Letter: Energy use

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    July 28, 2014 8:36 a.m.

    To "Open Minded Mormon" but nuclear power is green energy. The Cambridge Dictionary defines green energy as "energy that can be produced in a way that protects the natural environment." Nuclear power meets that definition. It has a small footprint so the land is minimally impacted. The weapons grade material can also be turned into fuel rods and generate power in the newest power plants. The fuel is recyclable, and has uses other than weapons and power.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    July 26, 2014 9:27 a.m.

    The thing I would love to know is how those espousing green energy are walking the walk. I have some friends who are environmentalists that truly do what they preach. However, I also have friends who preach green, but who drive old cars which get worse gas milage and emit far more polution than a Suburban, smoke and litter. Look at Mr. Green - Al Gore. He lives in a 10,000 sq. ft. mansion and flies around in private jets. Yes, you little people should pay more for energy - so us rich people can feel good about ourselves. Likewise, Tom Seyer is donating $100 Million to Democratic campaigns to help stop the Keystone pipeline (after making billions in fossil fuels). Anyone want to bet he has economic interests which will be adversely affected by the pipeline.

    If you are living green - please tell the rest of us how and why we should improve. If you are not, walk the walk before you talk the talk.

  • Sven Morgan, UT
    July 25, 2014 7:07 p.m.

    Roland Kayser said:

    "No one wants us to do without energy..."

    Oh really? Consider the words of your Dear Leader:

    “When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal…under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket…even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping greenhouse gasses, coal power plants, natural gas…you name it…whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retro-fit their operations.” -Barack Obama (January 17, 2008)

    Sorry, but we've been hearing this blather about wind and solar for decades, and yet it still isn't a very viable option. BTW, these wonderful utopian wind farms are killing migratory birds.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    July 25, 2014 1:45 p.m.

    USS Enterprise, UT

    Is nuclear considered a "green" energy source?

    [Yes, sort of -- Green-er,
    but it's not re-newable,
    and breeder reactors have not yet proven to be economically feasible]

    I have little problem with nuclear --
    I was around nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors all the time in the Military.

  • Demo Dave Holladay, UT
    July 25, 2014 1:44 p.m.

    The continued, unregulated consumption of fossil fuels is an enormously profitable scam being perpetrated by Big Oil. This evil empire runs our government, owns our politicians, controls the automotive industry, condemns environmental regulations and does everything in its power to ensure its own survival and prosperity, even at the expense of the planet.

    They, along with our complicit politicians, are the "conspiring men" spoken of in scripture.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    July 25, 2014 12:42 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" if fossil fuels are like whale blubber, then fossil fuels are not a finite resource. It only becomes finite if all of one gender is killed or else if all whales are killed. If you really think that fossil fuels are like whale blubber, then you must think that the oil is being constantly regenerated at some unknown rate.

    How do you define "clean" fuels? Is nuclear considered a "green" energy source? (The fuel can be recycled and it doesn't emit CO2).

    If we stop building coal and natural gas plants, what do you propose we use to replace them?

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    July 25, 2014 8:32 a.m.

    The future is nuclear energy. When China and India are using as much power as the USA (which will be sooner than later) the answer to clean energy is looking us right in the face. NUCLEAR is GREEN.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 24, 2014 5:24 p.m.

    ...except the reality of supply suggests we're going to have no alternative some day. Not, in the case of oil, that far away.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 24, 2014 1:46 p.m.

    Nobody said anything about doing away with electricity and people surviving!

    Like being dependant on Wale Blubber,
    Fossil Fuels are finite.

    We must find RENEWABLE sources of Energy,
    it MUST be clean.

    Rather than playing the viticem,
    or being all or nothing,
    Black & White, etc.

    How about we say --
    From here on out...no more new fossil fuel burning plants be made.
    All new plants, from here on out myst be clean or renewable.

    As new plants are built - we have a clean and pertetual future.
    As old plants wear out - they are phased out.

    It's like oil lamps, and candles.
    They will still be around,
    but more as old museum pieces from and acient time,
    than being our ONLY source of power...

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    July 24, 2014 12:24 p.m.

    Does Harry really believe it's all or nothing? Well, it is because we cannot discuss a comprehensive shift away from fossil fuels without hurting your feelings. You know fossil fuels are not good for your health but they are for your pocket book. You know the extraction of fossil fuels is trashing eco-systems all over the world not to mention air quality in the Uinta Basin and yet it's not where you live so "who cares". No one has ever suggested we cut them off cold turkey but when there is no policy it makes me wonder who really cares about our world. Conservatives argue that coal jobs will be lost but in reality coal jobs have already been lost and will continue to be lost to technology and in the east coal is almost history anyway. Companies that continue to fight against this grain will find themselves in bed with the dinosaurs but unlike the dinosaurs nothing of value will be able to be extracted from them.

  • Sven Morgan, UT
    July 24, 2014 11:44 a.m.

    The Real Maverick said:

    "Unfortunately, the radical right is bought off by dirty fuel. Dirty fuel and their cohorts are going to be blasting you today. Many will use solyandra as an example as to why we must still baby drill instead of go green."

    Oh, Solyandra just scratches the surface.

    Here is a partial list of "Green Companies" that received tax-payer money from the Federal Government (Crony Capitalism at its finest, brought to you by the Democrat Party) to the tune of 3 billion dollars, who are now bankrupt, shut down, or have been sold:

    * Solyndra: $570.4 million
    * Abound Solar: $494.3 million
    * A123 Systems: $390.1 million
    * Babcock & Brown: $178 million
    * Azure Dynamics: $119.1 million
    * Range Fuels: $162.3 million
    * ECOtality Inc.: $135 million
    * EnerDel, subsidiary of Ener1: $182.8 million

    Green energy is a scam perpetrated through the hoax of AGW.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    July 24, 2014 10:29 a.m.

    No question we can't just walk away from fossil fuels. No question also that we should just sit on our hands and do nothing but rely on them because it is easy.

    We need a current program spurring reasonable conservation and a serious plan for future development of alternative sources.

  • Spangs Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2014 10:12 a.m.

    You know what is convenient and awesome? Clean air to breathe. Clean air that doesn't cause asthma and reactive airway. Clean air that doesn't result in the deaths of many elderly each year. Clean air that attracts economic growth to our community instead of keeping it away. Clean air that doesn't result in the acidification of our oceans, record heat days, more wildfire, extreme weather, record droughts, no snow for our ski industry and less water for farmers.

    How does this balance out with the conveniences of inexpensive fossil-fuel electricity?

  • LDS Tree-Hugger Farmington, UT
    July 24, 2014 8:45 a.m.

    "Our very civilization depends on a reliable supply of electrical energy, including the use of cell phones, computers and all the other modern "necessities."
    Without it, many will not survive.


    Hyperbole, over the top rhetoric, the sky is falling...

    Look --
    Nobody is claiming, saying, or implying we do not need or depend of a reliable supply of electrical energy! NOBODY.

    But --
    The fact is,
    Fossil fuels are not only dirty, but they are a finite source of energy.
    Which means, once it's used -- it is gone forever.

    What we need is
    1). RE-Newable energy.
    2) It MUST be Green.

    Waste not,
    Want not.

    An ounce of prevention,
    is worth a pouind of the cure.

    However, a warning to those who think global warming is a hoax:
    there is another side to the coin,
    and that may be much worse than what we have now.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 24, 2014 8:37 a.m.

    Germany is a much smaller country than we are, they also receive far less sunlight than we do. Yet they manage to generate ten times more electricity from solar power than we do. There is no excuse for our inaction. No one wants us to do without energy, but we have to move much faster on replacing dirty energy with clean energy.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 24, 2014 8:37 a.m.

    Very good letter and very reasonable comments. Unfortunately, the radical right is bought off by dirty fuel. Dirty fuel and their cohorts are going to be blasting you today. Many will use solyandra as an example as to why we must still baby drill instead of go green. They'll conveniently sweep global warming and all the oil accidents we've had under the rug.

  • GK Willington Salt Lake City, UT
    July 24, 2014 8:22 a.m.

    The devices & many others listed by Mr Haycock as 'necessities' really aren't. They are just gadgets some have been convinced they need to make life easy, but do they really?

    I'd bet this thread will break down into the hydrocarbons good and green energy bad. If any of you paid to Quantum of Solace, you'd know water is the mist crucial natural resource.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    July 24, 2014 8:20 a.m.

    I hate it when the power goes out. I hat having to turn off things to keep my power bill down. I really like to have utility's in my house. I would not like to use an out house or carry water in. I want to live as comfortable as possible. I'm grateful to live in a place where I can live comfortable. Sun or wind power is too costly for me to ever break even in my life time.

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    July 24, 2014 6:30 a.m.

    Of course we can't "shut down" our use of fossil fuels right now. I don't think any responsible person recommends such a course. Someday, hopefully soon, we will likely replace most fossil fuel use. We will have to, because fossil fuels are finite. Until that day comes, however, we should take reasonable steps to encourage conservation and renewable energy. This is not an all-or-nothing situation. Just because we have to rely on fossil fuels (or nuclear energy) now, doesn't mean we shouldn't minimize our dependence as much as possible.

  • ECR Burke, VA
    July 24, 2014 5:49 a.m.

    Reducing energy consumption should be the goal of everyone. We need to build better buildings and houses that are energy efficient in their operation and durable in their lifespan. But no one if promoting the idea of shutting down power plants, at least not until an alternative source of energy can be found and implemented to take the place of that carbon producing plant.

    Our reliance on fossil fuels is bad for our environment and our security. Would we be so locked in to the politics of the Middle East if it were not for our reliance on the oil that exists beneath their soil? Would those nations and their citizens have the economic power to wage terror across the world were it not for the dependence of the civilized world on their energy source?

    The dedicated and constant search for alternative sources of energy should be our constant goal. And the efficient and judicious use of that energy, from whatever its source, should be equally as constant.