Deseret News | Reader comments: Utah power plant in the spotlight

Reader comments
Utah power plant in the spotlight

Steve | 7:36 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

What would the Sierra Club have us do? Tim Wagner says all we need to do is use wind, solar and biomass power (none of which are reliable) and that we suffer from health problems because of coal fired power plants. I for one believe the benefits of electricity far out weigh the pollution. Get cars off the road if you want to clean up the air on the Wasatch Front.

Anonymous | 8:39 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

Liberalism and tree huggers are killig the country. If they cannot get it done by legislation than they fund a liberal activist judge that will make their change by men in black robe fiat. We need additional power and the alternative sources just do not cut it. To make matters worse the friends of the trees like Kennedy do not want alternative sourse where they will interfer with his life.

Since there is no real scientific proof and their is NO actual consensus about global warming, it is time to kknock off the bs. Put a clamp on the thrid world countries fror burning off to forests to creat farm land . Put a clamp on China and India for gross pollution of the environment.

Sphenodon | 8:51 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

Hey, you global warming deniers - I do not speak to you, for until you get a grip on how science works, and impartially study the data, it will do no good. I speak instead to those of us who are concerned about the energy crisis, but also recognize the warming of the climate due to CO2 emissions. SOMETHING must be done to change the way we generate electricity, and if every time an opportunity to change comes along, we say, "Oh no, it's too expensive, it won't work, etc, etc...", then NOTHING will ever be done, and the situation will worsen. It would be nice to hear some of the go-nukes, go-coal people actually add, "And of course, we need to speed up our development of wind, geothermal, and solar." Instead, they routinely dismiss.

Comments continue below

Just a thinker | 9:45 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

I find it interesting that the same people who say we need alternative energy sources are also the same people who complain when we want to put up a windturbine (Sen. Edward Kennedy) because it will ruin the view. Do the math. Just how many hundreds of acres of windturbine farms will it take just for the energy needs of Utah? How many hundreds of acres of solor panels would it take for Utahs energy needs. I guarantee that if we wanted to blanket the west deseret with solar panels the Sierra Club would complain about that also. Finally on global warming??? I watched the weather last night and it said the all time high for September 20 was in 1931. Hmmmmm That doesn't fit the standard hockey stick model that was proven false but still quoted by environmental fascist. Who is the denier now.

Yep | 10:07 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

Steve and Anon: Relax. Wind, solar, biomass, etc... can't replace the beloved coal fired power plants at this point. Coal's not going anywhere. However, here in Utah and throughout most of the West, there is plenty of sunlight and wind to use that would enable us to suppliment the grids and offset some of the negatives associated with coal. Why not tap into renewable resources? Combine this with power conservation efforts in our homes and offices and we're on our way to solving impending energy issues. At least it's a start.

Anonomous: Your right about China and India being "gross polluters", but the 'States is still the leader in per capita pollution. Also, there IS a consensus among climatologists who believe that there is a warming trend of anthroponic causes. The nay-sayers are growing but are still out-numbered.

John | 10:13 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

It would be helpful to the reader's understanding if the article mentioned what type of plant it will be (i.e. coal, gas, etc...).

Granny | 11:49 a.m. Sept. 21, 2007

I believe we should take the very best care of our resources and land but I oppose the way the Sierra Club and similar groups make their attacks. If the Sierra club is so concerned about the environment and animals being displaced, what about the destruction of the Oquirrh Mountains? I never hear any protests about that. The mining has harmed underground water, polluted streams with lead and mercury, and destroyed a lot of wildlife habitat. The coal plant in Delta, Utah has been a great source of electricity and has been very clean. Besides, man's efforts in controlling the weather is ridiculous. What would happen if six volcano's blew all at once? I believe we should make every effort to recycle, restore, and build wisely but all of this was in the works through government agencies (EPA for instance).

Roc Doc | 12:31 p.m. Sept. 21, 2007

Fact: There is no correlation over the past century or the past 400,000 years between CO2 abundance and temperature increase. In fact, CO2 increase has always lagged behind temperature rises. While CO2 increased from 1945 to 1978, temperatures dropped globally. The entire carbonophobia of the global warming movement goes against real data.

carger | 6:08 p.m. Sept. 21, 2007

This is part of an article from the Sydney Daily Hearld

April 12, 2007 01:47am By Simon Kirby
ï¿½Solar activity a greater climate change driver than man
ï¿½'0.1 per cent of carbon dioxide due to human activity'
MANKIND is naive to think it can influence climate change, according to a prize-winning Australian geologist.

Solar activity is a greater driver of climate change than man-made carbon dioxide, argues Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide and winner of several notable science prizes.
ï¿½When meteorologists can change the weather then we can start to think about humans changing climate,ï¿½ Prof Plimer said.
ï¿½I think we really are a little bit naive to think we can change astronomical and solar processes.ï¿½

Utah running out of coal | 7:45 p.m. Sept. 21, 2007

Remember, the Utah Geological Survey noted in 2005 that Utah's economically available coal supplies are dwindling. This means that we'll have to import coal from Wyoming in the near future, and Utahns will face increasing costs associate with diesel fuel (for trains) and the carbon taxes or restrictions soon coming to coal-fired electricity. The state's electricity is 95% coal-fired -- thus, we face significant supply and cost risks in the coming decade with our poor diversity of power sources. For those who don't believe in wind power, check out Wyoming, Iowa, and Texas in their booming wind industries, the revenues and profits wind is bringing to rural farms and communities there, and the conservative politicians backing wind as the new economic boom for their states!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.

1 photo

Michael Brandy, Deseret News

Sierra Club's Robert Cox said the proposed Bonanza expansion has thrust Utah into the global-warming debate.

Deseret News health series

Advertisement

Reader comments
Utah power plant in the spotlight

Add your comment

BYU soccer coverage sparks debate

Text from LDS church on S.L. policy

Cougars practice with urgency

From glory to agony: Hal Garner's football career ended with pain and addiction

Koerber faces 19 new charges

4 players sign with Utes

Will state consider gay rights law?

Collinsworth signs with BYU hoops

Prep football: Felt's Facts Week

Cougars practice with urgency

Reader comments Utah power plant in the spotlight

Add your comment

Reader comments
Utah power plant in the spotlight