4/12/2008

Baseload renewables

An argument that you hear over and over from proponents of the coal plants for Kansas is that you cannot use wind energy for baseload power, therefore you need to develop coal, gas and nuclear energy. They say the wind is not dependable. German scientists would say they are wrong.

If you go to www.youtube.com and in the search box put in quotes "Combined Power Plant" you will be given a choice to watch a seven-minute video from Germany about supplying baseload power from renewable sources. Because of this pilot project, Germany feels that they will start to phase out coal and nuclear plants, and by 2020, will generate 40 percent of their power from renewable sources and by 2050 they will generate 100% of Germany's power from a combination of wind, biogas, solar and pumped hydro. Watch the video to see how they will do it.

If you compare Germany to Kansas and Oklahoma you will find that Germany is heavily industrialized with a population of 82,000,000 and a land area of 137,000 square miles. Kansas and Oklahoma have a combined population of 6,383,000 with a total land area of 159,000 square miles. Germany, as of this year, produces more electricity from wind than all of the U.S. Germany has to supply more power to more people crowded into a smaller area than Kansas and Oklahoma combined.

From the German example, Kansas could use a combination of wind and natural gas to supply all of our state's power. On top of that, Kansas could be a top supplier of electricity out-of-state because of our superior wind energy potential. This could be done while phasing out coal and nuclear power in our state.

Take seven minutes, watch the video, and come to your own conclusions .

-- JERRY BROWN, Salina, retired Salina School District administrator

It's not about guns

Gun control is really not gun control, it is people control. It is a person's right to protect himself or herself and his or her family.

Gun bans do not stop criminals from getting guns, but they do make it harder for a person to obtain a firearm for protection.

--SAMUEL GANTNER, Abilene, retired U.S. Army

Clinton, Obama on abortion

When Barack Obama (Saturday, March 29, Religion section) was an Illinois state senator, he vehemently opposed a bill that required hospitals to take care of any baby born alive. The problem, you see, is that a tiny percentage of these babies are boys and girls who have survived late-term abortions.

Previously, survivors of "unsuccessful" abortions were put into medical waste bins and left to die. Obama argued that this practice should continue because, he said, taking care of these babies would threaten women's rights ¬­-- meaning their right to expect that an abortion will result in a dead baby, not a living one.

In a Jan. 5 debate, Hillary Clinton attacked Obama for not being pro-woman enough, because even though he'd opposed the baby-saving legislation, he'd failed to show up on the day the bill was voted on. Clinton boasted about how she'd been sure to show up to vote against the federal version of the legislation in the U.S. Senate.

Let us pause to consider the spectacle of two Democratic presidential candidates fighting for the bragging rights as to which one was more committed to making sure that living, born babies are thrown into medical waste bins and left to die.

Despite Obama's and Clinton's opposition, both the Illinois bill and the federal bill passed overwhelmingly, since the majority of Americans are both decent and sane. But what kind of people are these two candidates? And how could anyone who condones such atrocities be qualified to lead a country?

-- KATHY SCHARPLAZ, Minneapolis owner and manager of Prairie

NaturalBeef

How to treat a stranger

Kansas' legislative leaders have a selective hearing problem. A majority of Kansans oppose building new coal-burning power plants that would produce carbon emissions at levels known to harm our health and the environment. Blinded by dollar signs and propaganda from power plant lobbyists, our leaders chose to ignore the will of the people.

Now, as legislators are crafting an immigration bill that could exclude people from basic health care, they say it's what citizens want. How insulting! This is what Kris Kobach, Kansas GOP chairman, and others of his ilk want. The same Kris Kobach who worked to defeat the Bush administration's immigration plan because it wasn't harsh enough.

How do our legislators, who profess to be Christian, reconcile draconian measures with the words of Jesus on judgment day? "Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me." (Matthew 25: 34-36)

Our lawmakers obviously have a selective reading problem, too. I think the people of Kansas who want humane immigration policies need to take action. Call a legislator every day and read the above, or an equivalent passage from one's own holy book, until the message about how to treat "the stranger" finally sinks in.

-- DEBORAH A. BAILEY, Lindsborg, retired teacher

A blatant political bias

I am writing in regard to your blatant political bias which seems to be promoting Sen. Obama for president. Nearly every day I find something which is pro-Obama in the Salina Journal. Just when I thought that you couldn't surpass the previous day's political promotion, on March 29, I was astounded to see an old posed photo of Obama (dated Oct. 31, 2004!!!) gracing your religion page.

Just because the photo shows him with his hands folded and his eyes closed as though in prayer, it hardly qualifies the political article as a headliner under the subject of religion.

I have for some time been disappointed and disgusted with the content of the religion page. The headlines and photos are generally of not much substance, but in order to find what's happening in the religious community of Salina, I must search through the next page for a tiny 6-by-6-inch block called Special Events. I am certain that with a little effort, you could do much better.

It is my understanding that local churches must pay an advertising fee to be listed in the Places of Worship section.

Since you have chosen to use the religion page to promote your favorite political candidate, please consider allowing local and area churches to have free space to promote their God and savior.

-- ¬­¬­¬­ALICE THOMAS, Abilene,

part-time entertainer, Classic Heart Band

Another pool option

It is understandable that some folks want Salina to have a nice big swimming pool or water park, to "keep up with the Joneses." It would be nice, and maybe we could afford it, but I still think far more youngsters would benefit from several modest pools and spray fountains located in neighborhood parks scattered around. A lot of towns around in Kansas with populations of 3,000 or so can afford nice swimming pools, so why can't a growing city of 45,000 to 50,000 afford to have several?

Regardless of whether a new swimming pool goes in Oakdale or Kenwood, I doubt if we can agree on a better place for the Expo Center than where it is right now. The task force studying ways to improve the area and its facilities was on the right track until it was apparently hijacked in midflight (maybe by the losers of the 2006 election, or maybe by those who really don't care about an expo center at all?).

Kenwood already has a good nucleus of land and facilities, and it is not really "landlocked" there, either. The old river channel surrounding Kenwood could be filled in and used to gain significant additional area.

To allow this, a short cutoff channel could be dug from southeast to northwest just south of Oakdale Park, where the channel almost doubles back on itself now. One bridge near the intersection of Center and Front Streets would replace four existing bridges.

A lot of old river channel would remain. It should all be cleaned up and could be developed with walking paths, etc., as desired.

-- LAWRENCE WETTER, Salina, retired engineer

Clintons know how to lie

Mr. Tom Bell: I really liked your editorial on the Clintons. It was the most truthful write-up I have ever read about them. They both are B.S. talkers. We all know she had a dramatic arrival at Tuzla Air Base, when she had to dodge sniper fire and run for her life, which CBS video proved it was a lie. Videos don't lie, but Clintons do.

Then Hillary called her comments a misstatement and a minor blip. It's just another lie from the Clintons. If that was a misstatement, I sure wouldn't want her for president.

The Clintons would do anything to get back in the White House. If she had so much experience, why didn't she do something when she was first lady -- being in the White House for eight years doing nothing?

Well I guess now you know what I think of the Clintons, so I will close this letter before I get anymore P.O.'d.

--BILL NELSON, Jennings,

retired farmer