In wind vs. coal debate, some perspective is in order
Naturally, environmental activists who create no jobs in the state are thrilled by Google's increasing interest in windpower and PSO's declining interest in coal. The rest of us ought to be skeptical.
First, dependency on one type of fuel, whether used for making power or running cars and trucks, isn't smart policy. Diversity — so celebrated by progressives in other areas of life — is frowned upon when it comes to energy. Second, the war on coal is really the war on fossil fuels. Indeed, hydraulic fracturing opponents who've gained little ground with the claim that fracking pollutes water supplies are now on the warpath against fracking's alleged effects on air quality.
Air quality is what is fueling the rage against the coal machine, but this won't stop with coal. Problem is, the wind sometimes does stop blowing. Incredibly, a Sierra Club spokesman hailed PSO's plans as being good for the pocketbooks of consumers. How is paying 10 percent more for power good for consumers?
Voices Photo Galleriesview all
- 14537OKC Thunder: Thunder trio praise fans before potential departures
- 9306Oklahoma State football: Todd Monken thinks Wes Lunt should've stayed in Stillwater
- 6496Oklahoma medical examiner reports cause of deaths in Grand Lake boat crash
- 6052Soaring gasoline prices hurt Oklahoma City area retailers
- 5977Oklahoma football: Sooners get pair of commitments
- 5977Student shot dead during botched home invasion
- 3990As Boy Scouts' vote on gay members nears, faith groups weigh in