- Most Read
- Discussed
- Editors’ Picks
- UPDATED with audio: American Idols Live: Archuleta wins the night
- Idol worship, sans America
- Rising use of painkillers taking deadly toll
- Mayor says Vegas hurt more than other cities by gas prices
- Lakefront homes, while lake lasts
- Two California teenagers die in accident on Colorado River
- An astonishing revelation
- Survey: Gas prices deter Southern Californians
- UPDATE: Driver arrested in bus stop crash that kills one, injures another
- Measures linked, going nowhere
Blogs
Sports: Upon Further Review
TNF: Kelley wins; Tyson didn't see it
Now and Then
Sun Ming Ming, 7-foot-9 center, selected in Globetrotters "draft"
Sports: Upon Further Review
TNF: The UFC guy loses; Tyson is not impressed
TNF: My goodness Kaspars is big
TNF: Mike Tyson is in the house
Tuesday Night Fights at the Hilton: Elvis has left the building but Kaspars (Kambala) isn't a ghost
Vegas News
Vegas woman selected as White House fellow
Politics: The Early Line
Ensign offers way to pay for energy tax credits, but it may be too late
Calendar
- Impurities (9 p.m.)
- Jerry Tiffe (2 p.m. to 4 p.m.)
- Louie Anderson (7 p.m.)
- The Improv at Harrah's (8:30 p.m.)
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.


Of course the cost of a power plant is going to be passed on to the consumer (rate payer). Power plants are the tools the power company uses to produce their product. Is there any company that doesn’t pass the cost of their “tools” on to their consumers through the price of their product? Assume a power company could get the financing to build enough renewable energy infrastructure to replace the production of a plant this size, don’t you think the cost of that infrastructure would still be passed on to the consumer? At the present time you would be looking at least ten times the infrastructure cost for renewables, just think how much the rates would increase then. Someone has to pay for the cost of producing electricity, it’s not a charity.