Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Power choices

October 24, 2007

Advertisement

To the editor:

I think most Kansans support the decision by KDHE Secretary Rod Bremby to deny a permit to construct a coal-fired plant in western Kansas. Regulating the type of energy generated from the top down is one way to confront the issue of CO2 emissions. What is also needed is a way to allow consumers to purchase electricity by the source of generation.

Colorado has a program in which consumers can buy electricity by source. For example, consumers can subscribe to buy a certain amount of wind-generated electricity each month (up to the amount actually generated) at a price that is about 2 cents per kwh higher than conventional sources.

As in Colorado, I would think there would be many people in Kansas who would be willing to pay more for electricity in order help establish a market for green power in the state. I would hope the state government and the state utilities would work soon to give the people of Kansas that choice.

Paul Longabach,

Lawrence

Comments

imastinker 7 years, 2 months ago

I think Paul has no idea what most Kansans are like.

kansas778 7 years, 2 months ago

I agree, consumer choice is a vital element to free market capitalism and the more choices, the more it benefits the consumer. However, that also means not preventing viable alternatives like coal-power from being chosen. This ability to choose power by source sounds like an excellent compromise.

happyscriv 7 years, 2 months ago

I like this idea as well. And I would say that since most of our energy comes from coal already we need some other choices. Now would be good for me:)

dirkleisure 7 years, 2 months ago

stinker - typical fascist nonsense. It is either your way or the wrong way, eh?

Colorado also allows for what is sometimes called net-metering. That allows consumers to produce their own power, and for their excess power to be sold back to utility companies.

Wow, what a concept. Self-reliance. Why on earth would we want that?

Most Kansans support a system where 100% of their power is generated from coal and controlled by single utilites, right stinker?

imastinker 7 years, 2 months ago

Most kansans know that the western part of the state really needs the work and enjoy the taxes this company pays to the state. Most Kansans know that this will go somewhere and we will all have the pollution one way or another.

Most Kansans are pretty hacked off with the city of Lawrence and the university over their contribution to this. Most Kansans are a lot different than the people most Lawrencians meet every day.

kansas778 7 years, 2 months ago

Here's an easy way to determine what most Kansans want--let them choose for themselves through the source-choice policy suggested above.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 2 months ago

Fine idea, k778, but just make sure that all the costs of coal are included for those who choose it-- including global warming, mercury poisoning and other forms of pollution.

imastinker 7 years, 2 months ago

I suppose you know what those costs are and support adding those onto your gas bill as well?

shockchalk 7 years, 2 months ago

Imastiker is right. MOST Kansans, especially those west of Topeka, would like the liberal folks in Lawrence to leave them, and their coal fired power plants, the hell alone. Of course, the gas executives are tickled pink that kDHE turned the power plant down.

kansas778 7 years, 2 months ago

bozo you just hate anything having to do with a free market don't you? Too bad you live in America huh comrade?

snowWI 7 years, 2 months ago

"Imastiker is right. MOST Kansans, especially those west of Topeka, would like the liberal folks in Lawrence to leave them, and their coal fired power plants, the hell alone. Of course, the gas executives are tickled pink that kDHE turned the power plant down."

Anything would be better than a coal plant. At least natural gas plants are relatively clean compared with coal plants. I think Kansas will have to rely more on gas, wind, and nuclear to meet future electricity needs.

kansas778 7 years, 2 months ago

"Anything would be better than a coal plant. At least natural gas plants are relatively clean compared with coal plants. I think Kansas will have to rely more on gas, wind, and nuclear to meet future electricity needs."

You are only thinking of one aspect. The price of natural gas quadrupled, and coal remains cheap.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.