The Kansas House fired the first shot of the session Thursday in the coal war with Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, giving first-round approval to a bill that would green-light the Holcomb plant expansion among other energy initiatives. House Speaker Mike O’Neal, R-Hutchinson, thinks he has the votes to override Sebelius, should she veto the plant expansion for a fourth time. Maybe he does. But O’Neal and other coal proponents are disregarding reality in pushing the plants when the Obama administration is proposing to tax and regulate carbon emissions, other states are halting or shelving new coal plants, and financing has frozen for other large projects.
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
- 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
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
126 Comments
But coal is clean, Brunk and Tiahrt said so. They can even get this nifty clean coal air freshner. It says it’s clean, so it must be.
http://action.thisisreality.org/page/s/coenbrothers
Any attempt to build the proposed coal fired power plants in western Kansas would be a HORRIBLE mistake. They threaten Kansas air quality. They threaten Kansas’ deep underground Ogallala water supply which provides water to western and central Kansas including Wichita. And they threaten the economy of Kansas in a variety of ways to numerous to itemize here.
The best solution is to just say “NO.”
Other states are also building coal plants. Including two in Colorado. Why mislead? Since the present Holcomb plant doesn’t even emit visible emissions the Eagle insists on running the same old photo of another facility to also mislead readers.
Lonny, the pic shows the stack releasing water vapor. Such a thing happens when steam is exposed to colder air. How is it dishonest?
“They threaten Kansas air quality. They threaten Kansas’ deep underground Ogallala water supply which provides water to western and central Kansas including Wichita”
We’ve been through this before. They don’t threaten the aquifer. What threatens the aquifer is corn farmers.
“We’ve been through this before. They don’t threaten the aquifer. What threatens the aquifer is corn farmers.”
The primary threat is corn farmers, but corn farmers along is still better than corn farmers plus a truly unnecessary coal plant.
Dumb*ss legislature.
Ban guns, Ban coal plants, ban cigarettes, ban this ban that! There is so much desire for bans that the air will should soon be full of music. The band played on until they got around to banning the band…..
BAN CORN FARMERS!
I think I calculated once that the plant would consume as much water as 15 circles of corn. There are thousands of corn circles.
Still doesn’t address the point, beber. The point is, EVERY decision in that region should consider water use and the potential drain on the aquifer.
We don’t need unnecessary drains on our water. Regarding the corn farmers, the ethanol incentives for farmers to switch from crops like wheat are counterproductive in Kansas, eastern Colorado, and the rest of the region. I am also in favor of removing incentives to grow corn for ethanol, at least in that region of the country. And for those who say that would be “too much” government intervention, have you really been paying attention to the agricultural economy lately?
To paraphrase writerdog:
DISCOURAGE corn farmers!
Speaker O’neal R of Hutchison seems to be your run of the mill con child who does not understand that no means no.More mature heads have already weighed in. The coal plant is DOA when it gets to the Governor’s desk. Send him a message now and on Earth hour 3 23 2009.
There aren’t any incentives to grow corn for ethanol; only incentives to grow corn period. Unless you count higher market prices as an incetive.
More to the point some more, the Butler County counselor often argues against certain aspects of government economic activity in the stimulus package on the basis that government shouldn’t be “choosing winners and losers”. I think his analogy is off. Government does have a role in setting rules which limits some of the plays that business can do (and agriculture is full of these). Those who play by the rules have a better chance of winning the game, but the winners aren’t really “chosen” by government.
And Sebelius is right. Coal plants are a long term loser because of the rules that are more than likely to come down the pike regarding carbon dioxide emissions, not to mention, again, making decisions in the entire region based on water sustainability. After all, in the end WATER will be the resource that dictates the economy in this region (and increasingly everywhere else).
“Unless you count higher market prices as an incentive.”
And what is the source of those higher market prices? Ethanol. And in part, those higher prices are due to government incentives for the use and development of ethanol. I stand by what I said.
In the end it will be the lack of water which determines economic activity in the area. Already is, to some extent. Remember, western Kansas grew tons of crops before the irrigation boom occurred, and baring a mega-drought, will do so long after the last well is plugged. The methods have gotten much better too.
Speaking of drought: We could sure use a rain.
I know the above is a trifle simplistic, because corn is the universal food ingrediant, but not by much.
There is an excellent novel by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child entitled Still Life with Crows. In it, they point out that their novel was inaccurate in terms of portraying a wheat growing part of the country (western Kansas) as a corn growing region.
As it turns out, they were to a point less inaccurate than prophetic. And it was increases in price due to ethanol that changed the landscape.
“Remember, western Kansas grew tons of crops before the irrigation boom occurred, and barring a mega-drought, will do so long after the last well is plugged. The methods have gotten much better too.”
Such mega-droughts have happened before and will again, with devestating effects on local agriculture. And this time, there is a much greater demand worldwide and locally for fresh water.
Fresh water is going to be the BIGGEST economic resource in the near future, and that is a fact. The transition, in fact, is happening now.
Out west, as much non-irrigated milo goes to the ethanol plants as does irrigated corn. I got no argument with you. If a non-polluting coal-fired plant could be built, it’d be a much better use of water than the 15 circles of corn it could replace. You need to bubble all that co2 through algae chambers to make diesel fuel. Then, you’d have something. Use the heated waste water to grow the algae. Or didn’t Sunflower already mention a test plant for that as a sweetener?
writerdog- that the air will should soon be full of music.
With all the corn being harvested, that “music” is the sound of geese….
BAM!!
And by the way, the face of the west hasn’t changed. Drive through it and it looks the same as it did 20 years ago. Some farmers are going for big corn, but the majority know better. Big Corn = Big Risk.
Speaking of geese; aren’t there a hell of a lot of them? I think every goose that went north last year came back with 12 goslings.
“Or didn’t Sunflower already mention a test plant for that as a sweetener?”
They ‘kinda sorta’ did – but with no specifics or guaruntees. IF they have the technology ‘plant-ready’ then why not build such a plant at their existing coal plant? Then they could demonstrate it to us and then go for approval.
The RepubliCONs don’t care what Momma don’t allow–they gonna do it anyhow . . .
LonnythePlumber
Posted February 27, 2009 at 6:17 am | Permalink
——————-
Actually Lonny the pic for this thread is the Holcomb plant.
Actually, the Crats should cheer the building of the coal plant on. Otherwise, Obama won’t be able to fund his trillion dollar escapades with his co2 extortion taxes.
Regular
Posted February 27, 2009 at 8:27 am | Permalink
Actually, the Crats should cheer the building of the coal plant on. Otherwise, Obama won’t be able to fund his trillion dollar escapades with his co2 extortion taxes.
————-
LMFAO!
To me there is no global warming or cooling that man can control. The greenhouse emissions and carbon credits is just a way for the greenies and our communist government to control our lives. Built the coal plants now!
I am obliged to point out here that outside the legislature, the coal plant is not so much a partisan issue. MANY Republicans have also expressed their desire that Kansas air and water not be sacrificed for electricity for Colorado. Indeed, support for the coal plant seems confined publicly to a minority who have no rationale for building the plant other than spite.
Ya don’t build a power plant to satisfy spite.
See?
WHILE I was posting, the ever reliable con drone “george” was showing up to make me right. “Built the coal plant now!” he pleads, while offering no rationale for his plea.
““Built the coal plant now!””
It is “shovel ready”.
It will “create or save” jobs.
It will pay “carbon taxes”.
DJIA headed for 7000.
george posted February 27, 2009 at 8:30 am
To me there is no global warming or cooling that man can control. . The greenhouse emissions and carbon credits is just a way for the greenies and our communist government to control our lives.
—————-
Your opinions are just opinions, and are meaningless, george.
If you want to stop the passage of carbon policies, you need to refute all of the AGW science. But you AGW deniers cannot refute the science.
I’d only say this: Republicans shouldn’t count their coal-covered chickens before their eggs are hatached.
A nice article on “clean coal”: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1870599,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-bottom
This will never end, talk about a waste of time and money. That a$$hat from Hutchinson is a real piece…
Need more coal energy to run more irrigation pumps to grow more corn to supply more ethanol plants.
Click here to see a satellite photo of the coal-fired plant at Holcomb:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Holcomb_Station
Phantom posted February 27, 2009 at 11:08 am
Need more coal energy to run more irrigation pumps to grow more corn to supply more ethanol plants.
—————-
LOL! Well said.
One of the oil companies actually installed solar panels to run some of their oil rigs in California.
Instead of building very expensive, CO2 pollution emitting, new coal plants. . .
‘Closing the Efficiency Gap ‘
http://ert.rmi.org/research/cgu.html
“…
In total, up to 30 percent of current electrical consumption could be curtailed nationwide by closing the electric productivity gap.
…
Closing the gap the ‘largest near-term opportunity’
This finding is extremely significant because if laggard states achieved the electric productivity of the top ten performing states through energy efficiency, more than 60 percent of coal-fired generation could be displaced in the country. “
How many times do they get? Stop the madness, no means no.
To override a veto, the rock burners needed 84 votes.
They only got 79.
Enough and gratuitous time has been wasted on a plant that Kansans don’t need and don’t want.
“Kansans don’t need and don’t want.”
They do want it. Why do you think majorities in the state congress are voting for it?
Fleetie,
“Why do you think majorities in the state congress are voting for it?”
Lobbyists? Campaign contributions? Downright bribes? Certainly not to generate Kansas pollution with Kansas water for Colorado electricity!
Add to the reasons Jed listed — anger, jealousy, pettiness.
“Lobbyists? Campaign contributions? Downright bribes?”
Way weak. Try again.
The “…state ‘congress’…?!”
A formal assembly of representatives, as of various nations, to discuss problems.
fleettwood,
Utility bills will rise sharply if construction starts on the two new coal-fired plants in Holcomb.
Give us some credible analysis that rate-payers would benefit MORE from those two very expensive, and unnecessary coal-fired plants, than with less expensive solutions — higher energy efficiency, and renewable energy.
Why do you think majorities in the state congress are voting for it
Add to the reasons Jed listed —
We built coal-fired plants in the past, so let’s ignore the better, cheaper solutions, and build more coal-fired plants.
fleettwood,
So you do NOT have an credible analysis showing that the two very expensive coal-fired plants are necessary, and also the best, least expensive solution?
Why not? Aren’t you a coal-fired plant proponent?
I’ve asked a simple question.
The Kansas House and Senate (added together) voted somewhere around 116 to 51 for the plants.
Whycome?
fleetwood,
Reasons have been given. If you choose another reason you’ll need to let us know what it is. We gave ours, now you’ll have to give the one that you’ve decided to accept.
fleettwood posted February 27, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Why do you think majorities in the state congress are voting for it
—————–
That’s too easy. . . it’s the red state of Kansas, where there are many foolish AGW deniers.
fleettwood’s reason seems to be the same one used by little children when they don’t want to answer a question —- “because”.
Reasons have been given.
“Lobbyists? Campaign contributions? Downright bribes?”
“anger, jealousy, pettiness.”
Those are some good reasons, but I’m not persuaded.
116 to 51
Oops! Forget this brilliance.
“it’s the red state of Kansas, where there are many foolish AGW deniers.”
Maggot. thank you for pointing out the water vapor. I have presumed, strongly in fact, that when people see that they feel it is emissions. Do you feel people realize it’s just water vapor?
ANTI. Are you sure it’s the Holcomb plant pic? I’ve talked to some of the people that work there and and a plant manager who have separately said it is not Holcomb. How do you know it is? I’ll really be embarrassed if it is and owe the Eagle some apologies.
lonny – I do not know if the specific picture is Holcomb or not. However I will agree that it really isn’t honest to show a picture of a water vapor plume and allow the coloration to imply that it is smoke.
fleettwood,
What are the REASONS for the NON-veto proof vote numbers?
Or do you, as BDP, believe that a majority vote * is * by itself a reason?
“Or do you, as BDP, believe that a majority vote * is * by itself a reason?”
The numbers are what they are.
116 voted for the plants and 51 voted against them.
“it really isn’t honest”
It’s what some do to win.
“Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary was littered with nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled”
Okay. . . fleettwood believes that the vote is by itself a “reason”.
Why did the bill pass?
fleettwood’s only “reason” is that it had the necessary number of votes.
fleettwood prefers to rely on judge who does not understand climate science.
And fleettwood also misstates what the judge said.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimmock_v_Secretary_of_State_for_Education_and_Skills
“fleettwood’s only “reason” is that it had the necessary number of votes.”
I was (and still am) asking:
Why do you think majorities in the state congress are voting for it?
fleettwood is asked: WHY did the politicians vote for that bill?
fleettwood answers: BECAUSE it got enough votes to pass.
“fleettwood is asked: WHY did the politicians vote for that bill?”
If I would have been asked that question, I would have said, “because their citizens wanted them to.”
fleetwood – since when does a judge know science? For a climatologist’s view:
“The presentation of the science is good, but not great–I rate it a B, which is the rating I give the movie as a whole. The excessive details on Al Gore’s life make the movie too long, and his insistence on using the movie as something of a campaign ad detracts from its message. However, this is a very important movie, as was recognized in the 2007 Oscars, where it won best documentary. It’s a movie everyone should see.”
http://www.wunderground.com/education/gore.asp
ANTI. Are you sure it’s the Holcomb plant pic? I’ve talked to some of the people that work there and and a plant manager who have separately said it is not Holcomb. How do you know it is? I’ll really be embarrassed if it is and owe the Eagle some apologies.
—————
Lonny, I lived in Garden City for 30 years. That is the Holcomb Plant. The Eagle has in the past, used pictures of other older plants to headline past threads. I think that is blatantly irresponsible.
“fleetwood – since when does a judge know science?”
What does a judge do?
Usually a judge interprets the LAW. I don’t pretend to be a lawyer – that is not something scientists do. I don’t like it when lawyers pretend to be scientists.
Give the EcoNuts enough hemp rope and they will surely hang themselves.
Is it any wonder they are laughed at?
“The tenderness of the delicate American buttock is causing more environmental devastation than the country’s love of gas-guzzling cars, fast food or McMansions, according to green campaigners. At fault, they say, is the US public’s insistence on extra-soft, quilted and multi-ply products when they use the bathroom.
“This is a product that we use for less than three seconds and the ecological consequences of manufacturing it from trees is enormous,” said Allen Hershkowitz, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defence Council.”
“that is not something scientists do.”
I didn’t know you were an AGW scientist.
I did not saw I was an AGW scientist – but I am in a related field. So, I read the writings of AGW (and other) scientists. However, as a scientist I come a lot closer than a lawyer does. That is why I linked the comments of a climate scientist.
Well said bth.
‘extra soft’ – maybe we should bring back the bidet?
“‘extra soft’ – maybe we should bring back the bidet?”
Takes too much precious water.
Sears catalogs. Nope. Kills trees.
Seed bags. Nope.
And on and on.
A quick survey of the thread shows about 16 posters against the plants…
…and about 4 for them.
It’s time for Sunflower to stop wasting the states time.
No means no.
Seed bags
========
Ha HA!
Almost as much fun as sunflower leaves!
Both will work…in a pinch…
#
BlueJay
Posted February 27, 2009 at 3:57 pm | Permalink
A quick survey of the thread shows about 16 posters against the plants…
…and about 4 for them.
It’s time for Sunflower to stop wasting the states time.
No means no.
—————
I’m rather sure this play pen for leftist wackos doesn’t represent the thoughts of mainstream Kansas.
Personally, I don’t care whether they do or they don’t build a power plant out there in the western Kansas desert.
I must adjust my shopping accordingly. It is senseless to cut grow and cut trees for toilet paper when there are ready alternatives.
http://www.grist.org/advice/products/2007/11/06/
“A quick survey of the thread shows about 16 posters against the plants…
…and about 4 for them.”
A quick survey of the elected representitives show:
116 for the plant
51 against
Yes means yes
Several Republican persuasion posters with good reasons to be against the plant will be surprised to learn that they are “leftist whackos”.
“I must adjust my shopping accordingly.”
What’s that stuff cost?
Hey BDP?
D
O
A
Aint got the votes to get by the Gov.
You lose.
Blue,
My grandparents recycled; they used pages from the Monkey Ward catalog, and when that ran out (toward the end of each season) they switched to corncobs. Of course they didn’t have to flush the outhouse.
116 for the plant
51 against
Yes means yes
Lonny asks,
“Maggot. thank you for pointing out the water vapor. I have presumed, strongly in fact, that when people see that they feel it is emissions. Do you feel people realize it’s just water vapor?”
I wouldn’t see why not. Growing up the university had a coal plant on its premises. There was always water vapor coming out of the stack, I never assumed it was anything else. If I, as a mere child, could grasp it, I don’t see how adults can’t.
fleettwood posted February 27, 2009 at 3:16 pm
“fleettwood is asked: WHY did the politicians vote for that bill?”
If I would have been asked that question, I would have said, “because their citizens wanted them to.”
—————————–
Now try to prove your claim is accurate, or else post a different “reason”.
‘TOP 10 (or 11) Reasons Not to Build a Coal Plant in Kansas ‘
http://kansas.sierraclub.org/Wind/Top10Reasons.htm
“1. According to poll data, the people of Kansas support Secretary Bremby’s decision to deny Sunflower Electric a permit for the Holcomb project. The results of a statewide poll shows that 62% of Kansas voters agree that the coal plant should not be built. ( Kansas City Star, Jan. 4, 2008)”
Hey Sunflower.
Nah nah nah nah hey hey hey Goodbye.
I ask again: Sunflower claims to have the algae technology ready. Why don’t they build it on their existing plant and prove it?
bth
Posted February 27, 2009 at 4:20 pm | Permalink
I ask again: Sunflower claims to have the algae technology ready. Why don’t they build it on their existing plant and prove it?
——————-
Ask them, I am sure they have an email addy.
“Now try to prove your claim is accurate, or else post a different “reason”.”
The claim that the vote on the plant is 116 for and 51 against is fairly accurate. I’m only guessing why 116 people would vote that way.
Should the State of Kansas allow a power company to build a new coal fired plant in southwest Kansas?
48% Yes
32% No
19% Not sure
Kansas Democratic Party Pollsters from DC Area Find Kansans Reject Coal-Fired Plants
Not only has the repeated bouncing of this proposal against a wall wasting the governments time, now we are wasting our own time talking about it here. Let it die.
“Not only has the repeated bouncing of this proposal against a wall wasting the governments time,…”
I have a feeling, and it is only just a feeling, nothing more than feelings, that if a vote was 116 to 51 for something you were for, you might think differently. Do you agree, beaner?
I have a feeling, and it is only just a feeling, nothing more than feelings, that if a vote was 116 to 51 for something you were for, you might think differently. Do you agree, beaner?
========================
LMFAO!!
Oops….anyone got a seed bag?
fleettwood posted February 27, 2009 at 4:22 pm
“Now try to prove your claim is accurate, or else post a different “reason”.”
The claim that the vote on the plant is 116 for and 51 against is fairly accurate. I’m only guessing why 116 people would vote that way.
—————-
Yep. . . and that’s one of many reasons fleettwood is the BDP.
“Do you agree, beaner?”
If I am mistaken and you are from India, it should have been, “Do you agree, Apu?”
These give you a pretty good idea of the kind of person fleettwood is:
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 1:56 pm | Permalink
The Barack “Sambo” Obama”
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 4:31 pm | Permalink
…Do you agree, beaner?”
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 4:38 pm | Permalink
If I am mistaken and you are from India, it should have been, “Do you agree, Apu?””
Yea, Brian, I know. He is not even worth a thumping.
Global warming ended in 1998. We’ll take the carbon dioxide along with the industry, jobs, and profits we need right now, regardless of stonewalling by Bilious Sebelius and Obamanation in their attempts to bankrupt the U.S. coal industry.
Perhaps you two should talk to your good friend, monkeyhawk.
Ah 1998…it was such I good year…lol Whatever dude.
———–Perhaps you two should talk to your good friend, monkeyhawk.——–
Yuk, yuk…right on a$$hat. maybe I will.
“Ah 1998…it was such I good year…lol Whatever dude.”
It was pretty hot, though.
“Yuk, yuk…right on a$$hat. maybe I will.”
With any luck, he won’t call you a racial sterotype name.
With any luck, your internet service provider will cut the cord…but alas I have never been that lucky.
I didn’t start it.
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 4:54 pm | Permalink
Perhaps you two should talk to your good friend, monkeyhawk.”
this is about no one but you
parkay,
That’s right. . . global warming ends after every record El Nino event, after every major volcanic eruption like Mt. Pinatubo, after every Arctic cold front, etc. . . /sarcasm OFF
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 5:00 pm | Permalink
I didn’t start it.”
don’t you have to be 18 to post on here?
“I didn’t start it”
Does your mommy know you are playing on the internet?
“I’m only guessing why 116 people would vote that way.
– BDP.
“this is about no one but you”
Hogwash. Calling Bobby Jindal “Apu” is not acceptable. Seems the Libs give that a pass.
“fleettwood
Posted February 27, 2009 at 5:08 pm | Permalink
“this is about no one but you”
Hogwash. Calling Bobby Jindal “Apu” is not acceptable. Seems the Libs give that a pass.”
So lets see if I can summarize your reasoning…if another poster does something you think is unacceptable then you are free to do the same thing (the thing you think is unacceptable) yourself?
My sincere apologies, “fleettwood,” for offending you –
I should have called the Republic Party’s boy wonder “Piyush,” as his parents did.
Oh…
And, btw…
Eat lead.
What’s your interest in the rock burning plant there fleetie?
Just to be a wanker?
You get that done in so many ways as it is.
“What’s your interest in the rock burning plant there fleetie?”
116 to 51
I shouldn’t have expected any better.
Ok, the new AG says we are cowards on race and wants us to have a discussion. Dirty Harry Callahan says he ought to be able to make ethnic jokes without everyone having a cow
Let’s not beat around the bush. What do you pol lock brained, mac aca headed, sand monkey, Hitler youth kr auts have to say about it?
Did I offend anyone?
Outie,
“Did I offend anyone?”
Quite a few people I would imagine. If you keep sticking your ass in the air like that, you can count on getting it kicked by one or more of ‘em.
No excuses folks . . . . .
========================================
RUSH LIMBAUGH .. monday thru Friday .. 11:06 am thru 2:00 pm [ http://www.640wgst.com/cc-common/streaming_new/index.html?refreshed=yes ] keep up the good work Rush .. we love you
========================================
no excuses