Comments about ‘Gov. Herbert's energy plan lacks goals, too dependent on fossil fuels, residents say’

Return to article »

10-year strategy also said to depend too much on fossil fuels

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 10 2010 10:41 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The "residents" are actually a handful of critics who seem to be the "usual suspects" who rant about all sorts of environmental extremist stuff.

I place more confidence in the judgment and recommendations of our Governor who actually has responsibility for doing things than in academic elites; the self-styled leader of a handful of "healthy environment" fanatics; or, from former mayors who make a living from punditry and political consulting (mainly for the opposition party).

The Governor should properly set the broad context and direction and subsequent implementation plans will flesh out the details.

The Governor also needs to be clear that "cap and trade" schemes will not be tolerated!

VST
Bountiful, UT

I wholeheartedly agree with DN Subscriber.

Brother Chuck Schroeder
A Tropical Paradise USA, FL

I see right through this, being a outsider, it was "YOU" Utahns that put your (Gov. Gary Herbert) back into Office in the first place, now ya'll whine about his 10-year strategic energy plan lacks specific goals and is too dependent on fossil fuels, Utah will "ALWAYS BE" dependent on fossil fuels, seeing that's all they got in that State, "COAL". The Glenn Beck conservatives in Utah always whine about something and are those "residents" that are actually a handful of critics who seem to be the "usual suspects" who rant about all sorts of environmental extremist stuff. Give it a rest.

Cedarite
Cedar City, UT

There's opportunity in geothermal in some parts of the state, and since we export so much of our power it makes sense to sell green/cleaner energy to states that mandate it- I much prefer some of the planned natural gas/ wind plats for here in southern Utah to the batch of coal plants that were being planned regionally to power Vegas and LA. If they're willing to pay for the cleaner power, we should give it to them. No need to smoke up southern Utah's air to power the spotlights and neon of Vegas and air conditioners of LA if we don't have to.

Sensible Scientist
Rexburg, ID

Where is nuclear energy in this discussion? It's the obvious choice for the future because it is the only clean electricity source that is large enough in scale to replace coal-fired plants.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments