Friday, March 27, 2009

Saint Paul can't even TALK Clean Nuclear Energy

A vote was taken last night in St. Paul to lift the ban on new nuclear energy plants in Minnesota- and it failed 9-12 it was killed in Committee. My understanding from Committee Chair Bill Hilty's office is that the DFL'ers all voted to kill it (with the exception of Rep. Joe Atkins- from 39B Inver Grove Heights/S. St. Paul-- Union votes anyone?) and all of the Republicans voted to let the legislation through committee.

According to the Star Trib article:

Supporters of lifting the ban have been careful to note that no new nuclear facilities are being proposed in Minnesota right now, and they say it isn't likely a law change would immediately result in new nuclear proposals. No utilities testified at the hearings.

"I'm not trying to build a nuclear plant," said Rep. Tim Mahoney, a Democrat from St. Paul and sponsor of the House bill. "We're just trying to allow people to talk about it because right now you can't."

There are no new energy plants being PROPOSED in Minnesota- I pointed out how misleading these types of statement are (when ardent nuclear energy opponent Mtka/Eden Prairie DFL Representative Maria Ruud made s similar statement to me at the fall debates):

Excel Energy had an entire booth at this year's Minnesota State Fair dedicated to nuclear power- as they currently operate the state's two plants which produce 24% of the electricity in Minnesota and are looking to expand them. Excel Energy's CEO stated in January "I certainly hope nuclear is part of our answer going forward," and the company said it would likely partner with other companies if it were to add a new nuclear reactor. Great River Energy said last year in an MPR piece that "in 20 years, Great River will likely look for a partner to build a new nuclear plant." No demand huh?

Perhaps they haven't been proposed, because they are illegal to build in Minnesota?

The Co-Founder of Greenpeace is now a strong supporter of nuclear energy- he uses global warming as a justification for his conversion. This is such a great example of how folks from the right and the left could come together on a solution for our country. It provides good jobs to a sector of our economy that needs them, it provides clean energy, it can provide the power we need to keep American moving forward. It can do all of this...without one thin dime invested from the government...and we can't even talk about it.

Minnesota stands to lose big-time and cripple itself if it only supports renewable energy (wind and biomass produces about 5% of our energy). Minnesota currently relies on coal for 62% of our electricity- the national average is 49%- and we're about to be forced into a cap and trade system that penalizes our state for any usage deemed "too much" by the federal government-and we won't even consider nuclear as a solution- Minnesota currently gets 24% of our electricity from our two nuclear plants. The Democrats in this state and nationally are already going to shackle us in their zeal to rid the world of fossil fuel energy (an absurdity on its own), and now they won't even consider reasonable alternatives.

Help us.


1 comment:

Jim said...

Good stuff.

Now if you can do some investigative journalism to determine why I see on the front page of the EP News that the $153M-178M 169/494 interchange that would relieve severe congestion is not a done deal ("still in the air") but the worthless billion+ dollar train through EP is pretty much a certainty. They're just deciding where the train will go; how about deciding not to build the crazy boondoggle at all! I don't care if the Feds pay for half of it. That magic federal money comes from us anyway, it's not free money no matter what the local people trying to justify it will say. Even building the train for "half price" with Federal dollars is still a waste of money. Here, I can sell you a bag of poop for $100, but I'll have Uncle Sam split it with you so you only directly pay $50... you're still buying an over-priced and useless bag of crap.

Also, the part of the 169/494article saying that MNDOT and the local cities all want one thing but the Feds want something else kind of implies we should tell the Feds to bugger off. Who knows better what kind of road is best... the local people or some DC bureaucrat? Hehe, of course, if our local planners are trying to get a train to EP, maybe their decision-making abilities should be questioned.