View Single Post
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 10-07-2007, 02:58 PM
lurker's Avatar
lurker lurker is offline
DodgeBoard Senior VP
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,397
Casino Cash: $2470
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 1195
lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!
lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!lurker Is off the scale!
Good logic says to burn the coal where it is....

I'm against the expansion of the Holcomb plant due to the extreme amount of our groundwater that will be evaporated... somewhere near 2,000 gallons per minute.

The operative question is "why is this type of operation not permitted within the states that will be purchasing the electricity?"

Here's the rub: Wyoming coal will be shipped into Holcomb to generate electricity that will be used in Wyoming.... and Colorado...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by wordsmythe View Post
Damn YOU for making me agree in public with you.

But when you're right you're right.


"Wal-Mart, you may want to look into this."
Reply With Quote