Voting 'Yes' on Proposal 3 could attract significant clean energy attention to Michigan
As a Michigander, I am proud of my state and I only want to see Michigan thrive. However, Michigan currently gets 60 percent of its energy from coal-fired power plants that pollute our air and water and it spends more than $1.7 billion a year importing dirty coal from other states. This current energy policy does not make sense. It hurts Michigan both economically and environmentally.
Proposal 3 would change this. Proposal 3 would increase Michigan’s renewable energy standard to 25 percent by 2025 and bring in $10 billion of investment to Michigan. Voting “Yes” on Proposal 3 — now that makes sense.
A “Yes” means that instead of Michigan spending billions of dollars each year for dirty coal, Michigan would attract billions of dollars of investments for clean energy. More than 30 states have already passed measures similar to Proposal 3. As Illinois moves toward a 25 by 25 standard, it has seen electricity prices reduced by $176 million.
I am proud of the state that I live in and only want what is best for it and its citizens and that’s why I’m voting “Yes” on Proposal 3. If you value the stability of Michigan’s economy and the health of its environment vote “Yes,” with me, on Proposal 3.
Rachel Koresky
Grosse Pointe Woods
Comments
A Voice of Reason
Wed, Oct 24, 2012 : 8:37 p.m.
Rachael, cannot wait to put big wind power units up in the Detroit River right front of Grosse Pointe! Enjoy!
E Pluribus Unum
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:31 p.m.
In the early 60's, Michigan rewrote the state constitution because it had become loaded down with amendments that tied the hands of the state to operate efficiently. It is causes like this that have no business on our constitution. It is a function of private industry and can be addressed through our state government working with private industry to efficiently and effectively enact a policy beneficial to all.
bobslowson
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:26 p.m.
Pretty disturbing when our government starts to go the way of New Right Paul Weyrich / Breitbart / ALEC and all these other conservative groups that want to change constitutions to say marriage is one man one woman (so they can deny rights to same sex couples) based on some fairy tale, written in some book, by some so called prophet. If we can change the constitution for that. I say we change it for all these proposals . So voting No, Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No is a vote for the people!
Buckybeaver
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:03 p.m.
If, as their ad says: 30 other states have already signed onto this type of legistration, how would Michigan garner any particular favor from investors. Sounds like it be be a race to the bottom for profit.
Jim Walker
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 1:57 p.m.
When the costs of wind, solar, and other alternative energies become competitive with existing sources, then they should be welcomed as growing parts of the mix. But Michigan's citizens should NOT be subjected to the higher costs these uncompetitive sources require, mandated by the Constitution. James C. Walker, Ann Arbor, MI
outdoor6709
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.
Please get informed on the issue. Look at the results of Spain,s attempt to create green jobs. According to leaked Spanish government internal documents, the Green energy initiative Spain undertook is the primary cause for their economic distress. Via Pajama Media: But today's leaked document reveals that even the socialist Spanish government now acknowledges the ruinous effects of green economic policy. Unsurprisingly for a governmental take on a flagship program, the report takes pains to minimize the extent of the economic harm. Yet despite the soft-pedaling, the document reveals exactly why electricity rates "necessarily skyrocketed" in Spain, as did the public debt needed to underwrite the disaster. This internal assessment preceded the Zapatero administration's recent acknowledgment that the "green economy" stunt must be abandoned, lest the experiment risk Spain becoming Greece. The government report does not expressly confirm the highest-profile finding of the non-governmental report: that Spain's "green economy" program cost the country 2.2 jobs for every job "created" by the state. However, the figures published in the government document indicate they arrived at a job-loss number even worse than the 2.2 figure from the independent study. http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/2010/06/according-to-spanish-government-its-green-energy-initiative-is-responsible-for-spains-economic-distress/ Why would we expect toend up differently?
walker101
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:34 p.m.
I have a home in California and every once in awhile I'll drive through the state, if you've every seen the windmills up close they are giant fans that can be seen from miles away, talk about losing a nice view and for what, my electric bills are just as high as before. Not any of these supposedly energy saving methods have saved anyone the cost of energy bills. This is a scam, you do not have enough solar or wind areas to justify this expense unless you want your nice views and secenary destroyed go ahead and vote for a few that may benefit.
A2comments
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:23 p.m.
We have a current plan in place to get to 10% by 2015. 2013 is about to begin. In 2015 we are slated to review what we've accomplished (or not), and set new goals. Setting a goal now makes little sense. How many jobs have been created by our current goal? Do these extrapolate anywhere near the misleading jobs claims of the proposed 25 by 25 plan? Does the 25 by 25 plan take into account jobs LOST by moving from other methods of power generation? Ultimately, the State Constitution should NOT be changed for something like this.
Jeffersonian Liberal
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.
What a steaming pile of BS! Spain's economy went down the tubes betting on this greenie weenie energy. It currently has an unemployment rate of 25%. The incompetent morons running our state government are wasting our tax dollars on components produced in Germany, Korea and China. How is forcing our energy producers to invest in this crap going to turn around the economy? The Progressives are forcing the middle class (which they care so much about) to divert more of their budget to pay for higher electricity bills.
ChelseaBob
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 11:20 a.m.
If green energy is such a "good idea" then why do we need a constitutional amendment to force it? Even the ultra-liberal Granholm admin didn't try to force 25% green energy, because they knew the resulting hikes in electric bills would kill more jobs. The illinois program is coming unglued as electicity consumers switch from high cost "green" providers to alternatives. See below. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-05-31/business/ct-biz-0531-aggregation-kills--20120531_1_renewable-energy-wind-and-solar-developers-renewable-portfolio-standard. This is a terrible idea and it could derail our economic recovery.
Enso
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:49 p.m.
Ultra-liberal? That's funny. I would never call a capitalist ultra-liberal.
A2comments
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 10:53 a.m.
The constitution should NOT be modified for this.
Enso
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:48 p.m.
This is a lot more important than two women getting married. Republicans can't have it both ways.
bobslowson
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.
But it's perfectly fine to modify the constitution to prevent same sex couples from being treated like everyone else?
Bear
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 9:07 a.m.
It currently costs $50 million in diesel, just to transport coal from out of state to power our power plants. Figure in the saviings of this and the purchase of coal, and the ecological costs and the cost in human health and this becomes an excellent idea. Also add in the 94,000 additional jobs and investment in Michigan and you are talking about a winning proposition.
DonBee
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:44 p.m.
Bear - Where did you get the $50 million number? What is the source? Coal comes into the state mostly on unit trains - 100 cars at 100 tons per car. The most fuel efficient land transportation available today. The 94,000 jobs number is a lie...used by pro-proposal 3 crowd. The actual MSU study, shows a maximum of 94,000 Job-years (1 person for 1 year) being created. Of that about 3,000 actual installer jobs that are seasonal would be done in Michigan, but would not have to be done by people who live here (many installers live out of RVs and go site to site). The balance of the jobs would be building the wind turbines, and we saw a couple of weeks ago, many of the turbines going in are coming into the state by ship, or by truck - not being built here. So yet more state money being shipped out of state to pay someone else.
Stan Hyne
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:56 p.m.
And who pays for the 94,000 additional workers ? Maybe it is the energy users.
average joe
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 8:01 a.m.
"...and bring in $10 billion of investment to Michigan." Just where is this money coming from again? The 'bill paying' utility customer is who will be "bringing in" this "investment". You make it sound like the funding for it is coming from another state. Another amendment that doesn't belong in our constitution.
Stan Hyne
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:53 p.m.
Well said. When wind, or solar make economic or environmental sense they will come. We will not need laws to force them.
Eat Local A2
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:24 a.m.
A123 Systems filed for bankruptcy yesterday. Why would we hard-wire doubling down on bad bets with the public's money? Good ideas will get the start they need from the capital markets, to an extent and at the time that they are likely to pay off. And when they don't, the businessmen--not the rest of us--will count up their losses and move on.
DonBee
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:47 p.m.
Bear - The state invested (via tax breaks and training allowances, etc) more than $50 million in A123. The promise was 1,000s of jobs that would bring tax revenue to the state. Not happening now. LG-Chem has not lived up to their promise of jobs in Michigan either, another almost $50 million in state and local investments. That is a cool $100 million or so on top of the $129 million from the US Govt. Johnson Controls bought it for $125 million. Sounds like wonderful investment of our tax dollars to me...lol
Enso
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:48 p.m.
Private companies go out of business all the time (and are also the beneficiaries of tax dollars). So shouldn't you be arguing against the existence of private companies too? Or are you okay with holding irrational beliefs?
Eat Local A2
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : noon
physical assets don't evaporate when a company is liquidated, and the Obama Administration is distracting from the money it has lost for the American people. thanks for adding that to the conversation.
Bear
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 9:33 a.m.
these two don't equate. And why don't you tell the whole story behind a123 systems bankruptcy. Like, its two Michigan manufacturing plants and some other assets were sold to Johnson Controls Inc. (a michigan company) in a deal valued at $125 million. or that - The Energy Department, in a memo Tuesday that seemed to anticipate renewed criticism, said the advanced-battery market was continuing to expand significantly in the U.S. and around the world and that A123's sale will enable it to remain a vital part of the industry in America.
Real Life
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:03 a.m.
We have a wonderfully clean and accessible source of energy in our state and nearby states. It's called natural gas, cleanly accessible through hydraulic fracturing. Let's focus on the possible, and not on the failed chimera of wind and solar power as any more than an adjunct to our energy needs.
Bear
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 9:15 a.m.
real life? not a good moniker for you if you believe that fracking is clean. Go tell that to the people of Pennsylvania who cannot drink their water. http://www.loe.org/blog/blogs.html/?seriesID=1&blogID=32
Jack Campbell
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:31 a.m.
Pumping an unknown mixture of chemicals into ground water sure is clean!
Dog Guy
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:48 a.m.
The sun shines around the clock in Grosse Pointe Woods, its public transportation is the unicorn, and there they have no concern about how much anything costs.
jcj
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:38 a.m.
Why is a2.com so intent on putting opinion pieces in the so called real news section?
NoSUVforMe
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:28 a.m.
River Rouge Power Plant is annually responsible for 44 deaths, 72 heart attacks and 700 asthma attacks. Source: Clean Air Task Force. "Dirty air is good for you and I wish my children could breath more of it" CEO of DTE. "I'm going to move next door to Rouge Plant so I can cough and die too."
jcj
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 11:55 a.m.
Bear Just because YOU say its so makes it no more true!
yohan
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 10:51 a.m.
OK, I stand corrected. There is a power plant in River Rouge. Learn something every day!
Bear
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 9:26 a.m.
Yohan, you'd better check your 'facts'.... If there is no power plant in River Rouge, then what is this? http://wikimapia.org/10715803/Detroit-Edison-River-Rouge-Power-Plant here are the coordinates: 42°16'25"N 83°6'56"W and jcj, just because you say so, doesn't make it so. I don't think you know what propaganda is. Because it's probably where you've been getting your facts to support your uninformed opinion.
average joe
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 8:08 a.m.
And I also don't think these numbers are accurate. Possibly, they are the average since the complex was built(90 years?), before the newer EPA restrictions were put into practice there.
average joe
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 8:04 a.m.
@ Yohan- Probably refering to the Ford plant complex. Doesn't change my no vote though.
yohan
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 5:35 a.m.
There is no power plant in River Rouge!
jcj
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:39 a.m.
BALONEY! Propaganda!
NoSUVforMe
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:01 a.m.
Here come DTE and Consumers laid trolls with their garbage. They'll overwhelm this thread with DTE and Consumers garbage. These corrupt monopolistic corporations are hiding behind a front superpac called CARE and funding it at about a $10 million campaign of lied and distortion. Why would anybody trust DTE or Consumers? Why aren't the CEOs of these companies held responsible for the people they are killing with their dirty coal plants?
Milton Shift
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 3:57 a.m.
That's right, get back at him by screwing your kids.
jcj
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:40 a.m.
Think I'll take my SUV fora ride.
Gargoyle
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 1:40 a.m.
You know you live in Michigan, right? It's cloudy more than it's sunny, so solar power generation is spotty. We aren't the windiest state in the union, and we have no major rivers to dam up for hydro power. Rationally, there is no way with the technology available today to generate a consistent 25% of the power needed in Michigan. I'm certainly not willing to foot the bill for this hippie boondoggle.
Enso
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 12:44 p.m.
@Gargoyle. We are surrounded by Lakes. Not sure if you've been out on a huge lake lately, but there is a lot of wind out there.
Bear
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 9:03 a.m.
Hmmmm.... ok, gargoyle, if your wild assumptions are right, then why are we slated to have %10 of our energy supply come from renewables by 2015? And you seemed to skim right over the part about the cost of coal importation into this state, since we have none of our own. Also, you failed to figure in the cost of continued sulphur dioxide and mercury pollution caused by coal-fired plants. The acid rain associated with these plants has been sterilizing many lakes in Canada and Michigan, loweing or eliminating fish stocks. A similar thing has been happening in Pennsylvania. Hippie boondoggle? Wow! that was an intelligent statement! Nobody's asking you to foot any 'bill'. This proposal will help to add 94,000 jobs to the state and would cost an extra fifty cents to monthly energy bills. Wow! If that's more than you can pony up, you must be one big cheapskate. Get the facts before you talk trash.
Jack Campbell
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:49 a.m.
Hmmm sounds like your misinformed. MI has abundant wind-power by the lakes and enough sunny days for solar.
jcj
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:41 a.m.
Did wonders for their economy eh?
AMOC
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:40 a.m.
Aboriginal - It doesn't work very well in Germany. They had to stop subsidizing more solar-voltaic systems because they couldn't afford them. Power prices almost doubled; families and factories are losing money.
Arboriginal
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:05 a.m.
Also, take a drive up 27. Big old wind farm, and more coming. Jump on the bus gramps, we are heading towards the future!
Arboriginal
Thu, Oct 18, 2012 : 2:03 a.m.
It works in Germany, it can work here.