Ping!
Posted on 10/20/2007 3:15:58 PM PDT by bobsunshine
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment yesterday became the first government agency in the United States to cite carbon dioxide emissions as the reason for rejecting an air permit for a proposed coal-fired electricity generating plant, saying that the greenhouse gas threatens public health and the environment.
The decision marks a victory for environmental groups that are fighting proposals for new coal-fired plants around the country. It may be the first of a series of similar state actions inspired by a Supreme Court decision in April that asserted that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide should be considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
In the past, air permits, which are required before construction of combustion facilities, have been denied over emissions such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury. But Roderick L. Bremby, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, said yesterday that "it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing."
The Kansas agency's decision caps a controversy over a proposal by Sunflower Electric Power, a rural electrical cooperative, to build a pair of big, 700-megawatt, coal-fired plants in Holcomb, a town in the western part of the state, at a cost of about $3.6 billion. One unit would have supplied power to parts of Kansas; the other, to be owned by another rural co-op, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, would have provided electricity to fast-growing eastern Colorado.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
"Hey, cutie, I like your energy?"
Think Enron. The whole issue can be leveraged into a "Get the rich white guys" schtick. So what if lives are ruined and ordinary people get to forfeit their assets and spend decades in jail.
This is a power plant where 85% of the output was targeted for Colorado. Why not build it there?
“More like 0.038%”
Correctamundo!
I only know that because I saw a History Channel show that included
that “death by carbon dioxide” event in Africa a couple of years back.
(I think they simply said “0.03%)
Keep patting yourselves in the back while you’re in the dark. I wonder what their excuse will be when they reject a nuke?
If they can’t be built in the US than Mexico will build them and maybe some of the illegals will return home for the work. LNG terminals will soon be built there because of restrictions here...
You give them too much credit. What they really want is your tax money, and coercive social control over your words, deeds, and thoughts. They think the energy necessary to maintain a modern civilization can be obtained from moonbeams and pixie dust industrial hemp and photovoltaic cells.
A sad day.
But look at how happy the state enviro official gets.
Over 1/2 of one degree increase. In 35 years. And no increase in the last 9 years.
It would go something like this.
"We at Sunflower Electric Power have seen the evil of our ways. CO2 is bad, very very bad. We won't make any more. We're shutting down all of our plants that produce it. And we cannot, in good conscience, buy power for any other company for resale that does either. So as you freeze to death this winter, remember it's for the environment."
If all the power companies would do this. We could do away with this type of idiocy. Once the "environmentally conscious" public learns that it's going to take far more drastic steps that installing CFL bulbs in their homes to comply with the enviro Nazi's demands, things will change.
AGW™ ping
Damned EXCELLENT idea.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.