Archive for Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Energy time-out
State policy makers should put this year’s heated political battle over two power plants behind them and look at a broad energy strategy for Kansas.
May 27, 2008
Advertisement
Both opponents and proponents of building two new coal-fired power plants in western Kansas now have an opportunity to show they are sincere about formulating a broad, positive energy strategy for the state of Kansas.
Legislative efforts to force construction of the plants became highly politicized on both sides. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent in private lobbying efforts to try to influence both legislators and the governor. Three bills clearing the way for the new plants were passed by the Legislature and subsequently vetoed by the governor. Efforts to override the first two vetoes failed, and House Speaker Melvin Neufeld announced last week that scheduling conflicts and other factors led him to decide not to pursue an effort to override the third veto at the Legislature's ceremonial adjournment on May 29.
Although some Kansans breathed a sigh of relief at that decision, the outcome obviously is disappointing for Neufeld and other legislators and constituents who favor construction of the plants. However, the highly charged political atmosphere in which this battle was being fought doesn't lend itself to thoughtful decision-making or, often, sound policy.
Perhaps this issue will be settled by the courts or it may come back to the Legislature next year. Either way, the state still has a duty to look at how it will meet its long-term energy needs in an environmentally responsible way. Whether it's coal, nuclear power, wind generators or solar energy, policy makers need to take a deep breath and try to make the best decisions for the state's future.
Deliberations on energy policy must include the latest scientific research available. State discussions also must take into account potential federal regulations concerning the environment as well as potential federal assistance with such things as transmission lines that would make wind-generated power more feasible.
These are not easy issues, but they are not going to go away. Rising prices and questions about the environmental impact of many traditional energy sources make it imperative that every state in the nation take a creative look at how to meet America's residential and commercial energy demands.
This year's fight over the coal-fired plants in western Kansas was primarily a political battle. Now it's time for everyone to put the politics aside and take a practical, scientific approach to the state's energy future.
More like this
- Political energy 4 comments / July 6, 2008
- Energy strategy 27 comments / February 21, 2008
- Neufeld: No veto override on coal-fired plants bill 1 comment / May 21, 2008
- Coal battle moves to court 53 comments / May 22, 2008
- Second bill on coal plants vetoed 6 comments / April 18, 2008
Top ads RSS
- Occupational and Physical Therapy Staff Positions. Rehab Center seeking full, ...
- Evening Cleaner/Floater Sun.-Thurs., 2-4 hrs. per night, start at 5:00 ...
- NOW HIRING ALL POSITIONS Come by the store and fill ...
- Traffic Safety Specialist 2 Kansas Traffic Safety Resource Office Topeka ...
- Federal Home Loan Bank
Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment · Bars · Theatres · Restaurants · Coffeehouses · Libraries · Antiques · Services
- Mormons throw support behind gay-rights cause November 12, 2009 · 53 comments
- Muslims troops deserve support November 12, 2009 · 70 comments
- Blog: When Will We Get Our First Snow? November 11, 2009 · 34 comments
- Attorney for man who says he shot George Tiller won't present 'necessity' defense November 10, 2009 · 87 comments
- Blog: We're Up And Running... If Only We Could Come Up With A Good Name November 12, 2009 · 14 comments
- Attorneys of man who says he killed George Tiller ask for change of venue November 12, 2009 · 21 comments
- Blog: What's Your Stripper Name? November 12, 2009 · 49 comments
- Lou Dobbs resigns from CNN November 12, 2009 · 30 comments
- Blog: Someone Asked For A Different Question November 12, 2009 · 29 comments
- Financial example November 12, 2009 · 10 comments
- Q&A with Kansas health officer about H1N1 November 12, 2009
- Fair Trade Holiday Market opens Nov. 27 in Lawrence November 12, 2009
- KU receives $6 million contract for vaccine research November 12, 2009
- Douglas County ceremony honors America's veterans November 11, 2009
- Report looks at county’s learning programs November 12, 2009
- Kansas conservation activist Jan Garton dies at 59 November 11, 2009
- Topeka area woman dies from swine flu; death toll from virus at 18 in Kansas November 12, 2009
- Mormons throw support behind gay-rights cause November 12, 2009
- Report: Nearly 6 million children die from hunger November 23, 2005
- Kansas women sign four November 12, 2009
27 May 2008
at 10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
DougCounty (Anonymous) says…
Seems that's what the governor is doing—check out:http://www.ksclimatechange.us/ewebeditpro/items/O1F17426.PDF Looks like everyone's got a place at the table to begin the discussion on developing a comprehensive energy plan for the state, a process that should have taken place before the legislature tried to start ramrodding special interest legislation through the session. Hopefully the discussions will be productive and the state can turn over a new, nonpartisan leaf on the whole issue.
27 May 2008
at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
cato_the_elder (Anonymous) says…
If Governor Sebelius were to run for re-election today, she could not win unless the only votes counted were from Douglas County.
27 May 2008
at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
tdarnell (Anonymous) says…
It's a perfect political cover to develop a plan instead of taking action. Our govenment and has been doing energy plans and setting energy policies since 1972. What has it gotten us. I would certainly like a full explanation from the governor about her resistance to the coal fired plants in western Kansas. Her CO2 argument doesn't seem to be forthright or Sunflower is not being forthright. Here's what they say about their new technology. http://www.biofuelreview.com/content/… Lawrence community would be well served by LJW doing a thorough in depth analysis to provide us your position on what is really going on politically in this state.
27 May 2008
at 4:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
belexus73 (Anonymous) says…
As far as the bioreactor technology that Sunflower proposed goes, my hat is off to the closed loop energy system they were going to attempt. However, Sunflower did not have enough confidence in it to put it in the air permit application because it is still experimental and they could not predict how effective it would be. As far as some comtemplating that the governor could not get re-elected, polls are showing strong support in the 60s and nudging 70 on her. So I am puzzled by an assertion she could not get re-elected.
27 May 2008
at 4:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
a_flock_of_jayhawks (Anonymous) says…
“The Lawrence community would be well served by LJW doing a thorough in depth analysis to provide us your position on what is really going on politically in this state.”They don't need to do it. I'll provide it right here.Federal CO2 regulation is coming, and it might include surcharges on the amount of CO2. This will make electrical generation methods that also generate CO2 more expensive than they are now. Sunflower wants to build a coal-fired plant in western Kansas with two other groups where the total investment will be shared and the capacity will also be shared. They attempted to get one more coal-fired plant (actually, two) approved before the process becomes more complex and costly. They know that if they don't get it soon, they probably won't be able to make it happen or it may not be feasible. The Governor and Secretary believe that they are doing their duty for all Kansans by rejecting the additional CO2 emissions and, instead, pursuing policies that aim to reduce CO2 emissions as well as some of the other noxious compounds that are introduced into the atmosphere as a result. The additional pollution from this plant impacts western and eastern Kansas as well as points beyond and puts additional strain on the Ogallala aquifer, which would impact several states. The Governor and Secretary also believe that it would be irresponsible to approve the plant as it was proposed at this time given the regulatory uncertainty at the federal level. Since there is a Republican majority in the Kansas legislature, the Republican leaders believed that they could do pretty much what they want to do as this is their MO on several past initiatives (a recent example: Kansas public school funding). That being the case, they did not negotiate in earnest. But, to their suprise, they were not able to succeed.
27 May 2008
at 5:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
acoupstick (Anonymous) says…
“They attempted to get one more coal-fired plant (actually, two) approved before the process becomes more complex and costly.”Don't forget they also wanted exemption from future environmental regulation.”they did not negotiate in earnest”Exactly.
27 May 2008
at 9:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
dirkleisure (Anonymous) says…
Don't forget, they also wanted to be removed from the oversight of the Kansas Corporation Commission.
28 May 2008
at 7:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
gr (Anonymous) says…
Don't forget, if we had as much CO2 as Mars has, we'll be as hot as Mars. The martians all died out because they failed to regulate their CO2 and now the planet is suffering from extremely hot conditions.
28 May 2008
at 11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
JerryStubbs (Anonymous) says…
I'm not sure all the Martians died out, some of them might be sequestered underground.