Brownback backing coal

brownbackSen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., exerted his influence on the fight over a proposed coal-fired plant expansion near Holcomb, to no avail. But at a recent appearance in Garden City, he signaled a willingness to fight on and defend coal plants generally.

“It’s been a tough, tough fight” and “it’s not over,” he said of Sunflower Electric Power Corp.’s effort to overcome an air-quality permit denial.

Of the energy, economy and environment, Brownback said: “These three have to travel together.”

On coal’s role in the country’s energy portfolio: “The answer’s not ‘no,’ it’s ‘how?’”

48 Comments

  1. bth
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    I wonder is Brownback will repeat Neufield’s lie that the Holcomb expansion would be essentially carbon-neutral.

  2. American_Way
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 7:42 am | Permalink

    About Oil & Oil Pricing

    This is an incredible video presentation by a man named Lindsey Williams, and he seems to know what he is talking about. If what he says is true, (and he is very convincing), then this country of ours, and we, are in deep trouble. I do think we all need to be aware of what this portrays. It would be very very hard to overcome such a monumentaly screwed up plan, that is in place, for dealing with oil, and oil pricing. If what he says is true, then this better explains some of the crazyness that we’ve seen happening in the oil market over the years.

    If what Lindsey Williams says is true, this country has NOW plenty of “proven”oil reserves to be self sufficient for 200 years. He says Gull Island, of the north slope of Alaska has proven oil and gas reserves as large, or larger, than Saudi Arabia’s reserves.

    This video may be deleted at some point.

    See this, and decide for yourselves!

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147

  3. CapitolWildcat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    Someone tell Sam that “how?” isn’t an answer.

  4. darkanonm
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:37 am | Permalink

    I have seen the “Gull Island” story in various media, and not very vredible media at that, but the logistics of getting to the oil would be the kicker, and since it is home to a lot of birds you don’t want to spill or have a load of disruption. Same story as with Alaska, there are no refineries to handle the oil, so it gets sold to Japan.

  5. Regular
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    Good video American Way.

    You know, there are huge oil fields not pumped all over Canada and the U.S. The main reason are the environmental wackos like Sierra Club who are bringing this country down because of their precious protectionist programs.

    It’s time to kick these dudes in the nads and get our oil that we need and deserver.

    DRILL HERE
    DRILL NOW
    PAY LESS

  6. gster
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I agree with Brownback! (Now I’ll have to gargle with Simple Green after saying that- it’s far worse than cursing and being heard by your Mother). We have such a huge supply of coal that has to be utilized in power production in a responsible and efficient manner. That process should be high on the “to do” list of our government.

  7. bth
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    “in a responsible and efficient manner”

    I wonder how many of us have ever actually handled coal? How many of us have ever been involved in coal utilization research?

  8. Regular
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    I wonder how many of us have been involved in current research and not research that was 20 years ago?

  9. Phantom
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    The proper respones isn’t “HOw”, but “Why!”

  10. bth
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    Valid point regular - that is why I keep in touch with my colleagues.

    I will grant that ‘how’ is a valid question; however that question remains unanswered. And Neufeld’s lies are clearly nt the answer.

  11. Phantom
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Price of coal doubled last yr., would get very expensive feeding the beast.

  12. Phantom
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 11:06 am | Permalink

    Brownback’s not up for election, he can afford to be the coal industry’s point man.

  13. Regular
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    I wonder how many BTU’s Sierra Club members yield?

    They are sort of the ’soft coal’ of the carbon based organism world, but might make an interesting test to discover yield prospects.

    Would be a lot of insalubrious, gaseous by-products though.

  14. darkanonm
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    I am waiting for the North Dakota field to be developed, since it is close to the new Refinery in South Dakota. Maybe it will lower the price, if and when it comes.

  15. DavidB
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    DRILL NOW DRILL HERE CONSUME MORE Make our children pay the terrible price of our failure to conserve and plan.

  16. Posted June 6, 2008 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    “http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080606/ap_on_bi_st_ma_re/wall_street

    Another great day for the bush economy. Dow is down 360 pts and oil is up $11 for a record high. Unemployment jump is the highest since 1986. Layoffs continue apace.

    All is going according to darth cheney’s plan…

  17. mom
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Why didn’t Bush and his Republican controlled Congress pass legislation for big oil companies to drill in the US. They had 6 years of total control and the Congress rubber-stamped everything else Bush pushed through. Perhaps the reason is because the big oil companies, in their secret meetings in the White House at the invitation of Dick Cheney, set out their energy policies to get rich off the Milddle East oil? Funny thing, these big oil companies have been making record-breaking profits since Bush and Cheney got into office - even when the price of oil gets getting higher and higher.

  18. littlejohn
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    “you don’t want to spill or have a load of disruption.”

    Yes, the old NIMBY theory. THe Real reason we don;t develop oil fields in the United States is that we would rather dirty up somebody elses back yard. Now, we are just complaining about the price to do so. THat is the real dirty secret nobody wants to talk about. Let’s dirty up some other country, we don;t care, as long as it’s not here. NIMBY Rules the country

  19. WSClark
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

    Actually, LJ, a couple of friends and I were going to come over to your house tomorrow and start drilling in your backyard. Of course, we will give you a cut of the profits.

    We hope that you have room for a few oil derricks.

    PSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!

    Just kidding, we’re going to drill in McCluer’s backyard.

  20. Jed
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

    Our national slogan:
    USE IT UP, WEAR IT OUT, EAT IT ALL!

  21. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    Democrat President Bill Clinton vetoed ANWR about 10 years ago with the support of Democrats in the US House and US Senate.

    ANWR would now be daily generating as much oil as the US daily imports from the Saudi royal family had that Democrat veto not killed drilling in ANWR 10 years ago.

    The primary reason we now have limited supply is that the Democrat party vetoed ANWR and started limiting supply 10 years ago. That veto is still working hard to limit supply to this very day.

    With that Democrat veto and the limited supply that it has resulted in, we now have $4 per gallon gas.

  22. Jed
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

    Uh, Stoned,
    Bush and a republican rubberstamp congress ruled for six of the past ten years. If ANWAR were really the republican solution, don’t you think they would have passed and signed it? You need to quit blaming Clinton for all your present problems, and put the blame where it belongs, squarely on your own shoulders.

  23. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    stoned,

    You just said that the U.S. is importing zero oil from Saudia.

    It would take a decade (or longer) after the Arctic Refuge was opened to get the first tiny trickle of oil.

    Then there’s a hypothetical, 50% chance production might go something like this graph (which ignores costs of production).

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/figure4.html

    Meanwhile, production from Prudhoe and other sources would be dropping. Can you say “less than status quo”?

    And demand would be rising due to a higher population — unless the real solution, higher mpg, was used.

  24. Monkeyhawk
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

    “Jed” accurately notes –

    “Bush and a republican rubberstamp congress ruled for six of the past ten years. If ANWAR were really the republican solution, don’t you think they would have passed and signed it? You need to quit blaming Clinton for all your present problems, and put the blame where it belongs, squarely on your own shoulders.”

    Grover Cleveland caused all our problems!

    (And John McCain was there to fight him.)

  25. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

    Here are the FACTS on Congressional votes on this issue:

    American-Made Oil and Gas: A History of Support and Opposition

    Washington, Jun 4 - By the Issue

    ANWR Exploration:

    House Republicans: 91% Supported

    House Democrats: 86% Opposed

    Coal-to-Liquid:

    House Republicans: 97% Supported

    House Democrats: 78% Opposed

    Oil Shale Exploration:

    House Republicans: 90% Supported

    House Democrats: 86% Opposed

    Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Exploration:

    House Republicans: 81% Supported

    House Democrats: 83% Opposed

    Refinery Increased Capacity:

    House Republicans: 97% Supported

    House Democrats: 96% Opposed

    SUMMARY

    * 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of American-made oil and gas

    * 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against increasing the production of American-made oil and gas

    Produced by the Office of the House Republican Whip

    http://conaway.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=92733

  26. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 10:12 pm | Permalink

    This is what actually happened. There is no couldda, wouldda, shouldda involved here. This is the HISTORY of the Democrat party when it comes to US oil supply.

    Democrat President Bill Clinton vetoed ANWR about 10 years ago with the support of Democrats in the US House and US Senate.

    ANWR would now be daily generating as much oil as the US daily imports from the Saudi royal family had that Democrat veto not killed drilling in ANWR 10 years ago.

    The primary reason we now have limited supply is that the Democrat party vetoed ANWR and started limiting supply 10 years ago. That veto is still working hard to limit supply to this very day.

    With that Democrat veto and the limited supply that it has resulted in, we now have $4 per gallon gas.

    “Government geologists say ANWR could hold up to 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil. That’s 30 years of imports from Saudi Arabia.”

    http://www.anwr.org/archives/2005_03.php

    Had ANWR been passed 10 years ago, the equivalent of all daily imports from Saudi Arabia for the next 30 years would now be available from ANWR.

    And who is responsible for the missing ANWR oil? The Democrat party.

    The Democrat party is responsible by way of the votes of Democrat voters who voted Bill Clinton and the Democrat Congress into federal power so that Clinton and federal Democrats were able to veto ANWR 10 years ago.

    Don’t get mad at me that gas is $4 per gallon. If you want to get mad at anybody, get mad at Democrat President Bill Clinton and federal Democrats that vetoed ANWR 10 years ago.

  27. Monkeyhawk
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, “stonegroundwheat” –

    But “American-made” simply does not apply to the fossil fuel industry. What part of “multi-national corporation” don’t you understand?

    All the oil pumped out of the planet goes into a common bucket. And America doesn’t have enough to make a big difference.

    The people who have enough to make a difference are flush with petro-dollars (I mean petro-Euros these days) to the point they could stop exporting OPEC oil for decades without feeling a pinch.

    The Cons’ first mistake is that they approach this problem with a pre-existing goal: more oil.

    A rational approach would be more energy and making the most of the energy we’ve got.

    “Clean” coal is an admirable goal, but so far it’s just the brainchild of some Public Relations firm. Yeah, it might be possible. And, yeah, that’d be nice. But so far the technology is about as advanced as “Flapping Your Arms and Flying to Vegas.” Another nice idea, perhaps, but not the basis for public policy.

    Cons come across as if their only interest is to fill the tank of their rusted out ‘78 Torino (with the faded “No Fat Chicks” bumper sticker) for less than sixty bucks.

    Ain’t gonna happen.

    And “American” oil ain’t gonna make a difference.

    Not in the global commodities market.

    Now, we could nationalize all American oil operations, remove the obscene profits of Mobil-Exxon and Conoco/Phillips and Chevron, et al. We could make American oil production a “Manhattan Project” kind of operation. Somehow I suspect that’s not the option you advocate, “stonegroundwheat.” But that’s what your lamebrain arguments are really advocating.

    Like the blind pig who eventually finds an acorn, George WMD Bush declared in a State of the Union Address that “America has to rid itself from its addiction to oil.”

    All you Cons who insist on drilling for more oil are like the guy who jumps off the Empire State Building and at the 67th story says, “So far, so good.”

  28. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

    Stoned again posted the obvious lie,

    “ANWR would now be daily generating as much oil as the US daily imports from the Saudi royal family had that Democrat veto not killed drilling in ANWR 10 years ago.”

    Stoned, I explained to you in my 7:00 pm post that is not accurate — unless Saudi imports are about zero.

    I’ll try again,

    anwr.org is a pro-drilling lobby with zero credibilty.

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/analysisdiscussion.html
    Seven to 12 years are estimated to be required from an approval to explore and develop to first production from the ANWR Area.”

    “First production” is the trickle just past the “0″ point on this graph,
    http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/figure4.html

    And the 16 billion barrel estimate is a very unlikely 5% chance, that also ignores costs.

  29. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    Monkeyhawk,

    Daily ANWR oil is equivalent to daily imports from Saudi Arabia for 30 years. In your mind that is not enough to make a difference?

    In addition to ANWR, the US has over 1 TRILLION barrels of oil just waiting to be extracted from oil shale. In your mind is THAT enough to make a difference?

    You were aware, weren’t you, Monkeyhawk, that the reason that 1 TRILLION barrels of oil cannot yet be tapped is that the DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED CONGRESS will simply not permit it?

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/may/15/panel-defeats-attempt-end-oil-shale-moratorium/

    I am just pointing out what has actually happened. And what is happening now. We don’t need to go the insults route, do we?

    Think clinically.

    So, I take it that your solution is to have the US government take control of all US oil resources. What do you propose to do with the profits? Split them up among the people? Or use them to fund government?

  30. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 6, 2008 at 11:15 pm | Permalink

    For anyone wishing to petition the US Congress to drill NOW for US oil resources, join over 400,000 fellow Americans in signing this simple petition to Congress:

    “We, therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries.”

    http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659

  31. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 12:38 am | Permalink

    stonegroundwheat posted June 6, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    “… by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries.”

    “Proven” means known. Only one well has been drilled in the Arctic Refuge, and the results are secret. The Refuge is a new, unknown “frontier”, with a very different geology than Prudhoe.

    stonegroundwheat, how much oil the Badami field is producing? How profitable is it?

    “to reduce our dependence… from unstable countries.””?

    The brilliant stonegroundwheat of course knows that a drunk shutdown the entire TAPS oil production, with a hunting rifle, during heightened security.

    ‘Alaska clean-up ‘could take years’
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1584553.stm

    The brilliant stonegroundwheat knows that the U.S. Army studied TAPS, and said that it was “indefensible”.

    And the brilliant stonegroundwheat knows that a mid-winter shutdown of TAPS, due to mechanical problems or anything, could cause the heated oil to congeal — with a restart impossible until months later, in the summer.

    In short, the brilliant stonegroundwheat believes that a very “unstable” source of oil is a stable source.

  32. mom
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 12:45 am | Permalink

    If the Big Oil companies are stripped of their profits (that will never happen and we know it), maybe the profits should go to pay the debt from the Iraq War?

    I’m all for drilling oil in the US but let’s not just blame it on the Democrats. The Republicans had 6 years of total control and they never once attempted to drill within the US. Perhaps it is because Big Oil could make more profits from their deals with the Middle East oil?

    Just think, if the Republicans would have started to drill 7 years ago (when they first had total control), we would be that much closer to being independent of foreign oil.

    Why not blame both parties for the mess we are in?

  33. Nathaniel
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 12:48 am | Permalink

    mom,

    The Democrats blocked the Energy Policy several times. I am not sure what ever ended up getting passed.

    Simply because the Republicans had both houses didn’t mean that they could do anything they wanted to.

  34. mom
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 1:00 am | Permalink

    How did the Democrats block anything when the Republicans had total control and rubber stamped everything Bush wanted? Bush did not use his veto pen until the Democrats regained power, did he? And as I remember, the Republicans had locked the Democrats out of many of the committee meetings when they were discussing everything that was being rubber stamped. Bottom line, the Democrats did not have the majority by themselves and I don’t remember many Republicans leaving the rubber stamp group to join the Democrats to block anything.

    I’m not saying the Democrats are not to blame. I’m saying that both parties are to blame for the oil mess we’re in.

  35. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 1:18 am | Permalink

    cosmos_originally,

    The words below are the words of a petition. People can click on the link below the very simple petition and decide whether or not they want to sign it.

    I am not making any arguments here, I am just making the petition known for people to check out on their own. There are a couple videos on the link with more information so that people can inform themselves before they decide for themselves.

    “We, therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries.”

    http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659

  36. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 1:50 am | Permalink

    stonegroundwheat,

    Thank you for being honest, and admitting that you are 100% clueless about the petition that you are promoting.

  37. Nathaniel
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 1:53 am | Permalink

    Look, here is cosmos again making ad hominem attacks.

    Is that all you can do besides posting links?

    We might as well be talking to a brick wall for all the actual discussion we can get from you.

  38. rich4the97th
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 2:12 am | Permalink

    It is with great sadness that the once great Republican Party has insisted on making the care of our environment as a political football especially when it comes to the use of coal. As of today this country does not have the science to totally burn coal without exposing the atmosphere to CO2 which even the conservative Supreme Court call a greenhouse gas and a polutant. The Republicans have told us that greed for mega bucks are more important than the health of our planet or those who life on it.

    With this it does not suprise me that our Junior Senator would back a CO2 belching power plant. This is just one of very many reasons that I pray that the Democrats have a very strong candidate in 2010 when Mr. Brownback runs for Govenor.

    Will the REAL Republicans please take back your kidnapped party from the ultra-right Neocons

  39. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 2:25 am | Permalink

    Nathaniel posted June 7, 2008 at 1:53 am

    “Look, here is cosmos again making ad hominem attacks.”
    ————

    Maybe this is too difficult for Nathaniel to understand — but if he cannot refute the facts and points I posted above, Nathaniel is the one who is making “ad hominem attacks”.

    Not me.

    So go ahead Nathaniel… try to prove that I am wrong, without falsely accusing me of “making ad hominem attacks”.

    Nathaniel can’t do it. LOL!

  40. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 2:36 am | Permalink

    cosmos_originally,

    Did you read the links describing known, but untapped US oil and shale oil reserves and listen to the videos on the petition web page? Or are you an expert on the US oil industry that can tell from a few written words that a petition such as this one is based on false data?

    “We, therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries.”

    http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659

  41. cosmos_originally
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 2:43 am | Permalink

    stonegroundwheat,

    If you are an oil expert, please explain exactly how you know that those “untapped US oil and shale oil reserves” are “proven reserves”.

  42. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 3:01 am | Permalink

    cosmos_originally,

    As you are evidently not an oil expert, please read these and tell us your personal opinion about the provenness of these reserves:

    38 Billion Barrels of U.S. Oil Resources Inaccessible

    http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=d4b72449-7edb-493d-88ff-76bfe669e0f2

    RAND: U.S. Oil Shale Resources Are Three Times Larger Than the Current Oil Reserves in Saudi Arabia

    http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=1c1a10c1-15fd-4ad8-a426-b9a87f635903

  43. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 4:55 am | Permalink

    New Poll: 81% of Americans Support Greater Use of Domestic Energy Resources

    June 4, 2008

    WASHINGTON, DC – A new survey of 1,000 Americans nationwide conducted by the polling company™, inc for American Solutions for Winning the Future reveals that 81% of the American people support the U.S. using more of its own domestic energy resources, including the oil and coal already here, to combat the rising cost of energy and reduce dependence on foreign energy sources. According to the survey, 85% of Republicans, 76% of Democrats, and 83% of independents support using more domestic energy resources, making the tri-partisan agreement overwhelming.

    The survey also shows that 69% of Americans support lowering energy prices by using domestic energy sources, even if it means drilling off our coasts and in Alaska, rather than suing OPEC.

  44. stonegroundwheat
    Posted June 7, 2008 at 4:57 am | Permalink

    New Poll: 81% of Americans Support Greater Use of Domestic Energy Resources

    http://www.americansolutions.com/ResourceCenter/Read.aspx?guid=9843634b-8ea6-4cfb-b201-41da92d222e9

  45. Posted June 29, 2008 at 1:24 am | Permalink

    gcotkbes etzcgwv kihxufyow btedoavzf eoahqwx lrwgsucaf gviuzkbhx

  46. Posted June 29, 2008 at 1:32 am | Permalink

    qbxe wnzhl zcjibvn khgdqm xyri tflndxoz klxoa

  47. Posted June 29, 2008 at 1:39 am | Permalink

    nyrshgl arzdlsuyt gzyeu ohjwkzt daynbsxcw psyfk opux

  48. Posted June 29, 2008 at 1:50 am | Permalink

    zagpnxy ilah xyzfwhdc zwgnlixjo gxvmqzou uxfakvgm aeynktvi

2 Trackbacks

  1. By holcomb garden on June 11, 2008 at 9:44 am

    [...] coal-fired plant expansion near Holcomb, to no avail. But at a recent appearance in garden City, …http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/06/brownback-backing-coal/Seven Tourists Players, Two Coaches Named to SAL All-Star Game OurSports CentralAsheville manager [...]

  2. By Karan on June 16, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Karan…

    I always enjoy coming to this Free Mp3 Download because you offer great tips and advice for people like me who can always use a few good pointers. I will be getting my friends to pop around fairly soon….