Good for the Kansas Corporation Commission for deciding last week that it would officially pursue policies to promote energy conservation. That makes economic and environmental sense. A Kansas Energy Council study last year determined that conservation could save as much as 20 percent of projected electricity use by 2020. But it remains to be seen whether the KCC decision not to impose any mandates on utilities but to rely on voluntary cooperation will get the desired results.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
62 Comments
That bulb, in the picture, contains mercury.
Make sure you get a haz-mat team out to clean up the mess, if you break it.
Especially if you break a whole box of them.
We used to put mercury switches in just about everything.The greens made us stop.
Now the greens are trying to bring back mercury in our light bulbs.
Every florescent bulb has mercury. So it’s been around forever.
Funny how the CONSERVAtives always oppose CONSERVAtion. They always say “oh, we don’t wanna use the new light bulbs, not water our lawns so much or try to fit the family into an Explorer as opposed to a Hummer”. That is just asking too much for them. No, they’d rather ruin the coast of Florida with oil rigs!
We should follow the lead of Austrailia and ban any light bulb over 20 watts that is not floerescent. This alone would probably eliminate the need for a new coal plant to pollute the air in western Kansas.
“State regulators said Wednesday that they will pursue policies to promote energy conservation, but they’re not planning to impose mandates on utilities.”
We must have more government regulation to mandate energy conservation. If we won’t conserve voluntarily, the government should force us to conserve, for our own good.
And if that means the KCC mandates 2 hour roving blackouts, then that is what needs to happen.
Good first step KCC, but a suggestion isn’t going to make it happen. The government must issue a mandate or the people will not comply.
“State regulators said Wednesday that they will pursue policies to promote energy conservation, but they’re not planning to impose mandates on utilities.”
Translation: We are going to regulate the citizens and not corporations. Corporations give bigger donations to political parties who penalize citizens, and do not hold corps. accountable.
Paulie……………. it is common knowledge that there is mercury in flourescent bulbs. The also do not consume as much electricity. The rationale is that even though these bulbs will put a small amount of mercury into the environment, the decreased power consumption will lead to less electricity being generated. Less electricity generated leads to less mercury (and CO2) in the environemnt from the burning of coal. Coal being used to heat the water for steam turbines dumps a HUGE amount of mercury into the environment.
Something wrong with this logic?
You environment deniers need to get with the program.
Good for the KCC. The waste in energy in American society is appalling.
I like some of Cheryl’s ideas. Americans have almost no concept of doing without. Maybe we need some.
“Make sure you get a haz-mat team out to clean up the mess, if you break it.”
Posted by: Econ101
Typical Paul…
Clean-up and disposal guidelineshttp://www.epa.gov/mercury/spills/index.htm#flourescent
Newer bulbs also contain less mercury. Also, the mercury vapor is absorbed by the phosphor, glass, and tube electrodes during use.
Re rolling blackouts.
Another solution — Austin Energy (TX) provides a free programmable thermostat, plus free installation ($200 to $280 value), to their customers.
The thermostat allows them to “cycle-off” the customer’s A/C (no more than 10 or 15 minutes per half hour) during peak demand.
http://www.austinenergy.com/Energy%20Efficiency/Programs/Power%20Partner/index.htm
LibsOne of your own, upthread, proposed “rolling blackouts” as a viable “conservation” option.
Government mandated blackouts!
Well now, radical enviromentalism is sure to gain lots of public support if you put these kooks “front and center” in the campaign!
Proves my point, actually: Liberals just want CONTROL and libs see green issues as a way to gain control. Actually solving anything isn’t the point!
Electricity preserves food, preserves medicine, transports food and medicine.
Electricity employs people, in the coal production, in the untility itself, in the industries that need electricity to survive.
Those “mandated rolling blackouts” will hit YOUR server, too, libs!
Your plans will only hurt the “little people” — the rest of us will just get our own electric generaters.
Greenhouse Grass
“causes”
Greenhouse Gas
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=071010135718.abucc7eu&show_article=1
And, if you force blackouts, I will personally try to find a generator that fits in the fireplace and burns coal and wood.
Geez Paulie, wake up on the wrong side of the bed today? heheheh!
Or just thinking about what a little conservation would do to your fossil fuel heavy portfolio?
ksfarmgrrl,
Paulie seems to just hate anything that’s “green” (except money).
Paulie,
Servers usually have UPS systems.
For home users,’Do-It-Yourself Solar-Powered PC: Hardware’http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/hardware_components/
“In the second article in this series, we focus on the hardware required to run a desktop PC, including monitor, with solar cells 24/7. The PC consumes a world-record low of only 61 Watts!”
That’s it Paulie! Defend that God given American right to waste!
Good thing folks during WWII didn’t think like you. Imagine Paulie being madated no meat Tuesday. He’d probably eat the neighbors dog in protest.
Gore gets a cold shoulderSteve LytteOctober 14, 2007
Climate crusader: Al Gore.Photo: AP
ONE of the world’s foremost meteorologists has called the theory that helped Al Gore share the Nobel Peace Prize “ridiculous” and the product of “people who don’t understand how the atmosphere works”.
Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, told a packed lecture hall at the University of North Carolina that humans were not responsible for the warming of the earth.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/gore-gets-a-cold-shoulder/2007/10/13/1191696238792.html
Enviomentalist must be having a fit about this one. Afraid I won’t be around long enough to hear Cosmos tell me what a hack Dr. Gray is.
Conservation isn’t a bad thing but until we really make a concerted effort to wean ourselves off foreign oil then how seriously can we take the ‘experts’.
We have an abundance of coal like or not – and with proper scrubbers in place have a ready source of energy. We have off shore oil that hasn’t been touched. Oil in Alaska that is available for now but Russia is looking at taking it.
This isn’t a serious argument until the ‘greens’ begin to act responsibility. IMOHO
Cosmos do you have an UPS at your house?
Anti Enviromental Civil Disobedience is comming.
Hey, “gay rights” activists rather regularly take their protests inside Churches, since they dont believe what is being preached, anyway.
Anti war types often burn the flag. (Hey, there is an idea, paint your carbon red white and blue and call your coal plant a 1st Amendment statement.)
I suggest, to you radical greenies, that many of us do NOT believe YOUR religion.
And, if you force it down our throats, we will retaliate.
I am thinking of a name for this new group:
“Sasquatch Carbon”
“BigFood-Print”
Oh well, I will wait for the mandates.
We will then try to neutralize anything you come up with.
What a ranting clown you are Paulie.
Hey Paulie? Make a BIGAZZZ carbon footprint! Burn your house!Burn your car! Burn your keyboard!
bigfoot print
Darn, should have eaten first, before posting.
Look libs
some of you tell us, on the abortion threads, that you wont follow the law, if your “rights” are restricted.
That is your rationale for leaving current laws alone.
There is much I can do, on the “carbon” issue, without breaking the law.
I suggest that all of us who do not worship at the Church of GW should make it clear that any carbon reduction, forced on us, will be made up for, in our fireplaces and elsewhere.
We don’t buy your garbage.
We have a right to believe what we want to believe.
We have a right to generate more “voluntary” carbon for any amount of carbon you mandate that we reduce.
“Afraid I won’t be around long enough to hear Cosmos tell me what a hack Dr. Gray is.”
Posted by: ksgrm
I’ll let climate scientists describe Gray.
‘Gray and Muddy Thinking about Global Warming’http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/04/gray-on-agw/
“Gray’s paper begins with a quote from Senator Inhofe calling global warming a hoax perpetrated on the American people, and ends with a quote by a representive of the Society of Petroleum Geologists stating that Crichton’s State of Fear has “the absolute ring of truth.” It is the gaping flaws in the scientific argument sandwiched between these two statements that are our major concern.
…The problem is Gray’s failure to adapt to a modern era of meteorology, which demands hypotheses soundly grounded in quantitative and consistent physical formulations, not seat-of-the-pants flying. “
Econ
Burning firewood in the fireplace is carbon neutral.
Because the wood you burn is replaced by the wood that is growing and absorbing CO2.
Duh.
“ONE of the world’s foremost meteorologists”
When a phony expert calls himself an expert, he’s still phony.
Usually experts don’t call themselves “experts.”
They just get published in peer-reviewed journals.
It’s not what they say or what they say they do, it’s what they do.
LOL
All Carbon, even from coal and Petroleum, WERE once organic.
Where is your cut off date for that last whopper?
Wood can be allowed to rot, in the field, right?
Also, though I am not a big ethanol fan, by your logic, the growth of the corn, which uses carbon would then make ethanol carbon neutral?
LOL
Yes, I have oversimplified, but not nearly as much as you.
(Wow, did I just ask a greenie to get technical, my apologies to the other bloggers.)
And, Capn, if burning wood doesnt piss you off enough, I will burn coal in my fireplace!
(No retaliation needed as long as you greenies stay away from mandates.)
“usually experts dont call themselves experts”
—unless they are greenies writing in the WeBlog!
“We don’t buy your garbage.
We have a right to believe what we want to believe.”
Posted by: Econ101 | October 14, 2007 at 11:44 AM
Absolutely… it proves what an idiot you are!
In AIT, Gore only said “if” Greenland melted, etc, with NO time frame given.
Paulie’s “expert”(sic) Lomborg falsely claimed that Gore told the world “to expect 20-foot sea-level rises over this century”.
Paulie, if you want to “believe” that “if” means “it will happen this century”, go right ahead. It proves that you are an idiot.
Econ–
1. Not all flourescents have mercury.
2. The amount of mercury is miniscule.
3. The biggest source of harmful mercury in our environment is from burning coal which atomizes mercury and puts it high into the atmosphere where it is spread indiscriminately.
So anything that reduces electricity (mainly produced from burning coal) reduces uncontained mercury.
Duh.
Wood can be allowed to rot, in the field, right?
I’m not a chemist . . . maybe Ben can help me out here.
But I think that rotting wood would also release CO2. Don’t know how it would compare with burning.
Heh heh,
I’m gonna WALK to the store now Paulie. It’s only a couple hundred yards. I’m taking my canvas grocery bag.
This walk done in the name of Paul.
Burning firewood is carbon neutral, because it releases carbon that the tree removed from the atmosphere.
CO2 exhaled by humans is carbon neutral, because the carbon is from plants we ate.
Burning oil and coal is not carbon neutral, because it had been safely stored underground. It unbalances the natural carbon cycle equilibrium.
Thank goodness we didn’t rely on people like Paul to get us through WW2. When people were asked to conserve, carpool, recycle, etc. Paul would be out there driving the biggest gas guzzler, hoarding food, throwing recyclables in the trash and leaving his lights on 24/7 even during a blackout test.
Paul just wants us all on our knees so we can polish the knobs of some oil sheik.
Not to mention Paul is bad for business. Numerous businesses are incorporating energy saving features to cut down on overhead costs. But Paul is constantly wrong about so many things.
“Hey, “gay rights” activists rather regularly take their protests inside Churches, since they dont believe what is being preached, anyway.”
Uh, links please? Especially to the “inside churches” part? Please list the name of the group that YOU SAY did this.
Why do I think this will be like the fictional email from JR’s girlfriend? I tell my chickens, “girls, you cackled, now you gotta lay”.
I’m a waitin’ on that egg paulie…
Doug
FDR was an idiot, on economic matters.
WW2 was fought rather brilliantly, by FDR and Truman, but economically, they were not very bright.
The American people suffered more, economically, than was necessary, due to their socialist policy.
The only groups I have heard of recently that invade church services with their protests, are the Pro Life groups, like the one here, who invaded a Worship Service of Holy Eucharist at Reformation Lutheran not long ago…
Many of the gay groups have their own congregations, or else attend congregations that are Open, or Open and Affirming congregations…
Farmgirl
Just happened, recently, in California:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58096
It is not the first time, or the first place.
DougI have no problem with voluntary conservation and voluntary substitution of alternative products.
Do NOT mandate.
Farmgirl
I DID receive an email from someone who stuck up for JR.I explained that.That person told me/asked me not to talk about JR and alcohol.
I have no way to prove if that person really knows JR or not.
However,
JR DID come very close to denying that HE had ever sent me an email.Then I proved that he had.
JR also made several false claims about me, knowing those claims were false at the time.
At least I had some form of evidence for my claims.
I admire those who fight for lost causes. Even you.
JR lost.
FDR’s policies greatly reduced the level of poverty in America and spurred economic growth to the greatest economic expansion that wasn’t seen until Clinton. As usual you are wrong on everything.
If we all lived like Paul we’d be speaking German and forced into military service. Paul, just come out and admit that you are a fascist. At least be honest in that respect.
DougFDR violated the Constitution repeatedly, on economic matters.
SCOTUS said so.
I think the forum at large is in agreeement Paulie.
You said you had an email about me FROM someone else.
You spun it six ways from Sunday. Inluding claiming that the email had a virus and you opened it anyway,
You have no such email.
You never did.
You lied and you are lying still.
“I suggest that all of us who do not worship at the Church of GW should make it clear that any carbon reduction, forced on us, will be made up for, in our fireplaces and elsewhere.”
Posted by: Econ101
Start burning!The “greenies” helped cancel 8 new coal-fired plants that TXU had planned to build. That’s a forced carbon reduction.
I suggest Paul buy all the coal that those 8 plants would’ve burned in the next 5+ decades, and TRY to burn it in his fireplace.
PS Buy a house with HUGE acreage, near a rail line, for the coal delivery.
wasnt paul pissed that Hitler and Mussolini didnt get a Nobel Prize
Paulie probably burned that email. heh heh
read:
http://www.amazon.com/FDRs-Folly-Roosevelt-Prolonged-Depression/dp/140005477X
“FDR s agricultural policies were in a class of genius all their own. Convinced that falling prices were hindering economic recovery, FDR decided that prices were now to be raised by any means necessary. Agriculture Secretary Henry Wallace, as thoroughgoing a Soviet dupe as this country has ever seen, described the wholesale destruction of crops and livestock in which he and FDR engaged in order to boost farm prices as “a cleaning up of the wreckage from the old days of unbalanced production” (as Tindall and Shi quote him, approvingly).
Wallace, you see, knew precisely what quantity of production would bring things into “balance.” What a waste that Wallace should have devoted his omniscience to a matter so mundane when thousands of crimes were doubtless going unsolved at that very moment.
Tindall and Shi assure us that “for a while these farm measures worked.” Well, if by “worked” you mean they succeeded in their goal of raising the prices of food and clothing at a time when people were desperately poor, then I suppose they did “work.” Slaughtering some six million pigs and engaging in the destruction of enormous supplies of wheat and cotton did tend to increase the prices of these items. Congratulations.”
As shown, above, FDR had alot in common with Stalin.
http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=355&sortorder=articledate
J R,
Paul also seems to believe that the word “if”, means that it will happen during this century.
He seems to have some “problems”.
JRI never lied.Not once.You can not prove that I lied because I told the truth.I can prove that you lied.Now, lets drop this, nobody really cares but you, since your pride is still wounded.
Problems, cosmos?? From what I have seen on the Blog, I wouldnt want Econ anywhere near my finances/investments/tax papers…
Didn’t you once post that truth is what you say it is Paulie?
I seem to remember that.
You busted yourself.
You lied.
Take your own advice, JR, this is lifted from one of your many emails to me:
“From the tips of your fingers…..to the depths of a distant soul…..words touch hearts
type carefullyJ
You said you had email from another source. Someone other than me.
You lied.
I’d think you’d rather not remind everyone.
Heh JR, maybe it was “barbara fox” who sent that to paulie? You know, the one who’s last name is NOT etal…. hee hee hee!
Ya know that’s right kfg!
I may or may not have emailed Paulie if I thought he was outta line. But he coulda got my old tag line anywhere.
Econ claims that FDR was terrible at national economics.
Really?
I guess that’s why he was elected to office four times, why he is in the top five of all time great presidents as ranked by historians, and his face is on the dime.
Econ sheds a silent tear everytime he drives by a playground and sees all those kids playing–they could be chained to looms making money for some rich capitalist like they used to be . . .
J R,
Maybe Econ101 just lacks the tiny amount of intelligence and common sense needed to distinguish between credible, and non-credible sources?
Econ101 seems to believe anything that supports his opinion.
For example, he considers Lomborg an “expert”, even though Lomborg spreads falsehoods about Gore’s AIT.
Kansas, WHERE are your Congress and the Justice Dept sources re the Sierra Club and levee failures???
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/dont_count_on_f.html#comment-70787152
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/open_thread_28.html#comment-71041282
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/06/sicko-offers-gl.html#comment-74527572
And thank you for posting the levee lie again above.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/09/open-thread-926.html#comment-84210900
It proves that you ignore facts, and have ZERO credibility.
“Look in the Congressional Record cosmos, not the Sierra Club. And look at Justice Department reports.”
Posted by: Republican | May 26, 2007 at 12:34 PM
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/dont_count_on_f.html#comment-70787370
cosmos is a racist because he calls the expert and scientific analysis of the Black Environmental Group of Louisiana liars, who are experts on the Mississippi River Basin including the Levee projects.
Kansas
Is this the “expert and scientific analysis of the Black Environmental Group” that you posted?
(emphasis added)http://aaenvironment.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html