Reader comments
PacifiCorp to fuel plant with wind, gas not coal
21 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Good morning edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In Business
Across Site
- Fuel removal under way on Italy...
- AP IMPACT: USAID contractor work in...
- SPIN METER: Romney backed earmarks as...
- UK gov't: Press must face tougher...
- Greek Parliament starts debate on...
- Boeing says it's frustrated with...
- Obama budget: New spending with...
- U.S. taxes more progressive than Europe
- Occupy protesters target California...
- Fashion Week trends: Military looks...
In Business
Across Site
- Faces beyond the numbers of long-term...
- Hong Kong asserts identity to...
- City Creek Center means uncertainty...
- Fewer auto safety checks? House...
- Working at home improves employee...
- U.S. taxes more progressive than Europe
- Obama budget: New spending with...
- West finals: Rural residents strike...
- Homeowners in distress hope new...
- Greek parties mull harsh new cuts
In Business
Across Site
- Bill would cut auto safety checks
24 - Utah takes $171M in settlement
19 - 19 at Gateway look to City Creek
14 - Fashion Week trends: Military looks...
7 - Dresses locked behind harnesses at...
6 - Designers lend their glamour to Obama...
6 - Penn class teaches students how to...
6 - US taxes more progressive than Europe
6 - Faces beyond the numbers of long-term...
5 - Bill aims to ban Internet gambling
4







Once concern however: the price. Although natural gas generation isn't any more expensive than coal (well at least not a whole lot) wind power is still more expenseive. Most utilities that utilize wind power can only keep the project viable by receivng subsidies from federal and state governments. We need to know whether or not Pacificorp will be subsidized for its use of wind power and to what extent. If they aren't being subsidized, have regulators given permission for higher rates? Are we willing to pay higher rates?
We need to know all this infomration when making energy decisions. I am willing to pay more for sustainable energy, but not much more. I generally don't favor subsidies (distortion of a free market) but if they are temporary and reasonable to support alternative energy, I have no objections. I don't think this story, however, will be unusual in the future.
I do like the idea of a wind and natural gas combo in the Delta area in support of IPP. Hundreds of wind units could supplement the power produced at IPP and natural gas could back up the wind. Due to the need to be backed up wind power and extensive maintenance requirements, the subsidy required is equal or more than nuclear over the long run. Wind and gas combo should be viable, but more expensive than any other source, especially when the increase cost of home heating is factored in. There is a lot of wind in Delta!
Perhaps a combination of IGCC (IGCC has been around for a long time and is used extensively overseas) and renewables could be used to meet energy requirements.
However, due to the global warming craze it seems to me that in colder regions of the country small nuclear power plants would be a better fit. As much as 10% of electrical power production can be lost in long distance transmission resistance. So if power production is near the point of use less is lost in transmission. In addition waste heat could be used in winter to replace natural gas and electricity used in heating homes and buildings.
Oh, your fear (paranoia) of nuclear power makes this unacceptable. Well, myself and tens of thousands of Navy folks have spent years eating, sleeping, and working within feet of a reactor. Our aircraft carriers, and submarines are all nuclear powered. No one has ever been injured or killed by a U.S. commercial reactor (in use for fifty years), not even Three Mile Island!
Meanwhile, expect natural gas prices to double, at least once coal is eliminated.
Whichever of you said Utah has a great supply of natural gas, you are misinformed as to how it works. We also have a large supply of crude, and refineries, but our gas prices are set by the global economy, not the local one.
As for carbon foot prints? Stick that trash in your ear.
Natural gas prices will increase and coal is still the cheapest source of power at the margins. But energy prices will increases all across the world with the rapid industrialization of nearly 2.3 Billion people in China and India. The increasing cost of energy by itself justifies exploration of renewable sources of energy because we don't have to compete in world markets to purchase wind or solar born energy. Wind is free.
Your reference to "eco-Nazi" is also unhelpful. We can have a serious discussion about energy policy, or we can call each other names. Where does that get us? Cold-hard economics justifies diversification of energy resources without any reference to carbon emissions. Coal will also increase in price as the world market for coal expands to include India and China further. That's Reality.
One-half of all our electrical power is generated by coal fired plants nationally. Coal is cheap to burn to fire the boilers at power plants to give you cheap electricity.
What the Sierra Club and the so called "environmentalists" want to do is control how we run our civilization. Coal fired plants have spent millions, maybe billions of dollars to clean up emissions with new technologies.
It is pretty crazy that this is coming from Pacificorp, and not IPA, a political subdivision of the state of utah, but controlled by "the very green" Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
I guess since IPA shilled for the state legislature on the failed school voucher initiative, we won't see any legislation "encouraging" IPA to follow Pacificorp's lead. One would think that with a legislature so concerned with "the children," they might actually care about the quality of air that they breath.
I'm not holding my breath though
And all of us need to take a harder look at our own power bills and see where we can save some money (more efficient lighting, EnergyStar appliances and proper insulation are pretty low hanging fruit for most) without having to compromise our beloved lifestyles - my power bills are down 45% from last year and I'm running more stuff, not less. It can be done!