Coal vs. wind

To the editor:

Kansas needs far more economic stimulation from our vast wind power resources and less coal heat in our atmosphere.

The proposed Kansas coal power plant would import many tons of coal from Wyoming (instead of using our nontoxic and vast Kansas wind power resources), would send power to Colorado (not to Kansas), would pollute our air and water with yet more mercury, dioxins and CO2. (“Clean-coal technology” is a myth perpetuated by the big coal monopolies.)

The Ogalala Aquifer has already been unwisely badly depleted, and the proposed coal plant would use many millions of gallons a year of water in an area that has serious water issues already. Our globe is on the verge of “clean water wars,” and Kansas wants to waste it on one of the most toxic, global warming, least job-producing forms of energy?

Most coal plant union members who wrote KDHE are simply not aware that wind power and solar power will produce four to five times as many good-paying jobs that are not in the hands of old-guard dirty energy monopolists who are greedily fighting the global shift to renewables, decentralized clean energy production and lowered heat indexes.

Sunflower Power Company has unwisely invested in Wyoming coal mines, and has rationalized its greed-induced global warming actions.

Rich Wenzel,

Lawrence