Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the five are among the efficient plants? Makes me curious about your idea of efficiency.
If they werent efficient, then why didnt the electric company close them? If closing them results in an increase in cost of 10-15%, then I'd say that doesnt sound very efficient. Whats your definition?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Your obligatory remarks never cease to deliver amusement.
its your inability to comprehend that this will result in an INCREASE in cost to the end consumer. You liberals sit here and keep asking about how government raises prices, and when you are faced with a prime example, rather than discussing the issue, you go off on a tangent and start talking about things like profit, which have nothing to do with the discussion.
If they werent efficient, and closing them results in an increase in cost of 10-15%, I'd say yes.. Whats your definition?
Usage. At what capacity were these plants running?
Quote:
its your inability to comprehend that this will result in an INCREASE in cost to the end consumer. You liberals sit here and keep asking about how government raises prices, and when you are faced with a prime example, rather than discussing the issue, you attack other posters and start talking about things like profit, which have nothing to do with the discussion.
There is more to the reality than consuming a product. Sorry if I disappoint you for not buying into the snake-oil salesmen pitch you're rooting for, but the fact is that corporations will pass down costs regardless. If they have an excuse that could help increase their bottom line, why would they not use it? That is the reality of doing business, no? The sad side to the story is that they can put anti-liberals such as you at work, that spend more time talking about liberalism than the core matter itself. Oh, and then complain about being "attacked".
Never mind that AEP would never increase rates absent such regulations. At least that is something you really believe in, no?
Externalities is still a dirty word to some, it appears.
It's obviously much cheaper to run a coal power plant if you don't have to bother with, say, keeping mercury emissions down. Or if you can stash your coal ash and wait for it to become somebody else's problem.
There's a cost to having mercury in the food chain, or to have a few hundred million tons of ash with generous helpings of arsenic, lead, selenium and mercury lying around to be dealt with, some day. This is known as an externality, a cost incurred by a party who didn't agree to the transaction - in this case, people who ingest mercury emitted from the smokestack.
Do the coal plants have a business interest in factoring externalities into their costs? Of course not.
So it's up to government agencies to take on the ever-popular job of telling the power plants that emitting mercury is a no-no from now on, because there's technology to filter it out.
Does the cost go up? Yes, because all of a sudden, the cost of power includes what used to be the external cost of mercury pollution. The product is sold at a price that reflects all (well, more) of the expenses incurred on producing it. Which seems rather fair.
I don't think so. But don't worry about me and my "needs", I'm working towards installing solar panels on my home in couple of years anyway. I will be fine. I don't get worried as easily as you do.
I guess you don't watch that show that i can't say the name of so you missed the fact that on October 5, 2010 our VP announced that there would be a solar powered water heater installed on top of the White House by spring. 260 days ago and spring ended yesterday and still no solar panel. I wonder when they will get the price of electricity so high that using solar for homes will be worthwhile.
Hey, over 10 years ago I had some solar people come to my home to study the feasibility of putting one of their systems on my house. The reply was that unless I wanted to cut down some trees in my yard that panel wouldn't be very feasible since not more than a couple of hours of sunlight would hit any part of my roof. Maybe in my front yard but then it would have to be movable to keep up with the sun.
Usage. At what capacity were these plants running?
Useless to the discussion since shutting them down will INCREASE the cost . I love the lengths you go through to distract from the discussion of the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
There is more to the reality than consuming a product. Sorry if I disappoint you for not buying into the snake-oil salesmen pitch you're rooting for, but the fact is that corporations will pass down costs regardless. If they have an excuse that could help increase their bottom line, why would they not use it? That is the reality of doing business, no? The sad side to the story is that they can put anti-liberals such as you at work, that spend more time talking about liberalism than the core matter itself. Oh, and then complain about being "attacked".
Never mind that AEP would never increase rates absent such regulations. At least that is something you really believe in, no?
I'm waiting for you to find ONE thing to backup your thesis that the cost increase of 10%+ is not related to the government shutdown of the plants
I don't think so. But don't worry about me and my "needs", I'm working towards installing solar panels on my home in couple of years anyway. I will be fine. I don't get worried as easily as you do.
Let me guess, you'll be relying up government welfare, i.e. grants, to help pay for them, so while the government is increasing the cost of electricity, they can give welfare to those who want to avoid the higher costs.
Let me also guess this wont be the poor in a position to be able to afford solar panels.. ooh the humor.. support policies that only the rich can take advantage of, while you moan and groan about big business and "profits".. haha
Externalities is still a dirty word to some, it appears.
It's obviously much cheaper to run a coal power plant if you don't have to bother with, say, keeping mercury emissions down. Or if you can stash your coal ash and wait for it to become somebody else's problem.
There's a cost to having mercury in the food chain, or to have a few hundred million tons of ash with generous helpings of arsenic, lead, selenium and mercury lying around to be dealt with, some day. This is known as an externality, a cost incurred by a party who didn't agree to the transaction - in this case, people who ingest mercury emitted from the smokestack.
Do the coal plants have a business interest in factoring externalities into their costs? Of course not.
So it's up to government agencies to take on the ever-popular job of telling the power plants that emitting mercury is a no-no from now on, because there's technology to filter it out.
Does the cost go up? Yes, because all of a sudden, the cost of power includes what used to be the external cost of mercury pollution. The product is sold at a price that reflects all (well, more) of the expenses incurred on producing it. Which seems rather fair.
What dangerous element do we find in those soon to be the only legal light bulbs we get to use, like it or not. yes, I know that the Congress passed this fool law when Bush was in office. However, in 2 1/2 years one would think that Obama could have killed that one.
Hey, by gosh, that chemical element that makes destruction of those bulbs so dangerous was mercury, wasn't it.
Externalities is still a dirty word to some, it appears.
Amen! The Ostrich Syndrome at work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
What dangerous element do we find in those soon to be the only legal light bulbs we get to use, like it or not.
As much as you try to keep up with "news", I would think you'd know better than that, if not for the lesser known fact that CFLs actually contribute significantly less mercury (and which can be controlled) than what you think is going to be illegal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
