Editorial

Until green energy is a reality, make the most of what we have

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Now that all the hype about green energy is subsiding, reality is beginning to settle in.

The economic crisis and lower gasoline prices have put pressure on the ethanol industry, an idled plant in Cambridge among its victims.

T. Boone Pickens, despite his $58 million marketing campaign, has given up on his plan to build a $10 billion, 4,000-megawatt wind farm in Texas. (He already has 667 wind turbines on order, so perhaps wind farms in our area might be able to buy them at a bargain price. One of the problems in Texas was a lack of heavy transmission lines to carry the power to the grid, certainly something for Nebraska to consider.)

But energy concerns aren't all as far away as Texas.

SourceGas is asking for more money for delivering gas to 90,000 customers in central and western Nebraska, including McCook. Although we can now pick among a variety of gas suppliers, we probably will pay SourceGas more to maintain the pipe and supply to our homes and businesses.

The company is asking the Public Service Commission for permission to charge an extra $7.43 a month to the average residential customer's bill, and an additional $8.76 to the average small businesses's bill.

Then, on Monday, NPPD announced it will ask for a 6.5 percent increase in the rates it charges wholesale customers, ironically caused by a drop in natural gas prices. The utility is looking at a rate increase for retail customers as well.

If any of the dire predictions about the Obama administration's cap-and-trade proposals come true, the current rate hikes will only be the beginning.

And, who knows when or if solar, wind or other alternative energy sources will ever become financially viable.

In the meantime, to avoid financial hardship on individuals and the resulting decline in general economy, we need to make the most of energy sources available today.

That means more development of readily-available energy like oil, natural gas and nuclear power.

Comments
View 17 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I agree with Sceptre. If instead of cap and trade the United States had a national mandate to replace coal generation plants with natural gas and nuclear energy, plus if we replaced our commuter cars with battery-powered electric cars, we would drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce CO2 emissions faster and beyond the proposed cap and trade targets.

    -- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com

    -- Posted by Rmoen on Tue, Jul 14, 2009, at 1:39 PM
  • Hey ....can we park the nuclear waste in your back yard and put it in you children and grandchildrens breakfast cereal?????

    -- Posted by kaygee on Wed, Jul 15, 2009, at 4:19 PM
  • Kaygee

    Impulsive, naive statements like yours are the heart of the very problem. Look I can do it too: "Hey...do you want the new animal control officer to come over and kill your dog?"

    If you've ever had the opportunity to tour a nuclear plant, you'd know better. Nuclear is clearly the answer to providing low cost, CO2 free emission energy on a large scale. The spent fuel rods for the last 20 years of generation from a typical nuclear plant would fit in a pool about half the size of the McCook City Pool (a bit deeper of course). Now compare that with a weeks worth of generation from coal. Literally, hundreds of rail cars worth. Today, we can also reprocess those spent nuclear rods for even more energy. Nuclear is the obvious choice for inexpensive, reliable, and SAFE baseload energy.

    Then we have people like kaygee eating all the spoon fed scare tactic garbage from the media. Do a little personal research before trying to influence someone else's opinion on a blog in McCook Nebraska. Now go eat your wheaties and try not to choke on the uranium.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Thu, Jul 16, 2009, at 1:08 PM
  • Sir you are the naive one if you think we can continue thrashing this planet without consequences. Just because you dont agree wih the "scare tactics" as you call them dosnt mean they dont have merit. How many Chernobals and 3-mile island accidents will it take for it to sink in that there is a better way. And I think the McCook swimming pool is the prefect place for the nuclear waste!! That way to will get an up close personal look at just how nasty that stuff is!

    -- Posted by kaygee on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, at 9:00 AM
  • Just like an enviro-nut...

    I'm accused of wanting to "thrash" our planet because I prefer clean, abundant, reliable, safe energy over that of coal and fossil fuel. I suppose you are also against wind generation because it might kill some birds, bats, and even the precious dung beetle.

    There are over 4 billion people on this planet. Think logically first kaygee, then respond...

    How do you recommend making this a better place for all of us and providing energy in the safest, most effective and productive manner?

    Cherynobal was a human error. The management new the reactor was stressed and being pushed above the limits. They intentionally over-rode the system and seven warnings to see how far they could push it.

    Three mile island?? Do you know how many people died or were infected in that incident? Pay attention Kaygee...the correct answer is zero. Here is a quote directly from the Kemeny Commission report that investigated the incident: "there will either be no case of cancer or the number of cases will be so small that it will never be possible to detect them. The same conclusion applies to the other possible health effects." The containment system worked exactly as it was designed. Google it for crying out loud. It was a public scare because of a movie - The China Syndrome.

    Today we have ships and subs that are equipped to run for years without refueling. All because of nuclear power. Just imagine being able to do that for everyone in the future.

    The nuclear waste is something that can be delt with and controlled on a much smaller and more effective way than 30-40 years ago, and certainly more effective than the CO2 emissions from coal.

    I have seen nuclear waste kaygee. It isn't glowing gooey ooze coming out of 55 gallon drums in a cavern in the Springfield. That's only on the "Simpsons".

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, at 11:46 AM
  • OK....so now you are going to start calling me names. You condemn my point of view with out even knowing what it is. So typical of the bullies that infest this site. I blame the anonymity of it all. Possibly if you had to look me in the eye and took the time to know the fair and open minded person that I am you could be civil...but I have my doubts.

    AND just for the record..... I have done the reserch, went far beyond "google" and looked at all sides and I came away with a different opinion..SHAME ON ME!!!

    -- Posted by kaygee on Mon, Jul 20, 2009, at 1:48 PM
  • I'm being uncivil for calling you an enviro-nut? A bully?

    If you couldn't get past that statement and read the rest of my argument, then consider this my formal written apology. I'm sorry kaygee.(Although I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you've been called worse.)

    Now go back and read the rest. What do you propose we do about our future energy needs?

    I hear you complain about the problem...yet still no proposed solution.

    I just think that your contribution to this discussion has been more hurtful than helpful. Let's try dealing with facts rather than fears. Try being part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

    Cap and trade and / or carbon taxes are going to be detrimental to this country's energy demands. It is foolish to put our energy dependence in the hands of the "market" that would include the Chinese, Russians and any other country or group that may have a hidden agenda to influence our energy supply and costs. Rather than becoming independent from foreign interests, we are putting ourselves at rist against those same foreign entities. Nevermind the fact that your energy bills will increase as much as 300% (or more).

    We need to seriously consider developing more baseload energy to meet our future needs. Nuclear has to be a part of that discussion - period.

    Anyone who will totally discount a generation option such as nuclear, based on comments like "putting nuclear waste in your children's and grandchildren's cereal" - obviously has a bit more research to do.

    Until you shut off all the lights, appliances, and electronic devices in your house and live off of the grid, you are being hypocritical. Like almost every other community in the state of Nebraska, Hastings is using energy that was generated with nuclear power.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Mon, Jul 20, 2009, at 3:48 PM
  • Husker 23

    I did as you asked...I went back and read...and reread....and read all your posts again just to make sure I followed your line of thinking. You sing the same party line that all pro nuclear advocates sing. And I still disagree with you.

    Your apology was very hollow bordreing on insulting. Perhaps you should get to know some one before you start making assumptions about them.

    You are not interested in my opinion so I will not waste my time offering one.

    I will how ever offer you my apology for calling you a bully, I know how sensitve your kind are when you hear the truth. For that I am very truly sorry.

    Sincerly,

    The enviro-nut

    -- Posted by kaygee on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 9:16 AM
  • And to you, my new dear friend kaygee...

    You make the same argument that all anti-nuclear advocates preach. "I'm scared, but I don't know why. I have no facts to base my opinions on, but I heard..."

    There is no substance to anything that you have posted here.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 10:01 AM
  • OH DEAREST HUSKER 23

    You really cant help yourself can you?!? Allways have one more nasty little comment!

    Actually, YOU did all the arguing. YOU put the words in my mouth. YOU decided that you know what my opinion is. You really dont. Just because I wont let you pick a fight with me dosnt mean I am uninformed or a "enviro-nut".

    I will admit the the breakfast cereal crack was quite flipant. But it all ways totaly amases me that any inteligent person could beleive that nuclear power is in any way a viable sloution to anything. And I allways have a knee jerk reaction to it. The comment is intended to make you think about the long term consequences of your ideas.

    The thing is I beleive that thoes of you who want to have nuclear power should be required to have an up close personal stake in the dealing with the waste(i.e. the cereal crack). I know how long this stuff takes to break down and if you beleive man kind is going to be around long enough to deal responsably with it you are dreaming sir! We are the only species that has ever exsisted on this planet the goes out of its way to find creative ways to soil its nest. Just incase you hav'nt noticed the Earth is getting ready to shake us off like the bad case of fleas that we are.

    Nuclear power is a short term solution with a very long term consequence that I find unacceptable. No I dont like the pollution the oil and coal companies are forcing on us. I do several things in my daily activities to reduce my consumption on all levels. I am working toward actually getting off "the grid" with solar and wind power. I also practice that nasty little thing every one in our society trys so hard to avoid...I conserve(yeah I know its a dirty word). How about you?

    I am one of thoes silly people that thinks in long term solutions and any concequencse there might be. I try very hard to be a conscientious and responsible citizen of the planet. So every time some one has a bad idea you are going to get smart *** remarks from me.

    Now can we dispense with the insults and name calling???

    -- Posted by kaygee on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 1:34 PM
  • Ohh...I get it now kaygee. Thanks for explaining it to me so patiently and articulately. I finally see the light...30% of the time (much like wind generation).

    I'm trying to deal in reality with you and am as irritated with you as your are with me.

    I still have yet to hear what you propose other than "conserve", and "wind and solar".

    These are the facts, kaygee: All wind generation will have to have a backup generation system for those times that the wind does not blow. Energy cannot be stored, it must be used at the same time it is created. Any "green" energy will either have to be backed up by what we call baseload generation, OR we will have rolling blackouts. Baseload generation is only provided by using coal, nuclear, or natural gas at this time. The worldwide population is increasing, and with it so is energy demands.

    Knowing these to be factual statements, kaygee, what do you propose?

    To summarize your options - A)Rolling blackouts using energy only when it is available. B) Increase baseload energy through fossil fuels. C) Increase baseload energy through nuclear, emission free generation. or D) Some form of population control.

    Conservation can be a great part of this, but face reality. We cannot conserve to the point of no use. My opinion is that solar enegy is a much better option than wind, but we are still not there yet technologically. We will always need a large, sustainable, reliable source of energy for mankind.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 3:14 PM
  • Husker 23

    Good sir,

    Once again you are doing the in your face... condisending...agressive bull...oney nonsense. I have tried several times to get you to back off and be civil. This in your face agressive bullying dosnt get any one any where. If you want to know what I think (or any one else for that matter) then you need to find a better way to ask. I tried to open venue for introducing ideas in an nonconfrontational way but you just have to be an insulting ..abusive....condisending ***.

    We cant solve any thing with people like you behaving in this manner.

    Think about this for a while and let me know if/when you are willing to be civil and respectful. Other wise ...let it go dude because you wont like MY solutions..but..You probably wont like any one elses solutions no matter what they are because they wont cater to your self serving ideals.

    TRULY.....It really dosent hurt so much to open your self to other ideas and points of view. Really!!!!

    -- Posted by kaygee on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 11:51 PM
  • Dear Ma'am,

    If only to be more like you, the poster child of civil and intelligent discussion. Your spats with me and with others in different blogs on this site prove your high morals. (Sigh)

    Your responses are typical of those who have a loud opinion, but no factual data. You call it condescending...I call it truth.

    I am open to other ideas kaygee...but the fact is, you haven't given me any...other than purchasing non uranium based cereal.

    I'll give you the last word, since it is obviously so important to you.

    Signing off,

    Dude

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Wed, Jul 22, 2009, at 8:48 AM
  • Do you understand that I have been messing with your head????? I allways mess with bullys:^)!

    -- Posted by kaygee on Wed, Jul 22, 2009, at 9:29 PM
  • Although I've never been in debate class, from what I understand, playing the "hapless victim" and "you need to be open-minded" cards instead of trying to refute somebody's points, then playing the debate off as some self-righteous joke, does not reflect well on one's ability to make meaningful discussion. I'll need to remember to stay far away from kaygee in future discussion.

    -- Posted by bjo on Thu, Jul 23, 2009, at 1:04 PM
  • Sorry guys...I just have a VERY WARPED sense of humor. Dont act like a bully and you wont incite my onery side!!!:^)

    -- Posted by kaygee on Wed, Jul 29, 2009, at 4:36 PM
  • Sorry, kaygee, but if Husker23's discussion counts as bullying, then you've apparently been out of school too long to know what REAL bullying is. I'm afraid your "ornery" side is really just your "overly sensitive" side.

    Then again, I've never been in the debate club, so maybe kids in said club did bully each other by having a heated discussion about alternative energy.

    -- Posted by bjo on Fri, Jul 31, 2009, at 11:58 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: