10 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumblePublished Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2008 | 4:35 p.m.
Updated Thursday, Oct. 30, 2008 | 2:14 p.m.
A large, coal-fired power plant proposed in Eastern Nevada is the key to keeping prices low and supply reliable in Southern Nevada. This according to power company bigwig Michael Yackira, who went to the stump again at this morning's Nevada Development Authority breakfast.
The Sierra Pacific Resources president and CEO said 1,000 megawatts of new demand from Strip developments coming online in the next five years – equivalent to about 750,000 average single-family homes – will contribute to the need for more power plants in Nevada.
Sierra Pacific Resources owns Nevada Power Co. in the south and Sierra Pacific Power Co. in the north.
Yackira also talked up the company's commitment to renewable energy and efficiency programs, but emphasized how important the $3.8 billion Ely Energy Center would be to keeping the lights on in Vegas.
He said volatile natural gas prices make buying power on the wholesale market a gamble, while owning plants that burn cheap, domestic coal keep prices down.
Environmentalists, however, have said the plants will spew global warming-causing greenhouse gases for 50 years and will cost consumers a bundle once Congress enacts climate change legislation.
Take our state to the cleaners
Take our very last dime
Sell our power to other states
They only pay
a penny a K
and its root root root
for the fat cats
they've been tightening their belts
and it's
one-two-three strikes you're out
at the old coal game
I don't believe sierra pacific resources sells power to out-of-state entities. The electricity they generate in-state goes to their own customers. If you read up on those other 2 coal plants being planned, those are out-of state companies wanting to build here and export all the power. What I can't figure out is who they plan to sell to since california won't buy coal power (even though they currently import about 10% of their power from coal plants around the west!!)
Other countries around the world are making massive strides in adopting renewable energy while the U.S. is being left in the coal dust.
These plants are being pushed on the public because Big Coal companies like Peabody Energy make billons from digging the stuff up and selling it. That's why they are spending tens of millions of dollars on advertising to lie to the public about how "clean" their coal is.
New studies show that coal reserves will deplete by 2025, not in two hundred years as some say. Coupled with the climate risk involved, it is sheer folly and completely irresponsible to build more coal plants!
This is big business pushing for more profits at the expense of our very survival.
Don't let it happen!
"the plants will spew global warming-causing greenhouse gases" carbon dioxide. Ok, Lets stop the greenhouse gases! On the count of three hold your breath!
i'm all for clean energy but it needs to be cost effective. currently some people spend more than $300/month in the summer. it will double or triple the cost based on current green technology. do you want to pay $750/month next summer? how many people will have to decide between cooling their house, food to eat or medicine to keep them alive?
Everybody likes to compare other countries to the US when it comes to renewable energy. ex. most of Iceland's energy is produced from geothermal resources. That's awesome! Why can't we do that? hmmm....Iceland has a population of about 300,000 people. Most US suburbs have more people than that, and most Americans are not energy-conscious or don't care about keeping thermostats at 68/78, or want to do without that 2nd fridge or deep freezer in their garages, or want to give up their 65" hi-def plasma TVs or make their homes more energy efficient. environmentalists think voila, you can wave a magic wand and bad coal plants will disappear and clean plants will take their place in an instant. It is impossible to stop global warming in its tracks. Practically everything humans use, consume, make, want, buy, toss out either spews GHGs or GHGs were emitted in their production. Clothes, food, vehicles, you name it.....Guess environmentalists want to double, triple, quadruple everyone's power bills. gee thanks.
They want No coal. No nuclear.
They say they want wind instead. But wait, environmentalists dont' like that cause they kill bats and birds and oh, they're ugly on the landscape and lower property values and nobody wants to hike or recreate around turbines. Ok, build geothermal. HA! That's just like oil because it is exhorbitantly expensive to drill to look for, and find, just the right resource that can be used. It's an extremely risky venture for developers, and oh wait, environmentalists don't want them using carbon-spewing drill rigs to drill nor do they want them to drill anywhere near a tree, flower or animal. Well shoot, that only leaves solar. PV? Very expensive and from a commercial standpoint, not very dependable for base load power in terms of size and space not to mention any little bit of shading drops a panel's output almost to 0%. Okay then solar thermal. Oh wait, if it uses wet cooling that's too much water to use, environmentalists want developers to use air-cooling. Okay, so that increases the price and decreases the efficiency. Solar thermal still uses large amounts of water though, they use a conventional good ole steam turbine to generate. many solar thermal plants have backup natural gas turbines too, and we all know how the environmentalists oppose carbon-spewing turbines. And haven't even mentioned yet how many thousands of acres of land would have to bladed and graded flat for solar thermal mirrors, and if you're in the desert southwest there's an endangered species that the environmentalists will oppose large solar plants with thousands of acres of land. Gee, they don't want coal or nuclear, and they turn out in droves to oppose wind, solar and geothermal proposals.
Let's turn out the lights and go live in the woods and live off the land the environmentalists have so passionately worked hard to save.
Well here is my 2 cents on this mess. If we want a reliable, efficient, economic power base, we need to live by the rule of moderation. As with everything we do in life, if we live a life of moderation things seem to work out for the best. The power company needs to operate by this rule as well. They cannot put all of their eggs in one basket and remain reliable, efficient or environmentally responsible. The only way that our power bills will stabilize and possibly drop is if Nevada Power Company has a proportional mix of energy resources. Nevada Power is supplying very little of their energy with coal and they have no nuclear energy. The majority of their resources come from gas fueled power plants and the power market. With this mix Nevada Power Company is at the mercy of greedy power marketers and greedy gas traders. These two entities are in business to make Billions through speculation and for no other reason. They have no responsibility to the consumer to provide economic or reliable services, they are just making money. Nevada Power is in the business to provide the lowest cost, most reliable and cleanest resource to the consumer that they can. Yes they do receive a profit but their profit is regulated by the PUCN, unlike the power and fuels trading companies, where the skies the limit. To make a long story longer Nevada will continue to have the second highest power rates in the Western United States as long as they keep a lopsided resource mix. Nevada Power can develop a responsible resource portfolio with Coal, Gas, Hydro, Solar, Wind, Geothermal and purchase power as long as the Environmentalists and nay Sayers quit blocking their every move and forcing them and us, to pay millions of dollars and lose valuable time fighting for something that we all know we need. Nevada’s one new coal plant will not destroy the world; in fact this coal plant will retire older dirtier plants and allow them to clean up their total Carbon footprint by allowing more renewables to tie into the grid. This coal operation will diversify Nevada Powers energy portfolio by reducing dependence on the power market, gas generation, and allow them to access geothermal and wind energy that they cannot get too without this power plant being constructed. Bottom line, yes Nevada Power can reduce their carbon footprint, yes they can increase our use of green power and yes eventually their portfolio will be economically and ecologically balanced allowing lower power rates with less volatility. Give em a break so they can give us a break and eventually help lead the country in the green power race to reduce Global Warming.
You guys are a hoot! Must be on the payroll of the polluters!
Not only does NV Power use coal, but the coal they buy comes at the cost of mountain top removal in Appalachia.
Go to http://ilovemountains.org
Type in your zip code and see if your power comes at the cost of mountain top removal.
Fact of the matter is that if renewables had the corporate socialism that coal, oil and nuclear enjoy, thanks to their fat cat lobbyists and PR firms sucking at the public tit, we'd be well on our way to a clean energy future.
The companies are telling a lie when they say this will reduce your rates!!! Carbon taxes are coming and regulations are coming - see EPA vs. Mass. These companies want to build the cheapest plant they can and then when they are NOT meeting the regulations they can upgrade the plants on OUR dollars. Ask your Public Utility Commissioner - they will raise your rates when the plants have to be upgraded to meet future regulations.
we're ALL polluters. We sit in our comfy homes kept a/c cool in the summer and heater warm in the winter. We watch our sports, reality shows, sitcoms, news and movies on the TV and read at night with overhead lighting and lamps. We wear clothes manufactured overseas in facilities using fossil fuel energy sources. We drive our nice trucks and cars buring gas and diesel. We love to ride our ATVs, Sea-doos, boats, snowmobiles, motorcycles, RVs, etc. We love to use our computers. Everything we do is tied to pollution. I'm not saying we can't, or shouldn't, do something about it. Too many people want other people to do it all. It will have to take all of us, collectively, to completely change the way we live and carry out our day-to-day, work and recreational activities. The problem is we don't like anybody telling us how to live our lives.