BugMeNot.com - Tell everyone you know. Because Common sense isn't. For OakRidger.com, for KnoxNews.com.
Purpose of this site:
- To challenge the claims by TVA and others that customers should volunteer to pay extra to buy "Green Choice" power on the basis that it is good for the environment.
- To challenge the assertion that wind power, as being implemented by TVA, is better for the environment than coal, nuclear or hydro power.
- To challenge the proposition that energy options justify a cost premium solely on the basis that they consume no fuel, which is the essential position of wind power proponents.
- To assert that Green Choice power sources, particularly wind, have not been demonstrated to be a good investment, when balancing cost of energy and effects on the environment.
Even non-fueled power plants like wind power plants have disadvantages. Among them is, as implemented by TVA, the sacrifice of a remote mountain top recreational area for installation of a power plant. While the Green Choice proponents like to say they are "reclaiming" an old strip mine, the fact is they are simply using the land again in much the same way. Some would say the wind power plant is as unsightly as strip mining, possibly more long lasting, and more visible from longer distances.
All energy sources involve risks and disadvantages that we accept. Even the wind power proponents sometimes agree that "The same standards should be applied to wind energy: nothing more, nothing less." ( Paul Gipe, Wind Energy Comes of Age, p. 363)
In this region, a basic question is: Which is a better investment of our money? Spending $4 extra per 150 kwh to support "Green Choice" power, or spending the extra money to reduce coal plant emissions? Along this line, another question is how competitive is the rate we are offered? Here was a site that offered wind power for less than $3 per 150 kwh block (2/100 = 3/150). Are we being asked to volunteer to be gouged?
| Quote of the moment |
| 9th Amendment: It has been objected also against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration, and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the general government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard urged against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I conceive, that may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the 4th resolution. |
| ~ (James Madison) Proposing Bill of Rights to House, June 8, 1789 ~ |
BugMeNot.com - Tell everyone you know. Because Common sense isn't. For OakRidger.com, for KnoxNews.com.
Images stored locally for protection of your privacy (unless/until you search with Google).
Disclaimer Fine Print: This site is personal, and is independent of TVA or any other organization. Use of the abbreviation "TVA" is purely for descriptive purposes (for example, to distinguish from wind power plants on Buffalo Ridge in Minnesota). No endorsement, no approval, and no involvement by TVA is implied.
Copyright © 2000-2009 hal9000[zat]mensetmanus.net
I last touched this page on
Saturday, 2007-11-17 at 05:09:07 UTC.