Commerce: Minnesota Power should close old coal plants
May 10, 2012 at 7:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
The Minnesota Department of Commerce has come to the same conclusion as environmental groups, although for different reasons, that some of Minnesota Power’s oldest coal-fired power plants should shut down sooner rather than later.
Continue Reading
Isn’t the problem too many people and too many cars and trucks? Maybe, to keep Mother Gaia happy, we should buy up all property north of , Sandstone, and tear down all the buildings and ban all motorized traffic in northeastern Minnesota north of there.
Only walkers would be allowed and they will have to carry pooper scoopers with them to make sure that the environment isn’t despoiled by their presence.
Hot debate. What do you think?
28 
22
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
22 
33
Get ready for a 30% increase in your electric bill. The EPA is going to ruin this country. The coal industry has spent millions in clean coal technology but Obama doesn’t care.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
21
Maybe they should have put some of that ‘clean tech’ in this batch of antique plants.
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
13
Hey Hattie, where is this clean coal technology being used? I think you are talking about the sequestration of the CO2 right?
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
19
There is no such thing as “clean” coal.
Like or Dislike:
6 
9
That damn EPA, trying to keep the air we breathe and water we drink from killing us. We all know that if the EPA did not exist the profit driven private sector would do evrything in it’s power to make sure the people were protected. Just like big oil did in the gulf and banks did before our great recession. Say what you will about the EPA but I’d rather have them around than not.
Hot debate. What do you think?
21 
18
Hey Ranger, go to the Obama campaign website and his energy independence graph. Last week it did not contain coal and viola this week it appears in the graph. Anything to be on both sides of the fence. Coal companies have invested their dollars in clean coal so we can keep prices affordable. Maybe you and Obama should be worried about China and India polluting the air. The US has the cleanest air on the planet. Yes. the EPA was a good regulator but now the are overstepping their authority and hold more power than even than president. When will the air be clean enough for you, the EPA and liberals? When we all can’t afford our electricity.
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
13
Here is a link to three ‘clean coal’ proposals and also gives a little hint as to their cost to the consumer.
http://www.midwestenergynews.com/2012/05/11/obamas-nod-to-clean-coal-and-a-tale-of-three-power-plants/
Most believe clean coal will never be economically viable, the link provides a little insight as to the efforts so far and the market will also help explain that. For Obama to put a tick on his web page is a clever way to snag a few independent voters who want to believe he is open to anything. He can be open, and can gain points for saying that they tried to figure it out but it was just too expensive to burden the US citizens with an antiquated fuel source any longer.
Remember all the clean coal commercials during the 2008 campaign? Nothing ever came out except commercials and false hope.
Like or Dislike:
7 
13
Hattie said:
“When will the air be clean enough for you, the EPA and liberals?”
When the National Weather Service no longer has to post warnings like this:
AIR QUALITY ALERT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE
WEATHER CONDITIONS COMBINED WITH EXISTING OZONE LEVELS ARE EXPECTED TO RESULT IN LOCAL MAXIMUM 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS THAT POSE A HEALTH RISK. ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS INCREASE AS AIR QUALITY DETERIORATES.
Like or Dislike:
15 
7
Replace them with nuclear plants asap.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
7
if these companies didnt spend so much of their profits in lobbying to prevent the government from putting a price on pollution they wouldnt have to worry so much about the cost increase. These companies have smart people running them and forecasting so they know full well that their is a huge push to make companies pay for their pollution. The fact that they view lobbying to prevent it as a much better investment than the cost of preventing pollution speaks volumes. One that government can be bought for way too easily, and also that business and ethics are mutually exclusive which is why the EPA was established to begin with.
Like or Dislike:
16 
7
and yes i know the EPA can easily be bought off as well ,…sigh…I just wish people/corporations werent so greedy and exploitation of workers, customers, and the environment wouldnt need to be legislated by the government but thats what happens when people adhere to the rational self interest philosophies of ann ryand.
Like or Dislike:
13 
9
I worked at the Boswell plant and they have won many awards for there efforts for being the cleanest plant in MN from the EPA. why now are they outdated. they just spent 2 yrs of improvements out there as well. the special interest groups are gonna destroy this country. there the ones who banned freon. They cause more expesnive things to come about. Gas will never be in in abundance and volume enough to run The Boswell Plant.
Like or Dislike:
8 
7
Energy should be something that we use wisely, not something that we are free to squander as long as we pay the bills. I’m not so much worried about the environment. I’m worried about resources, and coal is a nonrenewable resource. If we don’t conserve now, future generations will have to pay more later. Same with oil and same with natural gas.
So to all you tea partiers who cry, “think of the children!” about the national debt, you sure aren’t thinking very hard about their energy needs.
Like or Dislike:
5 
11
Had Minn Power kept its eye on the energy market and not car auctions it might have seen that big changes were ahead. A diversification plan for a utility? Could have diversified in green technologies. Shareholders, are you happy?
Like or Dislike:
5 
13