Letters: July 13, 2007

Broaden power options

All of us in the Mat-Su Valley that are plugged into the grid received another ballot from MEA this past week. When I opened ours I was disappointed there were only two options to choose from for our energy future. The wording is very misleading to those that may only read the ballot and ignore the included propaganda.

The obvious choice in this case is to have &#8220local generation form MEA” and not &#8220import power form Chugach electric.” My disappointment is that there is no mention of ways to reduce our consumption as a solution to increased power generation due to growth.

Coal is the major fuel used to generate electricity worldwide. In fact, it has been reported that 80 percent of our power is coal-generated. Burning it adds more carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, to the atmosphere per unit of heat than does burning other fossil fuels like oil and natural gas. So in this time of awakening to the harmful affects of CO2 on our atmosphere, why would we even consider the thought of building a new power plant that consumes coal? We have always been a little behind the trends of the rest of the nation, but I think it is safe to say we like it that way.

But going the opposite direction is not acceptable, nor an intelligent solution.

I agree that as the Valley grows, so does the need for more power generation. Why is there no mention of energy conservation, except for a small page on the MEA Web site? A large majority of the $191 million MEA projects in savings in 2015 could easily be saved by educating the public and offering a few energy saving tools.

For example, for a cost of under $1 million you could supply each of the estimated 22,000 households in the Mat-Su Valley with energy-saving tools that would save at least 20 percent on their current energy bills. This kit could include a programmable thermostat (saves homeowner $100 year), fluorescent light bulbs (use 60 percent less energy), furnace filters and a hot water heater blanket. Along with a progressive education campaign (costing way less than $190 million) we could achieve the same goals and keep our clean Valley air.

Take a close look at the ballot and the line items MEA is measuring. There is no mention on the affect on our society except for monetary value. Clean air is fundamental to our life. I do not want to see an oxygen bar kiosk in our new shopping centers any time soon.

Sandi Sturm

Wasilla

Back to the drawing board for MEA

I can't believe another ridiculous ballot is coming out from MEA. Is this the best way for MEA to use our co-op funds?

This new ballot is meaningless as it creates a black or white choice out of a very gray issue. There are numerous options available for Railbelt power, and this should be addressed as a Railbelt power issue and not as a power struggle between utilities.

The cheapest power cost is surely obtained through Railbelt utility cooperation or a merger of utilities. I have been a loyal MEA member and strong MEA supporter, but I do not support MEA placing a power plant in the core population area of the Mat-Su Borough. This is a quality of life issue. There is no guarantee our rates will go down with MEA jumping into the power generation business.

There are risks involved and our rates could easily be increased due to MEA building and operating new power plants. One of the most visible landmarks in the Palmer-Wasilla area is Pioneer Peak. How much sense does it make to cloud that view with a smokestack and pollution? Even a new coal plant will be a polluting eyesore.

Let's maintain our quality of life in the Mat-Su Valley! Let's say no to MEA's plans and tell it to go back to the drawing board as a cooperating Railbelt utility to adequately work on the Railbelt energy issue.

Pat Shiflea

Palmer