You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.

Michigan is 'bound by decency' to end reliance on fossil fuels

By Guest Column

We’re not used to thinking about how we manage our energy needs as a moral issue. But consider this: the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that one in six children born today is at risk of brain damage from the mercury released when coal is used to produce electricity. Imported coal from other states currently produces 60 percent of Michigan’s energy.

Our own Department of Natural Resources warns pregnant women not to eat too much fish from our beautiful Great Lakes, lest they ingest too much mercury and harm their unborn children. Burning coal for energy causes these high levels of mercury.

Love does no harm to its neighbors, but our over-reliance on coal is doing harm.

Is this acceptable to us?

We will continue to be dependent on fossil fuels (oil, coal, and natural gas) for years to come. But we are bound by decency to reduce this dependence, especially on the most polluting fossil fuel: coal. It’s a moral issue.

It’s time for Michigan to do what more than 30 other states have done: commit ourselves to a higher (and more moral) energy standard. The Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs proposal would do just that: raise our use of renewable energy to 25 percent by 2025. It’s a modest measure, not a radical step. Currently Iowa gets 23 percent of its energy from clean renewable energy compared to Michigan’s 3.9 percent. Gosh, can’t we do better?

Our church, the Vineyard Church of Ann Arbor, is committed to something we call Creation Care, based on the Biblical command to care for this glorious creation as good stewards. We’ve been working together to improve our energy use as a congregation along with many other congregations, with the help of Michigan Interfaith Power & Light.

It takes cooperation — as every parent who reminds their child to turn off lights and pick up their clothes knows. We can do some good as individuals, but we can only do better, together. The Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs proposal, on the ballot in November, is a way for the citizens of our state to say, “We can do better together!”

Join us in this cause, and remember to vote Yes! on the Michigan Energy Michigan Jobs proposal this November. For more information on the initiative and to learn how you and your congregation can get involved, visit the campaign’s website at www.MIenergyMIjobs.com.

Ken Wilson is the Senior Pastor of Vineyard Church of Ann Arbor, and author most recently of Mystically Wired: Exploring New Realms in Prayer (Thomas Nelson, 2010).

Comments

IICC

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:32 a.m.

Exelon Wind is a significant developer of wind projects in MI. But look what they are saying about wind subsidies now: Wind Power Producers Pay the Market to Run to collect the PTC • To collect the PTC, wind producers increasingly engage in negative pricing – paying the market to let them run, when there is little demand for their power, ultimately crowding out base load generation like coal and nuclear. • For example, in western Texas in March 2008, prices were negative 33% of time largely due to wind producers attempting to collect the PTC. • Because the PTC is worth approximately $35 per megawatt hour (pre-tax) of electricity produced, a wind producer could pay the market $10 to take their power and still collect $25 from taxpayers! • This threatens around-the-clock base load power producers, forcing them to pay to run their plants as well or to shut down for long periods of the day when their power is needed most. Crowding out Private Sector Energy Investments • Oversupply of wind is causing market distortions which is artificially suppressing prices and hampering investments in base load technologies. • Investments in traditional energy sources like coal, natural gas, and nuclear are not being made because there is a glut of subsidized and intermittent wind in certain areas

DonBee

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:09 p.m.

AWEA just tossed Exelon out of the association.

IICC

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:24 a.m.

Denmark: $0.36/kWh, MI $0.14/kWh. IA-76% Coal MI 52%, Texas-deregulated market, 80% fossil: $0.07-9 per Kwh. MI regulated monopoly due to PA295 renewable law, $0.14/kWh. Wind Power Purchase Agreements recorded at MPSC are coming in anywhere from 150% to 500% above MISO wholesale pricing. Subtract federal tax subsidies and it is 30% worse yet. Wind is way more expensive, period.

martini man

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:01 a.m.

What a bunch of left wing liberal crap !!!!!

NoSUVforMe

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 11:14 p.m.

I guess the discussion is over. Renewables are 500% more expensive than coal, but DTE fully supports renewables anyway- so they say. Iowa has batteries hidden all over the state, most likely in corn fields. DTE isn't a monopoly because Consumers also has a monopoly over some parts of the state. DTE doesn't care about profits and their CEO has waived his bonus based on profits for the good of the rate payers. And all DTE executives are moving their families downwind of the Monroe plant because mercury will make their children smarter.

NoSUVforMe

Thu, Sep 13, 2012 : 2:55 a.m.

DonBee , is your day job working for DTE. You write nothing but garbage. Total trash. Do you know what Iowans think of wind power? They love it. No batteries or storage of any kind. Just clean green power. This board is flooded with DTE shills. The Michigan people will prevail against the lies and deception of DTE and Consumers. It is really too bad mercury can't be targeted directly to DTE executives and their families. They should be the ones eating mercury since they love it so much.

DonBee

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:08 p.m.

LOL NoSUVforMe - I love the fact that you grab a bone and run with it. Batteries are not the only storage medium, pumped hydro, compressed air and other storage mechanisms are available. What happens in Iowa is they pay peak price for the wind energy at off peak times (difference between $60 MWH and $5 MWH) and sell it at a loss to others, then they add the loss amount to their customer's bills as a "fuel rider". Eventually if they keep adding wind generation, they will have to institute time of use pricing so that customers will use more wind power when it is available. Think about 4AM laundry and dish washing.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:16 p.m.

What is missing in this discussion is this: "In far too many cases, EPA has been given carte blanche to regulate as it sees fit. A key pretext is the 1970 Clean Air Act, as amended by Congress in 1977 and 1990. The act deals primarily with six common pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides, particulates (soot), ozone, lead and carbon monoxide. It never mentions carbon dioxide, the plant-fertilizing gas that is essential for all life. As EPA itself acknowledges, between 1970 and 2010, those six "criteria" air pollutants declined by an average of 63% and will continue to do so under existing regulations and technologies. Moreover, those dramatic reductions occurred even as coal-based electricity generation increased 180% … overall US energy consumption rose 40% … miles traveled soared 168% … and the nation's population increased by 110 million."

NoSUVforMe

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 11:07 p.m.

IICC, New to the boards? I'm shocked the you are supporting DTE! Where can I sign up for CareForMich dollars?

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 3:43 p.m.

Assume our purpose in building wind turbines is to eliminate the Monroe coal plant at 3,000 Megawatts. Exelon Wind's policy right now is to build no more than 2 turbines per square mile. Michigan turbines have a capacity factor of less than 30%. If we build the 2 Vestas V-100 1.8 Mw turbines per square mile at a generous 30% CF, we would need to cover 2,778 square miles with 50 story tall turbines. Huron County, e.g., is 824 Square miles. At 824 square miles per county, it would require us to cover every last square mile of 3.37 counties the size of Huron County with two 493' turbines per mile to equal the annual output of the Monroe plant. But could we then decommission that plant? No. We have too many windless days. So if we tore down the Monroe plant and the wind stopped blowing, we would then have to build 3,000MW of gas turbines to replace it. Nuclear won't work because it cannot cycle up and down to meet the variable output of wind. And since gas is 60% cleaner than coal in the first place and we will have to build the gas plants to backup large installations of wind anyway, why bother with the wind at all? Especially when you would have to cover 2,777 square miles with turbines in the first place? And at a cost of 16.6 billion dollars, not including infrastructure build out and gas backup costs?

IICC

Thu, Sep 13, 2012 : 12:29 p.m.

Don: How you can be content measuring turbine scale impacts from the hub and not the tip of the rotor is a mystery to me. The hub doesn't cast the shadows, kill the endangered species like the Indiana bat or cause the LF noise issues. The rotor does. Most turbines being installed in MI are 100M class 1.6-1.8MW low wind models. IN a better wind regime they would be higher capacity turbines which is all the evidence one needs to understand that MI will always be a high cost wind producer. Pumped storage is a net energy loser and we simply lack geography and money to install much more. Pumped storage is much more about energy arbitrage then energy storage. Wind and solar can never be any more than a very expensive interruption to reliable and efficient steady state producers like fossil and nuclear.

DonBee

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 12:05 p.m.

IICC - Wind turbine towers are between 65 and 110 meters tall for 1.8 MW class turbines in Michigan. More like a 20 to 30 story building. Most turbines installed now are in the 2.2 to 2.5 MW class, reducing your turbine count. My numbers are all done at 2 MW - just slightly over the NREL numbers for 2011 installation sizes and given the trend in turbine size, about right. We actually need to have more pumped storage, if we are going to meet the requirements of the 25 in 25 amendment in a reasonable fashion. Most of the wind turbine production is off peak, and if you look at the wind production information at NREL.GOV and other locations, they would over produce in April/May and under produce in July/August, solar would also over produce in those same spring months. So we need to shift many hundreds of GWH to July and August or limit air conditioner use in July and August, or burn a lot of natural gas in those months and sell excess wind energy at the low priced point in the cycle.

jcj

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 12:23 a.m.

Might be difficult for some to support social services when they don't have a job or they are forced to pay an exorbitant amount for energy. Which is the greater moral responsibility?

shepard145

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 8:09 p.m.

Gee Ken, with all your responsibilities as a church pastor, I am amazed that you found time to learn so much about global warming, human controlled global weather, green energy, environmental activism and the economics of energy policy and employment. With all that intellect, I wonder how much you think Michigan Residents should pay in skyrocketing energy bills for each job? Do you think they will have enough money to continue to support those employed to see after their faith as well?? This generation has an amazing ability to find ways to spend other people's money in ways clearly rejected by the market. ...while their hero, obama, has done nothing as incomes fell by about $4,000 in the last 4 years. ...quite a time we live in....but it's good to see that leaders "believe" that if they waste enough of your money, the earth might get colder.

shepard145

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 5:27 p.m.

There are so many mercury lies in this piece, I don't know where to start. The EPA under obama is trying to shut down economical sources of energy in the United States. Read this nonsense again: "....estimates that one in six children born today is at risk of brain damage from the mercury released when coal is used to produce electricity......" That is compeltely insane, relying on the subjective "at risk" as opposed to "causes". There is no research here - this is what some fraud thinks could happen. As far as mercury in fish - it's a naturally occuring metal and there is NO EVIDENCE that it's cause by coal power plants! ....but once again - where is the reporter's investigation? - this is only worthless note taking.

waylon

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:57 a.m.

Amen !! I always love when these same people that put this crap out here like they care about children anyhow .. when their the same ones that agree with aborting children by the millions every year .. go figure !!

shepard145

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 5:21 p.m.

So Michigan is EXCLUDING the market from it's energy supply, engaging in central planning socialism, nonsensical environmental activism and driving up the state's costs why? Who is speaking for Michigan voters, who WANT THE BEST, MOST RELIABLE ENERGY AT THE LOWEST PRICE. PERIOD!! "Fossil fuel" translation: EPA lies added to profit grubbing activists want to claim that if MICHIGAN FAMILIES ARE FORCED TO PAY FOR boutique energy sources because activists think their payments will make the entire planet colder, THAN SAY SO! SAY IT AND BACK IT UP!! ..but all rational people know that claim is A LIE, yet this lie is driving Michigan's energy policy. Ask Europe how much money they have wasted on green energy and how much colder the planet has become as a result! Once exposed, they say well no – it's actually a job buying scheme using our energy bills to buy unnecessary energy sources - see Solyndra $500 million taxpayer dollars gone!! So if Michigan families pay high enough prices for their energy, then a few temporary jobs will be created. HOW MUCH ARE WE PAYING PER MAKE WORK JOB??? And what are the people in those jobs going to do next when the market overtakes this nonsense and they are unemployed?!

Mike

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:42 p.m.

"estimates that one in six children born today is at risk of brain damage from the mercury released when coal is used to produce electricity." If that were true then most of us would have brain damage. We actually have less coal fired plants today than we did in the past. Has anyone even considered that before accepting these statements as fact?

SEC Fan

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 5:37 p.m.

We are also at risk of being hit by a bus...or a meteor...

Brad

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 3:46 p.m.

They are "at risk", the risk being about 1 in a bazillion. Just another bogus statistic.

Brad

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:21 p.m.

If god didn't want us burning old dinosaurs and such she shouldn't have made them out of hydrocarbons.

Ron Granger

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:18 p.m.

"Our church, the Vineyard Church of Ann Arbor, is committed to something we call Creation Care, based on the Biblical command to care for this glorious creation as good stewards." That is an interesting perspective. There are those who insist resources were put on earth by God for Man to Consume. Like some kind of all you can gorge buffet that closes only when the rapture comes.

jcj

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:36 p.m.

Biblical command to care for this glorious creation as good stewards. resources were put on earth by God for Man to Consume Ron BOTH CAN be true! The problem is those that think we must use nothing and those that think the resources are endless. The key is to be good stewards.

Dog Guy

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 4:10 a.m.

Coal is a fossil fuel. Petroleum and natural gas might legitimately have been argued to be fossil fuels for two months in 1875 until Dmitri Mendeleev killed that notion. Since then, only ignorant dupes have believed this lie. The first divine command was "Be fruitful and multiply: replenish the earth and subdue it", not "Establish a tyranny of majority ignorance by saying it is for the women and children."

Real Life

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:51 a.m.

If it's "Michigan Energy, Michigan Jobs", then we'd better start fracking. Clean, sustainable, and would keep us all warm in winter.

Ron Granger

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:18 p.m.

Love Canal called. They said those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.

John

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:40 a.m.

I just wanted to let everyone here know that I live in Ann Arbor and burn coal! Omg will I now be excommunicated?

John

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 8:27 p.m.

Exactly Dog Guy!

Dog Guy

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 4:12 a.m.

Is OMG an acronym for Obama Must Go?

a2citizen

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 3:20 a.m.

No, excommunicated is a religious concept and that is not allowed here.

NoSUVforMe

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:34 a.m.

Iowa 23% renewable. Denmark 22% renewable. Texas 15% renewable. No batteries. No shortages. No skyrocketing energy costs. Why do so many posters repeat DTE fear mongering? Follow the money...

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:23 p.m.

Denmark: $0.36/kWh, MI $0.14/kWh. IA-76% Coal MI 52%, Texas-deregulated market, 80% fossil: $0.07-9 per Kwh. MI regulated monopoly due to PA295 renewable law, $0.14/kWh. Wind Power Purchase Agreements recorded at MPSC are coming in anywhere from 150% to 500% above MISO wholesale pricing. Subtract federal tax subsidies and it is 30% worse yet. Wind is way more expensive, period.

NoSUVforMe

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 1:46 a.m.

DTE paid poster, 23% is not capacity. It is power generated. Go back to your DTE handlers and tell them you need more training in parroting their talking points. You can fool some people, DTE man, but not someone with a real brain.

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 10:42 a.m.

Of capacity NoSUVForME - NOT OF ENERGY. The battery is the national or international grid (in the case of Denmark), sending excess energy to someone else when they have it and then pulling energy in the case of Denmark from the Nuclear plants in France and the Coal Plants in Germany when they don't.

gsorter

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 11:51 p.m.

It is too bad that wind (not dense enough) and solar (1.3KW per square meter) will never have the energy density needed to power more than a token percentage of the total demand. Yes, coal is dirtier than other sources, but tell that to small towns like Luna Pier that depend on taxes from coal plants for a large percentage of their revenue. The most realistic solutions are natural gas and nuclear. There are nuclear cycles that don't produce much in the way of dangerous isotopes (thorium cycle and others) but they will never produce many jobs as nuclear is TOO dense for much job creation. America has a huge technological lead in natural gas production from shale that can lead a new industrial revolution in the industries that depend on cheap energy. As long as nat gas is under $5, alternatives will never make sense.

Ron Granger

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:23 p.m.

"Yes, coal is dirtier than other sources, but tell that to small towns like Luna Pier that depend on taxes from coal plants for a large percentage of their revenue." Clearly, their sponging off of taxes is more important than mercury deaths. Taxes are not a viable way to make a living. That is just an excuse for corporate welfare and subsidies. They will retrain and move on. Just as the garment industry, steel workers, and buggy whip makers.

Ron Wagner

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:26 p.m.

http://ronwagnersrants.blogspot.com Natural gas is the future of energy. It is replacing dirty, dangerous, expensive coal and nuclear plants. It is producing the electricity for electric cars. It will directly fuel cars,pickup trucks, vans, buses, long haul trucks, dump trucks, locomotives, aircraft, ships etc. It will keep us out of more useless wars, where we shed our blood and money. It is reducing CO2 emissions. Here are over 1200 recent links for you: NbaKYme3bqOw0b6KMxXSjOLHLNeflalPy9gIAiTYhttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1FMQ/edit

justcurious

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:14 p.m.

"Currently Iowa gets 23 percent of its energy from clean renewable energy compared to Michigan's 3.9 percent. Gosh, can't we do better?" The answer is NOT corn made into ethanol!

jcj

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:33 p.m.

No SUV Why can they export electricity? Any chance the farmers go to bed at dark?

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 10:40 a.m.

http://www.state.ia.us/government/com/util/energy/electric_profile.html Not the 23 percent of energy you claim, but 23 percent of the installed capacity. There is a difference between capacity and energy. Capacity is the ability to make energy if you run. Energy is what you consume when you turn on a light. All of the supporters arguments are based on capacity. The amendment to the state constitution requires 25 percent of the energy. That means building a lot more capacity than 25% by 2025 to make the energy. For 100% - it would be worse, since we could not fall back on other sources for energy when the renewables were not running. Hence the need for storage.

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:50 a.m.

NoSUVforME - Yes you are sir, paid posters like you are easy to spot. I am not paid, but I do - do my homework.

NoSUVforMe

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:29 a.m.

Population is irrelevant. In fact, Iowa exports electricity because it over generates much of the time.

jcj

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 11:03 p.m.

Iowa has 1/3 the population of Michigan, corn and wind.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:19 p.m.

And not a single battery. Facts are on the side of more renewable energy, not DonBee quoting from the CARE distortion web site. Paid posters are easy to spot.

nickcarraweigh

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:46 p.m.

If you want to act like you believe in the Christian God, you might want to remember the Bible invests us as stewards of the Earth and requires of us attention to its needs. If you want to act like you believe in common sense, you might want to consider than arguing about "acceptable" levels of extremely poisonous mercury in our air and water owes a lot of rhetorical homage to how many angels can tango on a pinhead. When you can eliminate very bad stuff at very low cost, you should.

DonBee

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:45 p.m.

Pastor WIlson - Will you help us expand the Ludington Pumped Storage facility? Or will you allow large sets of batteries on your church property to store the wind energy? The answer is not just to throw a few wind turbines and solar cells out there, it has to be a whole system answer. If we want to move to 100% renewables then we need to be able to store 100's of GWH (1 GWH = 62,500 Chevy Volt Batteries at roughly $15,000 each). On days when the wind does not cooperate we will need to cut residential consumption by at least 60% at 100% renewables. Michigan peaks at 20 GW right now - that means if both the sun and wind are not available - we need storage that can produce 20 GWH every hour. Over night on a hot summer night - we would need to able to provide almost 100 GWH of electricity from storage. To make 20 GW of wind power - we would need to install about 14,000 wind turbines in the state - and that ASSUMES they run 100% of the time on a peak day. Recent hot day results show that the wind turbines in the Midwest Independent System Operator (MISO) area - of which Michigan is a piece - ran about 9 % - yes Nine percent - of the time. SO that 14,000 wind turbines becomes about 150,000 wind turbines OR massive storage systems. All of it costs money. Right now just to get to 25% one independent estimate is that the electric bills will increase by 22% to support the additional costs that are required by regulation to be paid in subsidies from the power companies to the wind turbine farms. That does not include new transmission lines, storage, or other costs.

DonBee

Wed, Sep 12, 2012 : 11:54 a.m.

NoSUVforME - Wind and solar are not "free" on the scale you are talking about - the land owners the wind turbines and solar cells are installed on will get lease fees - in some cases in good locations, those fees are in the range of what natural gas costs today. As to the cost of natural gas, no one has a crystal ball, but natural gas forecasts by IEA.GOV show the price still in the $2 range (down from $8 a decade ago) in 2025 in constant dollars. As to batteries, at 2, 5, 10 or even 20 percent, the easy thing to do is to send it out of state. This article is not asking for 20 percent, but 100%. We can't be like Denmark who sends wind energy out of the country for roughly free and then buys nuclear energy from France and brown coal energy from Germany at peak times, if we want 100% renewable sources. So we have a 2 GW facility at Ludington, one that the state utilities have wanted to expand for years to handle peak. Environmentalists have fought them tooth and nail, to make 100% renewable work, facilities equal to 5 Ludingtons would be needed to meet today's peak. In Iowa, MidAmerican is looking at creating large caverns in the rock to hold compressed air for storage, not the best choice from an efficiency standpoint, but it would allow them to reduce the need for very dirty peaking turbines that balance the lack of wind at times. OBTW - peaking turbines in Iowa, according to MidAmerican run 10 times as much in Iowa as they do on average in the US. Peaking turbines. As to Mr. Sikema and CARE - I had not heard of either when I originally posted this article, my research was and is independent of both groups. No one in this discussion is telling the truth, neither side. Both are HEAVILY funded from outside Michigan and backed by large corporations. On the vote no side are the state utilities and their supporters. On the yes side are large hedge funds, private equity firms and their supporters. This is all about money as NoSUVforME knows.

NoSUVforMe

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 11 p.m.

Debunk? "Right now just to get to 25% one independent estimate is that the electric bills will increase by 22% to support the additional costs that are required by regulation to be paid in subsidies from the power companies to the wind turbine farms" Independent study? Ken Sikema, right wing trash man, paid by Careformichigan.com, the disinformation arm for DTE and Consumers. Your post is garbage. Lots of garbage. Where are the batteries in Iowa, DonBee? Hiding in the cornfields? I didn't know DTE was a non-profit? The SEC says otherwise. Counting turbines to 20 GB? Why not use 2008 turbine capacity? Rubbish. Right out of the DTE play book. Tell me DonBee. What will the cost of natural gas be in 2025? You don't know. But I know the cost of sun and wind... Free.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:27 p.m.

This jives with our analysis at the IICC. www.iiccusa.org

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:25 p.m.

According to EIA data, pumped storage is a net loss to generation. In fact in 2010, wind produced just over 30% of what pumped storage lost.

average joe

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 1:56 a.m.

Don- There you go again, bringing facts & numbers into the picture.

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:49 a.m.

NoSUVforME - LOL, the statistics and numbers all come from real world sources, and are current. You are not debunking it, because you can't.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:23 p.m.

Not a shred of truth to any of this. None. It doesn't even deserve debunking. I doubt if you make this up yourself and no reputable source would make such claims.

Jeff Wickens

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 7:34 p.m.

What an incredibly poor arguement for a change in energy policy. The use of legislation to inforce the "morally superior" position of one frame of thought is abhorrent. Is it the position of this church that they should then also determine the morally superior position of other issues? Who has the moral position to determine law and enforcement? What evilness denies the moral superiorness of those that first claim the high ground? Perhaps in the land of lollipops and rainbows that is occupied by this church the answers for all issues exist. I am not arguing that the use of solar or wind or water or nuclear is right or wrong, but to suggest one is morally superior then another is absurd and points to a lower agruement with ulterior motives.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 7 p.m.

Comparing mercury emissions globally to U.S. contribution? Gee, I suppose the other 185 countries also contribute less than 1% too. No wonder Exxon, DTE, and Consumers find it so easy to fool people. "In 1995, an estimated 5,500 tons of mercury was emitted globally from both natural and human sources. Coal-fired power plants in the United States contributed less than 1 percent of the total."

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:28 p.m.

Only 3% of mercury emission in the US come from coal fired power plants. Forest fires annually emit more Hg than power production.

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:48 a.m.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/31/the-epas-mercurial-madness/

Billy

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 7:31 p.m.

You realize that what you quote is contradicting the claims the organization you're rooting for makes....right? Well....maybe not contradicts exactly....but it puts them into perspective since they're playing the statistic game.

a2grateful

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 6:42 p.m.

Churches could lead the way by example to decrease reliance on fossil fuels. . . Use of solar cells. . . Use of wind generation. . . Use of buildings with comprehensive and intensive use many hours and days of the week. . . What exactly does Vineyard do to decrease reliance on fossil fuels, and how much has it saved since doing so?

a2grateful

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 11:40 a.m.

Nice list. . . please explain the exact savings of the actions, as well as the actions. . . For example: KW use before improvements compared to KW use now. . . KW use now compared to KW use goal. . . KW use for green building compared to KW use now. . . The total lack of data undermines "promotional scientific" statements. . .

Jake C

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 12:07 a.m.

First, I am not affiliated with the Vineyard Church. Second, decreasing reliance on fossil fuels often costs more (at least in the short run) compared with continuing the status quo. Some stuff is common sense (such as adjust AC/heat temps, fixing insulation, using CFLs & timers, etc), but some will cost you more over the long run. It ain't easy being green. Second, A 5-second Google search produces the following information straight from Vineyard Church's website: http://annarborvineyard.org/ministries/justice-a-compassion/green-vineyard-environmental-stewardship "In keeping with our vision statement to bear the transforming presence of Jesus into the heart of the Ann Arbor area we will grow in our stewardship of the environment, guided by Jesus brand spirituality in our call to work together in community, and our commitment to works of justice and compassion. Steps We've Taken in the Local Church: performed a church building energy audit promoted eBulletins encouraged people to bring their own coffee mugs; sold reusable coffee cups switched to biodegradable eco-cups, made from corn products re-insulated the church roof switched to energy efficient fluorescent building lighting recycle cardboard containers switched to LCD monitors reduced parking lot lighting hours reduced building interior lighting during week eBay ministry--reducing consumption and trash installed a dishwasher so we could use plates & silverware instead of disposable products service projects at The Arb: removing invasive plants appointed an "energy manager" to institute further energy savings initiated an Adopt-a-Block ministry to increasing recycling in neighborhoods observed Earth day 2012 by distributing 150 saplings for planting in the Ann Arbor area Lifestyle Changes We've Encouraged/; encouraged people to buy and use CFLs in their homes sold reusable tote bags distributed 2,000 free reusable tote bags in Ann Arbor area"

Top Cat

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 6:13 p.m.

The EPA has become so politically tainted that they have ceased to become a trustworthy or objective source of information. The nonsense that the Pastor is spewing only means more people unable to heat their homes or afford a car. The cost of electricity would go through the roof. The "Michigan Energy Jobs Proposal" is a lie as it would destroy both jobs and a reliable and proven source of energy.

Billy

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 6:08 p.m.

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/pollutioncontrols/overview_mercurycontrols.html "In 1995, an estimated 5,500 tons of mercury was emitted globally from both natural and human sources. Coal-fired power plants in the United States contributed less than 1 percent of the total." Coal isn't the problem......if you rally behind this argument you look like a moonbat.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 5:37 p.m.

DTE and Consumers, just like Exxon, think they can fool the people with disinformation. They have created a secretive Super Pac (secret donors) called CARE (Clean Affordable Renewable Energy) to fight the truth. This money is being used to provide paid posters on sites like AnnArbor.com to spread their disinformation. Check out their web site if you want to read paid monopoly propaganda from DTE and Consumers. www.careformich.com Enjoy your mercury sandwich compliments of DTE and Consumers.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 6:22 p.m.

http://tinyurl.com/8s6ko4f Enjoy your 25x25 Green Baloney Sandwich compliments of GreenTech Action Fund, San Francisco, CA. 90% of 25x25 funding comes form out of state, likely including NoSUV's paycheck! http://tinyurl.com/8s6ko4f It's all right here in "Green" and White.

DonBee

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 10:36 a.m.

Enjoy your higher electric bill if this passes as the hedge funds and private equity firms buy up the wind farms (which they do). This is because they have laws in Washington that make these farms a license to print money for a 20+ year period. Both sides have VERY large corporate backers. Neither side is "grass roots" but one side is hiding behind the "grass roots" label.

jcj

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 10:57 p.m.

Yea and Oswald didn't shoot Kennedy.

Homeland Conspiracy

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:45 p.m.

Astroturfing is a form of advocacy in support of a political, organizational, or corporate agenda, designed to give the appearance of a "grassroots" movement. The goal of such campaigns is to disguise the efforts of a political or commercial entity as an independent public reaction to another political entity—a politician, political group, product, service or event.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 5:26 p.m.

Natural sources, such as volcanoes, are responsible for approximately half of atmospheric mercury emissions. The human-generated half can be divided into the following estimated percentages:[81][82][83] 65% from stationary combustion, of which coal-fired power plants are the largest aggregate source (40% of U.S. mercury emissions in 1999). This includes power plants fueled with gas where the mercury has not been removed. Emissions from coal combustion are between one and two orders of magnitude higher than emissions from oil combustion, depending on the country.

DonBee

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:36 p.m.

NoSUVforME - Since 1999 major improvements in mercury emissions containment have been made at power plants. If you check the EAI.gov site, I think you will find your numbers are light years our of date and whack with reality.

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 5:20 p.m.

DTE and Consumers are fighting to keep coal. To say that the are pro renewable energy is wrong. They are funding a dishonest "environmental" disinformation group to the tune of $6million so far. They'll kick in more if needed. Why? Profits. Nothing else matters to these so-called supporters of renewable energy. We need a ballot proposal to take away the monopoly status of these two anti-free market bad actors.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:31 p.m.

http://tinyurl.com/8s6ko4f Shorter link to campaign filings.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.

And which local grassroots groups are funding mienergymijobs? http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/cfr/contrib_anls_res.cgi?doc_seq_no%3D359336%26doc_stmnt_year%3D2012%26com_id%3D515662%26doc_date_proc%3D07/25/2012%26sched%3D1A%26doc_type_code%3DP1%26caller%3Dcf_online Nearly 90% out of state funding. I think that is spelled "A-S-T-R-O-T-U-R-F".

DonBee

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:35 p.m.

NoSUVforME - LOL - it is not about profits, but about meeting the regulatory requirements for adequate supply and reliability. When we have reasonable storage systems that can store excess energy from wind and solar, so it can be used when we don't have enough, I think you will find both DTE and CMS willing to switch.

BernieP

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 4:59 p.m.

Pastor Wilson - Michigan property owners with mineral rights derive an income from the extraction of fossil fuels in Michigan. Do you advocate making this now an immoral proposition? For a more concrete example of immorality I'd suggest you review this eminent domain case... Kelo vs City of New London.

Billy

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 4:53 p.m.

I'm sorry....this is JUNK science.... Coal plants contribute to LESS than 1%...that's ONLY ONE PERCENT.....of global mercury emissions...... YOU ARE CRYING WOLF!!!!!!!

SEC Fan

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 5:24 p.m.

@p-sowers. I believe Billy was intending to address the first statement of the opinion piece.

p-sowers

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 8:17 p.m.

Billy, That report is only about mercury emissions. What about the other various harmful substances coal fired plants give off? Such as CO2? "One 500 mega-watt coal plant produces 9 millions tons of CO2 into the air per year' (DoE). All that aside, coal is a limited commodity. P.V., Wind and Solar are much less limited. They are not the complete solution but they are definitely part of it.

Billy

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 6:06 p.m.

http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/pollutioncontrols/overview_mercurycontrols.html

NoSUVforMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 5:07 p.m.

1%? Sounds like Limbaugh Science to me. Source?

Albert Howard

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 4:40 p.m.

An investment in wind power produces nearly four times as many jobs as the same investment in coal power. And an investment in solar PV power produces almost twice as many jobs and building retrofits, and more than seven times as many jobs as coal power.

IICC

Tue, Sep 11, 2012 : 4:32 p.m.

Wind is tied to fossil at a 1:3 ratio in MI due to poor capacity factors. If you love wind you must LOVE fracking!

chapmaja

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 3:02 p.m.

Really Mr. Howard. You have these wonderful jobs building these massive wind farms but then what? Once the farms are built what happens to these jobs? What about the coal power plants which require more people to operate and maintain than wind farms, and also require a larger volume of support jobs. A coal power plant not only supports the staff of the plant, but also the railroad or boat crews that deliver the power to the plant, plus the jobs for miners who extract the coal from the ground. Is it really true that wind power creates 4 times the jobs? I don't see that are being truthful.

DonBee

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 9:33 p.m.

Mr Howard - Can you provide a source for this information. The Energy Information Agency, the International Energy Agency, The UN, and other sources that I would consider neutral to friendly to renewables contain no such numbers.

RUKiddingMe

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 7:40 p.m.

So is wind power 4 times more expensive than coal? Or do Wind-related jobs pay 1/4 what coal-related jobs pay? Or is wond 4 times hjarder to produce? How is the fact that it takes four times as many people a good thing? Would it make things better to pay 3 times the people to stand around in the coal industry?

MRunner73

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 4:36 p.m.

While everyone has a right to an opinion and can be a guest columnist, Pastor Wilson should be aware of the committment DTE is making in Green Energy. They have several wind farms around the state of MI. They also have an established Bio-mass program in effect are are harvesting energy out of that. I would like to refer the Pastor the the DTE web site which this information can be obtained for some peace of mind. Emission standards by the EPA are very stirct and robust. Utility companies around the nation must adhere to these strict emission rules and regulations. If you expect coal burning plants to drop to zero, you will have a long wait, but they are slowly being replaced by Nat-Gas burning plants. If you think Nas-Gas is a bad idea, then the only option is go back to the stone age.

Macabre Sunset

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 4:11 p.m.

Religion and science don't mix. Please keep your yammering to the pulpit and leave renewable energy standards to the people who understand the technology.

harry

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 5:10 p.m.

Sure they do. God says to take care of the earth. Science says to take care of the earth. Sounds like they mix perfectly.

Dog Guy

Mon, Sep 10, 2012 : 4:27 a.m.

Historically, Macabre Sunset, religion and science have had a closer and more fruitful marriage than even mathematics and physics. But "we are bound by decency" has never been a touchstone of true religion or true science.

Superior Twp voter

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 11:29 p.m.

Excellent reply - agree.

a2citizen

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 7:52 p.m.

With the slow rate of results divine intervention wouldn't hurt.

Indymama

Sun, Sep 9, 2012 : 6:21 p.m.

OOPS!! I voted "down" by mistake. I actually agree with Macabre Sunset!! I just don't know how to recind my vote and correct it!