The Kansas Energy Council voted 14-13 last week to remove background information about greenhouse gases from its Web site, exposing a widening rift that has made the advisory group largely irrelevant.
“It’s important to leave it to Congress†to take a position on greenhouse gases, said Jeff Kennedy, a Wichita attorney for Kansas natural gas producers, in supporting the move.
But Bruce Snead, an energy efficiency expert with Kansas State University, called it “ludicrous†to remove from public view information that is relevant to the energy debate.
He’s right. What happened to educating policymakers and the public on energy issues?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
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
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- parkay on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- parkay on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/24
20 Comments
I can see both sides of the argument.
On one side, the argument of having background information of “Green House” gases may seem to favor environmental activists.
On the other side, if the information is withdrawn from the Website, then the energy council it is a neutral body that makes decisions with the facts presented and not “press clippings” from environmental activism which might be irrelevant to the issues at hand.
Your post is not about seeing both sides. It is about one: environmental activism.
To me, having the information available has less to do with “environmental activism” and “environmental activists” and more on the public (and the council) having every scrap of information available relevant to the topic. That’s called “being an informed buyer/voter.” Special interest groups fear it– it’s easier to manipulate votes and opinions if they control what is known.
The Kansas Energy Council seems to be taking their strategic plan from the Communist Party’s Play Book. Withholding information is an well know tactic of the government and advisory bodies in China and North Korea. Tell the people what you want them to hear and continue to make decisions for an uninformed public, and then try to discredit opposition by claiming they are alarmists and without merit. Sound familiar – Kansas Energy Council?
Big oil and gas want to keep everyone in the dark..except for those that pay them for the lights.
Are we then ready to finally heed Pres. Carter example to turn down the thermostat and just put on a sweater?
Shall we ask the next POTUS to expand the use of the solar panel on top of the White House?
Over Thanksgiving Dinner I heard some of the oldest members of my family talk about 1928.
“We were doing so well and everything seemed to be going great. We heard about people making huge amounts of money. We figured, sitting in Oklahoma, that we were missing out. And then, a year later, the Depression made *news!* Hell, we’d been living the Depression for four or five years already!”
As long as the rich can make money off the poor, the corporate-owned media will continue to prop up public opinion and ignore the people who are suffering from sub-prime mortgages, corporate greed, and the widening gap between the haves and have-nots.
Too many people still buy into the “conservatives’” reverse-Robin Hood theory of business. Steal from the poor and give to the rich has never worked and has always resulted in revolution.
There is a huge coporate-funded propaganda campaign that’s dedicated to extending our collective addiction to oil. They’ll keep at it as long as there’s a quarterly P&L report due.
All we need is Paris Hilton to not wear panties again and all the economic catastrophes we’re facing will be pushed out of the news.
In Democracy, it is imperative that the citizens be given the mportant information and be allowed to present their ideas and opinions to the council of decision makers.
Unfortunately this is often violated. Note the downtown arena. Now three holdover countyh commissioners are holding some 150,000 Sedgwick County voters and taxpayers HOSTAGE on the matter.
It looks like the three holdover county commissioners, DAVE UNRUH, TOM WINTERS, AND TIM NORTON won’t even let the two new county commissioners have their say. (See this morning’s “local” section of the Wichita Eagle.
So, TIM NORTON, its time for you to stand up like a man, like you did after the Haysville tornado, and vote the wishes of your Methodist Church members and the taxpayers of all of Sedgwick County and STOP THIS HUGE UNWANTED, UNNEEDED ALBATROSS ICE HOCKEY $500,000,000.37 WASTE OF TAXPAYERS MONEY.
TRUST ME … THE ENTIRE WICHITA METROPOLITAN AREA WOULD OFFER YOU A GIANT “THANK YOU” IF YOU DID.
First: not everyone will give Mr. Norton a thank you. I would ask what your vision is for Wichita? Wichita has a ton of potential but the community must move forward. If you maintain the status quo you are backing up. The major cities in our region are making investments in their entertainment value. Ok City, Kansas City have both recently built or approved arenas. Why not us? If we can’t or don’t attract younger adults our community will suffer.
A new ad campaign has been emphazing the need to retain our young adults who are now leaving for college and not coming back. How do we expect to retain them if we don’t build for the future?
Like him or not Ethridge(sp), had a vision and made a committment. That is what we need, people who are willing to look to the future and commit to it.
I applaud the people who are moving Wichita forward and making Wichita a better place to live and work.
Heh. Etheridge made one hell of a committment with other people’s money. Looks like you have plenty of that going on in Wichita already.
Now, how about someone sucessfully making a committment with their own money? Failures have had the stage long enough.
On the original topic:
Including carbon dioxide as “pollution” is a political statement, all by itself.
We should concentrate on sulfur, lead and other dangerous pollutants.
Carbon Dioxide is NOT pollution ans is not harmful.—–Long Time
Huh? Tell me, just exactly what incentive does any “rich” person have, in keeping anyone “poor”?
The “rich” would have more money to spend, whould they not?
The “rich” would not need government support, so that would help keep taxes lower.
You live in some kind of ciqueish high school world, where you envy those with the nicer cars, and people divide into social groups based on class.
The real world does not work like that.
Economic conservatives want everyone to be “rich” through effort and work and brain power.
Economic liberals want everyone to be equal, even if that means everyone must be equally poor.
Sub prime mortgages? If all of those mortgages that are in trouble, now, had been declined at application, you liberals would be crying about how hard it was for those with bad credit to get loans!—-Just as soon as viable energy alternatives are available, conservative will have no trouble at all with those ideas.
They will finance alternatives in a heart beat, if those alternatives prove viable.
As a scientist I want ALL information out there. Not edited.
Ben, I guess one would have to know the mission of the Kansas Energy Council first to know what should or shouldn’t be included on their Website.
If the Kansas Energy Board has no resident Climatologist on its staff, would it be wise to set for concepts and ideas they cannot argue for or against.
I think the vote they made was wise. The Kansas Energy Board should be of utilitarian nature minding the business of Kansas Energy, not the National Climate “picture.”
I love to drive and it is obvious that most people do. I get tired of the United States gasoline prices being compared to what people pay in England. This is America not backward Europe. Every day Big Oil and Independent Oil People are drilling for more oil and gas with a 50% to 60% chance of finding a commercial oil or gas well. Take those odds to your local Bank. Some big rewards in the Petroleum Industry but some mighty big losses also. Would the average investor put up $250,000 to drill for Oil in Kansas with these odds? Didn’t think so. Thanks to Big Oil when you enjoy your warm house or drive that car.
The Kansas Energy Council is headed up by Mark Parkinson. Nice to see the cons here defending what the democrats do.
“Carbon Dioxide is NOT pollution ans is not harmful.”
Posted by econ101
Tell that to the planet Venus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Atmosphere
High CO2 levels cause illness, and deaths.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co2#Animal_toxicity
Guess we can legislate that greenhouse gasses are good for America and esp. good for kansas.
Hold your breath Cosmos, you are polluting the environment when you breath.
cosmos once again fails to put in parts of a story that incriminates his failure of trying to prove something.
“Carbon dioxide ppm levels (CDPL) are a surrogate for measuring indoor pollutants that may cause occupants to grow drowsy, get headaches, or function at lower activity levels. To eliminate most Indoor Air Quality complaints, total indoor CDPL must be reduced to below 600. NIOSH considers that indoor air concentrations that exceed 1,000 are a marker suggesting inadequate ventilation. ASHRAE recommends they not exceed 1,000 inside a space. OSHA limits concentrations in the workplace to 5,000 for prolonged periods. The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health limits brief exposures (up to ten minutes) to 30,000 and considers CDPL exceeding 40,000 as “immediately dangerous to life and health.” People who breathe 50,000 for more than half an hour show signs of acute hypercapnia, while breathing 70,000 – 100,000 can produce unconsciousness in only a few minutes. Accordingly, carbon dioxide, either as a gas or as dry ice, should be handled only in well-ventilated areas.” from the same wikipedia source cosmos’ reference.
cosmos, a little knowledge is dangerous, try not to endanger us all with your “little” knowledge.
Nathan,
The CO2 that humans exhale is carbon neutral — the carbon comes from the plants we ate, which recently captured it from the atmosphere.
Apparently, the public doesn’t give a rats butt about this and neither does the blog posters.
Why? Because we are tired of the media stroking after the GW whine.
It gets old guys. They teach you that in liberal arts school?