Comments on: Kansas should get smart on home wind

By: Jed

Jed — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:49:40 +0000

I’m certainly for utilizing windpower, but I’m also a bit suspicious of T. Boone Pickens alleged altruism. Let’s just be sure he doesn’t end up owning the air and sunlight in the state.

By: mrbill

mrbill — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:25:40 +0000

The UTILITIES pay TAX.?? ..Nonsense. YOU pay the tax. They just collect it in your bill.

No business of ANY TYPE pays tax. YOU pay it when you buy the product. Businesses do not have a printing press to get money. First YOU give it to them.

Then they buy things and pay these TAXES you speak of.

Why do you think the politicians like to tax them? Because they can get you to believe they are taxing these EVIL corporations etc. That way they can raise YOUR taxes by raising the Businesses taxes.

Remember that evil EXXON..they made 40 billion last year. Well they paid FOUR times that in taxes. Where did they get that tax money…any guesses where they got it…from your hot little hands through the gas purchase.

Many economist have proposed that NO BUSINESSES be taxed at all.

THis would force the politicians to stand up and tax you directly for the goodies you have and force them to tell you what its for. Otherwise its just generic funds to be farted off.

By: Chas

Chas — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 04:11:55 +0000

Good night; Good luck; God bless —-
Whatever you conceive God to be!!

Blessings ALL!!

So mote it be!!

By: TomPaine

TomPaine — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 03:14:37 +0000

Didn’t Love Box Company use a wind Generator 20 years ago?

By: Phantom

Phantom — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:08:48 +0000

Brownback just loves tilting at windmills!

By: Chas

Chas — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:05:50 +0000

Franklin you got no evidence either… Same as what I have… Doesnt make you right, and me wrong… I would however, direct you to the T. Boone Pickens Plan… and keep in mind, I am NOT a Pickens fan at all… but this plan of his looks very good, and answers most of the objections you raised… I posted two links to answer your objectiions… I have seen no such thing from you as of yet…

By: Franklin

Franklin — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:04:42 +0000

Mr Bill
That is nuts.
The largest property tax payer, in every taxing district in the state of Kansas, are the utility companies doing business in that taxing district.
Why make taxpayers pay for the upkeep of transmission lines?
Why not have the utilities pay tax on those properties?
By the way, Utilities pay the HIGHEST property tax rates in the State of Kansas.

By: Franklin

Franklin — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:02:54 +0000

Chas
You have made a claim with no evidence.
As GMC notes, above, taxpayers MUST subsidize wind, or wind will never work for the individual.

By: GMC70

GMC70 — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:43:21 +0000

Brownback would discover, quickly, that without massive subsidies, such an investment would make no economic sense whatsoever.

In demanding massive subsidies, of course, those who advocate same simply wish to pass on the costs of their smug self-satisfaction to others. How nice of them.

By: mrbill

mrbill — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:00:24 +0000

Texas doesn’t have an issue with the transmission lines because when I lived there they OWNED the wires themselves.

So they do what they want.

That is what more states should do. Then let some providers bid for the privilege of serving electricity and running the plants for your customers.

We should extend that to both cable and telephone wires. If we owned the wires we could get bids for all kinds of phone and cable and new not invented yet services coming into out homes. And not be at the mercy of the content providers.

The content providers should NOT be allowed to own the ACCESS also.

I would not want GM owning the street to my home. They might charge more for FORDS of not let them on it at all….. Which is what we have with phone and cable now.

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:53:52 +0000

Not subsidies, Franklin… incentives…. The production, and new jobs, and sales, and construction will provide new tax revenue, in the form of jobs…. Wind power cant replace Oil fired plants, and coal plants… but even if it saves 20 – 40%, thats a huge savings!!

I fail to understand the reluctance to use such a renewable, and expandable source…. It cant do anything but HELP the economy…

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:50:43 +0000

Should read Oil being used foer Electric Plants… sorry — typo!!

By: Predestined

Predestined — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:12:43 +0000

A friend in southern Illinois was telling me about a woman in her area who has gone completely green. Whether it’s solar or wind or a mixture, I’m not sure. Her initial expenses were high for getting it set up, but she had it at the time. (I believe she was widowed and used the life insurance money from that to set it all up.) She is already seeing a return after a short period of time. I’m assusming that means there’s “net metering”? Within the next 5-7 years, she’ll actually be making money, it’s working that well for her.

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:07:40 +0000

Chas
“oil being used to fire coal plants”????
HUH???

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:07:07 +0000

Chas
Wind farms are a net tax LOSS, not a gain.
The subsidy to wind is never recovered.

Oil generated tax revenue is a huge contributor to Federal, State and local budgets.

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:28:28 +0000

Wind farms DO create jobs… lots of jobs… That means increased revenue… which means increased taxes… And the tax incentives encourage more production, and more development… which also creates more revenue… AND, it is clean…. AND, it can replace a LOT of OIL being used to fire coal plants, which means more for transportation…. not to mention natural gas saved for heating costs…. which also can be used for transportation… ALL of which lead to American Independence from foreign OIL!!

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:19:16 +0000

Drill Here Drill Now
WILL generate American jobs.
Drill Here Drill Now
Will gererate tax revenue.
Drill Here Drill Now
Will increase the supply of oil, which will help bring down the price.

On the other hand?
Wind can not, really, be used for transportation, directly.

On the other hand?
Wind requires MASSIVE taxpayer subsidies to survive.

By: Phantom

Phantom — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:43:45 +0000

Pelosi says the Drill hereers, will have to justify economically and pragmatically what it will accomplish. Bush says ‘it’s destined to fail’. Well sure, all you have is an empty slogan for justification, let’s shine a light on it.

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:17:55 +0000

That would work good, rsmueller

By: rsmueller

rsmueller — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 17:07:11 +0000

Wind generators alone is not all we will need. It would be better to use photo-voltaics in combination with wind. On sunny days when the wind is not blowing, we can still harvest energy from the sun’s light.

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:51:43 +0000

Check this one:

http://www.awea.org

Then this one:

http://www.siemens.com/answers

Siemens is one of the biggest manufacturers of wind generators that I observed in Texas…

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:49:31 +0000

Yes, of course, wind farms make more sense along the routes of existing power lines.
Just like gas wells make the most sense along the routes of existing gas pipelines.
However, some of the BEST areas for wind generation have NO existing power lines, at this time.
That, I think, is the point some of us are trying to make.
And, the greens are blocking power line construction, in many areas.

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:48:38 +0000

Basically, Franklin, I am calling BS on your objections, since I dont believe your objections are realistic… based on what I have seen, and lived with….

By: Chas

Chas — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:46:48 +0000

Frnklin, have you ever SEEN the numbers of wind farms in the TX Panhandle area?? There are already power lines from the “grid” all over the place…. I m not talking about MILES of transmission lines… more like yards of line….

If you dont believe it, go take a look at them… they are truly an awesome thing to see….

By: Franklin

Franklin — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:43:17 +0000

Chas
First you say that there is no transmission line problem, even though it has been documented that this is a problem, upthread.
Then you say that wind is not unpredictable.
Then you say that we can overcome the unpridictable nature of wind by having multiple generation sites —

Which would require multiple transmission lines!