Sad that here in Utah, we still have global warming deniers testifying before government committees pushing Utah to simply "sit put," build more coal, and do nothing about global warming... with most states and regions already onboard to develop initiatives to reduce carbon dioxide, debate about global warming is less useful than addressing regional and national policies looming that will impact Utah. California's Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 has already shut down IPP#3 and the Milford Wind Project broke ground last week to replace it. With Schwarzenegger already moving California onto cleaner energy sources and Obama "threatening" or "promising" (depending if you're for or against clean air) to invest $150 billion into renewable energy sources, Utah has little choice but to work to be a part of the 21st century's energy revolution. The train has left the station! Pushing coal will get Utah no where! Even conservative places like Sevier County are against dirty coal! Utah is always a day late and a dollar short when it comes to innovation. With solar and geothermal resources abundant in Utah, you'd think local entrepreneurs would be demanding action to get the state onboard the next big energy boom. but no... coal!

Is this guy an expert on climate science? What is he doing on testifying on the subject? This is like having a fast food executive talk about our need to be careful about promoting healthy food!

I see that scientists it England are now predicting a comming ice age that will bury England under a sheet of ice.

Because wind power is notoriously unreliable as the amount it can generate depends entirely on weather conditions. Which is why you need coal or natural gas plants to take up the slack during calm weather.

Mr. Rasmussen is correct when he says there is little we can do about global warming. China recently surpassed the US as the world's largest CO2 emitter and their emissions are projected to double over the next 30 years.

While upper-class liberals neurotically install CFL's in their mansions in order to assuage their guilt any actual reductions they achieve will be swamped by a carbon tsunami from Asia. Barring a significant leap in technology that renders the internal combustion engine obsolete, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere will continue to increase.

But then again, we do already have a viable source of carbon-free fuel to generate electricity with. It's called uranium, but once again our environmentalist friends block any and all opportunity to actually do something substantial to reduce CO2 emissions.

It's all about controlling people, not solving the problem.

Train has left the station did you even read the article, he said that he doesn't deny global warming. This whole debate is all based on guesses anyway. According to scientist it will warm by 3% by 2100, but they can't factor in new undeveloped technolgies. Right now coal plant remove 20% of CO2, and in 10 year they may remove 40% or 100% depend on how we develop technologies. Also no one can predict how fast or slow these new technologies develop so they can only make predictions based on the current numbers.

I was interesting to read that NASA was claiming the hottest October on record, even though all over the globe countries are reporting record cold and record snowfalls. Why the discrepancy? NASA had to sheepishly admit their data came from another source and was from August instead of October. Isn't this the second time they have majorly botched the details? Didn't they have to downgrade their estimates of water levels rising by 24 inches down to just 2 or 3 inches because someone couldn't do simple arithmatic. Oh yeah, and they boldly stated that the hottest decade on record was the 1990s but were soon debunked and had to admit that it was actually the 1930s. They are losing credibility fast. Or is it that they have an agenda to push and err because they already have their conclusions dictated to them?

Global Warming apologists put so much faith in skewed data that they won't even believe their own eyes.

The global warming scare is the result of two things. First, old hippies who didn't have much success with their anti-pollution campaigns in the 70s are now trying a different tactic. They believe the American people are stupid enough that they can be scared and intimidated into not polluting. And they may be right, since we elected a stuffed suit with no governing experience to be our president. Secondly, these same old hippies saw an opportunity to made a bunch of money off of this scare and have enlisted the help of the scientific community and people of power with promises of a slice of the pie.

I've always been anti-pollution and have always done my part to look out for the Earth. But I won't fall for this deception and hypocrisy. Lying and scare tactics are not the way to push an agenda. The ends don't justify the means.

Good for Utah being a day late (Train has left the station)but it seems to me California is billions of dollars short! Why would we want to follow them? The train left on global warming and global cooling when this planet started its existence. Good for Mr. Rasmussen to point out the change in temperature would only be 7/100ths of a degree if all the coal plants in the US were shut down. What does 7/100ths of a degree feel like? I wonder how much it will cost US taxpayers and utility ratepayers to secure this insignificant change over the next 100 years?

small changes are not insignificant. just look at the polar ice caps. Just in my lifetime, I've seen the overall climate change here in Utah. Two ponds I used to skate on as a child haven't frozen solid enough to skate on in almost 30 years. We used to have snow in November.
Its less noticeable here, but the closer you get to the polar ice caps, the more pronounced it is. Utah needs to remember that we are all part of an interconnected planet. We don't exist in a vacuum. and if people and governments start making small changes now, big changes can happen. I'd rather we were on the furfront of change, rather than sitting on our collective asses pointing at China and saying "well, they're doing it too..." like somehow that makes everything ok.

To "Anonymous | 10:05 a.m." do you realize that 30 years ago the climatologists said that we were heading into a global ice age? That is why you had frozen ponds and snow in early november.

Another point that the global warming people use is the ice cap reduction. The problem is that they are using a period where we had excessive ice as a starting point. We probably won't be able to establish a reliable base measurement for the polar ice caps for several decades as we go through several cooling and warming cycles.

Also, did you know that the climatologists don't take the sun and solar activities into account that change the intensity of the light emitted from the sun? That is why Mars is also going through global warming right now, and all they have are solar powered electric cars running there.

"We used to have snow in November"

We still do. It happened last year.

In fact, this November we received so much snow in our mountians that several ski resorts opened early.

Heck, last month there was 5 inches of Global Warming on my lawn after a cold storm.

What is to say that we are living in the world's ideal climate today? The world goes through natural warming and cooling cycles. The world's temperature is never going to stay the same. The environmentalists (Al Gore, et al) believe that the world as we know it will come to an end if the temperatures continue to rise. I'll believe it when I see it.

It appears that the article is trying to suggest taking a common sense approach to solving CO2 emmissions. It is a world wide issue that does not need to be solved in 1 year. If the United States follows the direction that left wing liberals want to take, the USA will stangle itself and will no longer be able to lead global climate inititives. People also have misconceptions about wind farms. It would take several hundred wind turbines operating 24 hours a day to replace IPP unit #3. Wind is only a partial solution to help reduce reliance on coal fired plants. It is true that Utah and the USA has to be active in determining the future of our planet. However, we do not need to rush into emotional based decisions that will cripple the economy and prevent funding to further reduce coal fired plant emmissions and provide research into alternative sources. The truth is always somewhere in the middle. Let's not swing so far left that we stray from reality.

This guy really does no his stuff. Listen to his presentation at utah website. it is about 45 minuites.

A Rational Look At Climate Change Concerns

Utah Public Utilities and Technology Interim Committee
November 19, 2008

The Committee will hear a presentation and receive a handout regarding
critical issues about climate change and the production of energy.

Kimball Rasmussen, President, Deseret Power