Federal regs force coal plant closures now, higher rates later, critics warn

Rogue wrote:

PkrBum wrote:who is it here that keeps defending investing (spending) on infastructure?

where does this fit into the ideology?

Im not sure if I get your comment pkr, but I would defend investing in our energy infrastructure before I would cars.

all this is going on and no one really knows about it, except for teeny bits here and teeny bits there. But we are under a major attack on our energy resources and we are going to be in big doo doo soon.

PkrBum wrote:

Rogue wrote:

PkrBum wrote:who is it here that keeps defending investing (spending) on infastructure?

where does this fit into the ideology?

Im not sure if I get your comment pkr, but I would defend investing in our energy infrastructure before I would cars.

all this is going on and no one really knows about it, except for teeny bits here and teeny bits there. But we are under a major attack on our energy resources and we are going to be in big doo doo soon.

it's seaoat... he talks down public positions... while screaming for road repair (which i don't necessarily disagree with)... but ignores huge ideological issues that are a MUCH bigger issue (energy expenses) to the middle/low class. he doth prostrate too much. i'm beginning to think he is the shill.

Yomama wrote:

TEOTWAWKI wrote:What does it matter ?..there's nothing on TV and I don't need a freezer, I eat out and if restaurants lose power I will just forage and eat spam...Without lights people will stay home and huddle. That is better. It will bring us all home...just think no pesky power bills or jobs or much of anything...maybe my cute neighbor will get lonely or scared and need comforted.

Look on the darkside you bunch of Pansies .

Let me ask you a question, Teo. Do you have a power meter at your property? If you do, does that make you a pansy too? (Ok, that's two questions. )

PkrBum wrote:

Rogue wrote:

PkrBum wrote:who is it here that keeps defending investing (spending) on infastructure?

where does this fit into the ideology?

Im not sure if I get your comment pkr, but I would defend investing in our energy infrastructure before I would cars.

all this is going on and no one really knows about it, except for teeny bits here and teeny bits there. But we are under a major attack on our energy resources and we are going to be in big doo doo soon.

it's seaoat... he talks down public positions... while screaming for road repair (which i don't necessarily disagree with)... but ignores huge ideological issues that are a MUCH bigger issue (energy expenses) to the middle/low class. he doth prostrate too much. i'm beginning to think he is the shill.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

PkrBum wrote:

Rogue wrote:

PkrBum wrote:who is it here that keeps defending investing (spending) on infastructure?

where does this fit into the ideology?

Im not sure if I get your comment pkr, but I would defend investing in our energy infrastructure before I would cars.

all this is going on and no one really knows about it, except for teeny bits here and teeny bits there. But we are under a major attack on our energy resources and we are going to be in big doo doo soon.

it's seaoat... he talks down public positions... while screaming for road repair (which i don't necessarily disagree with)... but ignores huge ideological issues that are a MUCH bigger issue (energy expenses) to the middle/low class. he doth prostrate too much. i'm beginning to think he is the shill.

Making energy cheap would only make sense if one wishes to ease the burden of the middle/low class. It does seem conterproductive in what he believes. But then I'm just a...

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paUGhVQfBpw

NaNook wrote:So, is ECUA going to raise their rates 8% or not?

Why can't we have a combination coal/natural gas plant?

Why don't people talk about companies that recycle spent nuclear fuel rods?

Oh, well, I'll continue to be myself........