If all those left wing ,hug a tree,lets not drill people would just put there lifestyle where their mouth is, we wouldn't have to worry about energy. give up your cars, stop using electricity, use an outhouse and, for heaven sake, grow your own food but you can't cook it so eat it raw!!! DRILL BABY DRILL!!!!!

He also expressed his opposition to coal as did his running mate.

Does the Wisconsin PSC exist in a vacuum? Are they immune to the political tide that just swept over the nation? Are they not political appointments of our Governor, a staunch supporter of the "green" movement?
No, Obama is not directly responsible, but he will soon be president and he most definitely expressed opposition to more drilling. It's either naive or disingenuous to suggest that the last Presidential campaign had no effect on this decision.

J'villemom:

I agree in principle that "conservation is the way to go." However, how far are you willing to go?

Does conservation include family planning? Govt restriction of auto sales, restrictions on the number of people who can move to Wisconsin (though, with WI punitive tax system-flight from Wisconsin is most likely). Absent conservation the solution is restriction of the use of energy.

A new plant, helps everyone, except Eric Callisto. He has determined that a new plant is not effecient enough. The project looks "too expensive" to whom? I ask. The result of Callisto's decision or indecision will be higher energy prices for Wisconsin consumers and more pollution from agin coal fired plants! Well done Mr. Callisto.

SBL is correct in that NIMBYism is a problem. The electoral promises of clean coal, off shore drilling, and nuclear energy are just that-empty promises by politicians more concerned about getting elected rather than developing and implementing a comprehensive energy plan for the future. Conservation is only 1 small piece of a larger expensive problem that America faces. Failure to act prudently today will result in more companies moving, higher wisconsin unemployment, less energy, and higher costs for Wisconsin residents.

Conservation is definitely the way to go. If everyone would do just a few things to save energy, we could eliminate the need for new power sources.

Can't lay this one on Obama (see previous post for one reason), McCain had the same position on coal. It seems that almost everyone agrees that until we can come up with a way to burn coal in a cleaner way, it's use should not be expanded.
*
"But just three years ago on the floor of the United States Senate, John McCain's Republican colleague George Voinovich of Ohio took to the floor to argue against a proposal by McCain to curb greenhouse gas emissions. McCain's proposal, Voinovich said, would "put coal out of business" and cost thousands of jobs, an argument that McCain did not contest.

In fact, McCain agreed that his plan would require sacrifice, but he also argued (correctly) that in the long-run, America would be better off. In other words, he made the exact same arguments as Barack Obama -- and it was all on video."

The PSC is a Wisconsin agency, not a federal one. It is not answerable to President Bush or President-elect Obama. Its decision is in line with the nearly 5000 public comments that were received.
.
As for nuclear power, the timeline for building a nuke plant -- even if there were any being seriously considered, which there aren't -- is measured in decades, not years.
.
Conservation of energy currently being used can save more than the entire output of many power plants of any type. Everyone has to want to participate to make a difference, though. If you think it's somebody else's problem, it will be that much more expensive.

On the nuclear power note: there would be plenty of environmentalists against that also even though almost all of France's power comes from Nuclear and they have come a long way in making it safe and clean. People are right when you say this is a sign of things to come with the new administration. Don't come crying on these posts if you voted for him.

Let us not forget that NIMBY applies to natural gas pipelines. We want cheap but we don't want to be bothered by the pipeline or the power line or anything that could cause an efficiency in delivery. Just my $.02

There is no such thing as clean coal as it's just a term the coal people made up. There are cleaner burning coal plants but they still produce acid rain. Also enough with the natural gas.... if there is so much out there then get it to our houses now and lower the price we are paying for it.

Somebody said that nuclear power is out of the question. I'm not sure of that anymore. There are technologies out there that can deliver modern nuclear power without the 20 year wait time to get it built. I'm sure we will find ways to clean up nuclear waste safely and both presidential candidates were on record of supporting this.

We are in the dark ages with coal fired plants. Gas is expensive but cleaner and Mr. Pickens is sure pushing for it. My bet though would be to invest in Solar, Wind, and Nuclear for the big ones.

All I have to say is, "UNREAL!!". A new plant would be much cleaner and more efficient than the old one. This is going to get out of hand with the new administration. Energy independence, my butt!!

Change we can believe in is here. The state regulators can read the writing on the wall, “No Coal Fired Power Plants”.
What a marvelous suggestion, use natural gas instead. The price of natural gas has risen dramatically over the last few years. Why? Because there is ever increasing demand without ever increasing supply. Why doesn't supply keep pace with demand? Because we have to drill for it just like crude oil and in the same places, which environmentalists oppose with every fiber of their being. Hasn’t it been in the news that the President-Elect is considering rescinding the current President’s executive order allowing more drilling? What will happen to the price of heating our homes then?
I think we may all need stationary bicycles connected to generators to make up for all those brown-outs we’re going to be having in the near future since air polluting, carbon emitting candles may be banned next.

The PSC has to consider a wide variety of stakeholder views. In this case there was very little support for the plant outside of WPL itself. I think the message here is "come back with a much better proposal that addresses specific concerns".
http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topstorie...

So, in the mean time the dirty old Sheboygen plant keeps chugging away? State Regulators don't seem to see the big picture very well.
A cleaner coal power plant to replace an aging boiler seems like a sum gain to me. I suppose a nuclear power plant is out of the question.
Welcome to Obamaland!

On second thought, I remember now that you should never use sarcasm in emails or online forums.

Ok, there is something weird going on. It says reader Comments (1) but I don't see any comments.

Anyway, I'm glad they suggested natural gas plants, that's something we could sure use more of.