plants in western Kansas and would prefer natural gas and wind development, a poll released Thursday said.

But coal plant developers, Sunflower Electric Power Corp., said the poll was biased, noting it was commissioned by Chesapeake Energy, an Oklahoma City-based company that is the country's largest independent producer of natural gas.

"The more coal plants they kill the better for them," said Steve Miller, a Sunflower Electric spokesman. "That must be their marketing strategy - work against coal to sell more gas."

State officials are considering permits for two 700-megawatt coal-burning electric plants near Sunflower's existing facility near Holcomb. Most of the energy from the plants would be sold to out-of-state customers.

Supporters of the project say it will help the western Kansas economy and burn cleaner and more efficiently than any other coal plant in the nation.

Opponents say the plants' carbon dioxide emissions and other pollutants will add to global warming and hurt Kansans' health.

When given the choice between coal and natural gas and wind, 87 percent of Kansans selected natural gas and wind, while 8 percent picked coal, according to the poll of 500 likely Kansas voters surveyed Oct. 2 and 3 by The Tarrance Group, based in Washington, D.C.

The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percent.

When asked whether they favored or opposed the two proposed plants, 51 percent opposed and 34 percent said they supported it.

"The poll results demonstrate that the majority of Kansans see natural gas and wind power as a clear-cut, attractive alternative to coal," said Ed Goeas, president of The Tarrance Group.

The company said natural gas and wind were paired together as a possible energy source against coal because wind alone couldn't generate enough energy to take care of all of Kansas' power needs.


hornhunter 10 years, 6 months ago

It makes a person wonder where the 500 LIKELY Ks. voter live ?

The big problems I see is 1) Gas companies in that area of the state have to put compressors in to put pressure on the severely depleted gas pocket and pressurize it to get the gas to the well heads. 2) Gas plants burn large amounts of natural gas to generate electricity. With natural gas prices out the roof, this in turn will raise the electric rates, then in the winter months we heat our home with the same natural gas but at a higher price due to a higher demand charge. To me this poll is loop side and could say that without a doubt Chesapeake Energy is sleeping with the serraEnvironmental groups

hornhunter 10 years, 6 months ago

Have not seen that one, but if you sign me up.

ranger73 10 years, 6 months ago

that makes sense-especially in Lawrence, where there is a lot of hot air and something rather smelly in the air. And it isn't the dog. Just look at what is going on with the albatrosses of the SLT, the T, the post office/library, sprawl-mart...the list goes on.

SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years, 6 months ago

And I prefer cold fusion, but that's not reality. We need coal-fired plants.

happyscriv 10 years, 6 months ago

Without implementing power generation from wind and sun is why we need coal-fired plants. Do we need more now? NO. Kansas needs to harness the power blowing around the state--- "wind". and put more solar panels on businesses and government buildings to collect power from the sun.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.