See this poll on: https://poll.fm/1609252/embed
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
I don't think a Harvard Law graduate (without the help of Daddy Bush) constitutes someone as a Moron. How about re-considering your WC.
Well that is where we need to go, climate change is nothing but a myth congered up after acid rain and the hole in the ozone became obsolete to push agenda's. We'll look back on this and shake our heads about the emotional lunacy that took place just like the previouse two "crisises". That's if we even have a free society by then to have a say in it but that is a whole different topic. The point is we need to think and not let emotions run wild, that's when people do stupid things.
And no that doesn't fit my paradigm, i don't take anything from the big brother govenment as gospel. They are pushing an agenda just like you are trying to do. If this moron, and the rest of the congress, can take over the banks and auto industry why can't he/they make statistics fit his/their energy agenda? I hope you're happy when this CAFE crud and Cap and Trade BS run us into the ground. My guess on their coal projections figure in Carbon Tax, just a guess.
Well John, just not going to go there with you on the climate question. But your points about cost are just wacky.
I can't put a link here, but go the FERC website and search for an energy study that was released on June 6th, 2008,(prior administration) on slide #11 is listed the cost of new generation at today's prices for building new, they are as follows:
nuclear 4,700 - 7,600 per kW
conventional coal 1,900 - 4,100 per kW
IGCC coal 2,800 - 5,800 per kW
wind 1,300 - 2,600 per kw
geothermal 2,600 - 3,600 per kW
concentrated solar 3,000 - 5,100 per kW
Now if that info doesn't fit into your paradigm, take it up with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
More cost comparisons can be found at the Union of Concerned Scientist website that is www.ucsusa.org .
Or even go the Lazard Engineering website, they have been doing utilty work for years, search for cost comparisons of new generation.
The bottom line is that the price difference between renewables and convention fossil is a thing of the past. When comparing new generation to new generation, the answer is much different than your comments. staff
Well that's all fine and dandy, anyone can find anything to fit their paradigm. You can make energy that way but what about cost? What is the $ per MegaWatt for these fine projects? Coal would have to go though the roof to compare costs. The problem with renewables is they are inconsitant, which means you need to store it to supply base load. Electricity is a very difficult thing to store and then you have to convert it to AC. All storage is inefficiant. Nice graph of coal prices by the way, my guess at the price increase in 2 of the 4 quaries is needless regulation.
We have plenty of resources to use but some people don't like them so they legislate and regulate to make them cost more. Take Gas for one example. I'm interested in low cost energy. I don't like paying more for something than what it should be. Would you pay 50 cents a KWH for electricity that comes from a renewable or would you rather pay 10 cents for electricity from a coal or nuclear plant? I take the coal plant. Renewables have their place in our energy generation but attacking cost effective and reliable generation that we have today for the sake of pushing forward something that is not cost effective but gives you warm fuzzies is what i have a big problem with. If you think MI has it bad now just wait until everyones utility bills go up 200% or better. How many average people can afford $200 electric bills??????
This whole argument revolves around whether you believe in Global Warming which is now Climate Change becasue the global temperature is headed south. I don't. What happened to Acid Rain? Hole in the Ozone? There was a local scientist that was studying this and he would make you think the final coming was just around the bend with what he was pontificating about this "crisis", then it fixed itself. If it's not one thing it's another. It's what happens when you think emotionally vs. Logically.
Well John, maybe as the head nature nut, let me ask where you are getting your facts?
When we talk about all the options available to avoid new nuclear or coal we like to have some basis. Try the links below or at least Google two different stories to let you know we just aren't making this stuff up.
Google - New FERC chairman on new generation or try this link....
http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/04/23/ferc-chairman-we-dont-need-no-stinkin-nukes/
The Google 100% renewable energy plan or try this link
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Ten-Year_Renewable_Energy_Plan
And as far as the 'wind doesn't blow all the time and the sun is only out during the day...' argument. Try reading up on what a solar thermal plant is. Also think that if the Ludington Pump Storage Facility were powered by wind turbines from around the Great Lakes, wouldn't that make wind a base load power source too? And of course you have to appreciate what a new electrical grid can do for this country.
See John, there are actually lots of engineers and scientists who think that there is a way for man to survive without coal and nuclear. And here are just some of the many many plans and ideas we have heard. And we are sharing them with members like you.
This site is all about a conversation, how about fleshing out your 'facts', tell us more about the source of your position on coal and nuclear.
Thanks for commenting. staff
Why do you keep tweeking your pole questions to reflect the opposite, i.e. member regulation that went from 90 some % for to 90 some % against? Same goes for Wolverine's investment into the Rogers City CLEAN COAL plant. You simply transposed the questions. If you can't win a fair fight then you cheat, it's what nature nuts do right?
The facts are that "renewable" sources will not meet demand. Therefore you need COAL or NUCLEAR. Based on how long it takes to build a nuke plant and how many of this state's coal plants that are going to have to go off line do to age in the next few years I think this is the BEST thing that Wolverine could have done.
It's stuff like this and people like you that have regulated everything right into the toilet. You can't even buy a childrens book anymore without it having a choking hazzard warning. Good grief.
I'm very glad they're spending money on a new plant. New generation is needed all across the country or there won't be enough supply to meet demand. I support renewables and conservation, but we cannot conserve our way out of the demand growth curves and renewables are only operational when the renewable fuel is present (the wind isn't always blowing and the sun not always shining). Baseload power is still needed. Even if we could conserve the demand curve flat, plants eventually have to go offline and the next generation of plants has to be in place ahead of time. The only reason other coal plant proposals have "failed miserably" is because of extreme factions that do not want any baseload plants built anywhere. I sincerely hope this plant gets built.
Hey Mike, thanks for speaking your mind, its the start of the conversation that we want here. Concerning a few of your points, GM can spend millions on a dumb idea and it will just be the investors and emplyees who will be hurt. But both the investors and emplyees made conscious decisions to be involved with GM. Most co-op members do not have a choice. They are locked into any dumb decisions that are made.
Also you stated this....they (the utilities)are controled enough by laws and statues to make sure they operate in favor of the people they serve instead of the people who invest and need to make a big return on their investment. ......
Most folks think that the Michigan Public Service Commission regulates all utilities. To a degree this is true, but the amount of regulation is different depending on the utility. As I understand it Consumers Power and Detroit Edison are the only fully regulated utilities in the state. Municipal utilities have the least amount of regulation. And co-ops traditionally have been in the middle. However, with the passage of the energy legislation last year, co-ops were given the opportunity to vote themselves out from regulations concerning the rates that can be charged members. Cherryland has already started this.
So the idea that the customers/members are protected by regulations that will keep them from feeling the effects of dumb decisions is incorrect. As is the case in several of the examples in this website, many many co-op members are suffering financially from dumb decisions made by co-op boards.
Thanks again for your comment, do you see my point?
It may be true that Wolverine spent many millions of dollars on preparing to build a new coal plant, but take that into persective, how many millions of dollars does GM or Ford spend on a prototype of a car they may or may not produce. Also take into account that our electric industry is about the only industry in this country that is not holding its hand out to the Federal Government for bail out money. they are controled enough by laws and statues to make sure they operate in favor of the people they serve instead of the people who invest and need to make a big return on their investment.
From staff; a little background on this poll. Wolverine went to the MPSC to ask permission to draw money from member accounts for a future power generation project. So far co-op members have unknowingly donated over $58 Million to this fund in the last few years. $18 Million of that money has already been spent just developing the proposal. If the plant is not built, like many others in the country, the money spent will not be returned to members.
Thanks for participating.