The Seattle City Council has directed its public utility, Seattle City Light, to “move away from getting electricity from fossil fuels and nuclear energy” via a new resolution. Additionally, the city council directed City Light to “use its position on the Energy Northwest board to consider replacing its electricity with carbon-neutral alternatives.”
Currently, Energy Northwest operates the Columbia Generating Station near Richland, the Northwest’s only nuclear power plant. The nuclear power plant supplies about 4 percent of the city of Seattle’s electricity.
Ultimately, the resolution set a goal for Seattle City Light to close the Richland reactor. Never mind the fact that reactor “employs about 1,000 people and pumps $400 million into the Tri-City-area economy annually.” Via the Tri-City Herald:
The document, which the Seattle council passed unanimously, is intended to oppose new nuclear efforts and require an ongoing evaluation of existing nuclear power generation on the basis of health, safety, reliability and cost.
It also opposes the use of fossil fuels to produce electricity.
The resolution does not explicitly call for a shutdown of the Richland nuclear plant, “but it still is a very important tool that activists believe they can use to put pressure on all those who decide the fate of Columbia Generating Station,” said Councilwoman Kshama Sawant.
How does the Seattle City Council address the fact that thousands would lose their jobs?
Apparently, its little resolution suggests “retraining programs, retirement plans and reassignment to decommissioning as part of a transition to clean, healthy and renewable electricity production.”
That’s the consolation working families would receive should the whack jobs on the Seattle City Council get their way in imposing their extreme, entirely ideological agenda on the rest of the state.
And, what “alternative” sources of energy does the Seattle City Council advance?
Well, the resolution points to “advances being made in storing solar and wind power.” Of course, its unclear how city councilmembers expect to overcome the not-so-small problem of solar and wind power’s dependency on the weather.
As a spokesman for Energy Northwest told the Tri-City Herald, “[Seattle City Council members] just got a lot of really bad (information) that went unchallenged, and unfortunately, they acted on it.”
It’s strange how that keeps happening with the Seattle City Council.
So, how is it that the liberal city with an unrealistic view of economics wound up paying good wages to 1,000 people and putting so much money into Eastern Washington? Or, putting it another way, how did those rock-ribbed conservatives wind up as employees of such effete liberals?
No worries, though. Being the stalwart, self-reliant folks they are — and if you don’t believe me about that, just ask them! — they’ll certainly create enough wealth to put us dainty Seattle liberals to shame.
(And if that somehow — amazingly! – fails to happen, the good folks in the Tri-Cities can do what so many places in Republican Eastern Washington do: take state welfare money from Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett.)
Well, tensie, you’re wrong again. Since SCL only receives 4% of it’s power from that facility it only support the equivalent of 40 of those positions, which would be required regardless even if Seattle didn’t derive any electrical power from it. SO, your entire premise is false, as usual.
BTW, any electricity that SCL get that isn’t generated by facilities that it owns directly, are filtered through the BPA, HQ’d in Portland, OR. You don’t really have any knowledge or understanding of just how electrical power is generated, distributed and brokered in the Pacific Northwest, no idea at all! You liberal, meatheads revel in your stupidity and ignorance.
If what you guys say is true, then why all of the alarmism in the article?
It’s not alarmism, or praise, for that matter. It’s pointing out their foolishness.
So, the phrase, “… Damage the Tri-Cities” is the very model of rational restraint?
More rationally restrained than “… a very important tool that activists believe they can use to put pressure on all those who decide the fate of Columbia Generating Station,”
So. is the title of the post correct or not?
Tensie, I’m sorry, but I can’t help it that you’re too dense to get simple concepts. The fact that the Seattle clowncil is making an issue of it shows how shallow they really are and another fact is that because they receive such a small portion of their electrical power from the nuclear generating plant, their input on it should be about that significant if at any.
Since your reading comprehension is quite a bit inferior to your ability to collect multiple government pensions, I’ll explain this to you in very simple terms.
Either the Seattle City Council has the ability to “Damage the Tri-Cities,” or it does not. If it does not, then you should direct your ire at Shift for publishing a false claim. If you say Seattle does have the ability to damage the Tri-Cities, then you can fight it out with Biff — and the rest of us will then enjoy an epic battle of wits between the mutually unarmed.
Either way, your complaint is not with me, so stop flailing uselessly, pick up the scattered strands of straw which remain from that doll you’ve been bashing, and go home.
Tensie, I’m tired of trying to match wits with such a witless moron as you. However, I’ll try to explain it in simple words for you; Seattle City Council wants to have the nuclear power generating plant closed with the effect of putting about a 1000 direct employees out of work. They think they have the authority to dictate to the rest of the state how it should operate and they don’t have that much power. Now shut up and go away.
So, if they don’t actually have the ability to do any of that, why do you care?
That’s certainly an response one would expect from a half-wit, liberal.
Tensor, you really don’t get it. Actually the nuke plant sells most of its power to CA.
Of course tensie doesn’t get it, he’s nothing but a troll, probably a paid one. But I like messing with his feeble, little brain, it’s so much fun and easy, too.
The liberal Silly Clowncil that has no clue about economics doesn’t pay good wages to 1,000 people in Richland and have absolutely no say about whether any generating facility City Light doesn’t own operates or not. Knowing your tenuous grasp on reality, you probably think as the electrons are generated, some employee (paid by the Silly Clowncil) puts a “City Light” tag on them, then they go happily on their way to Seattle liberals. The most they have the authority to do is direct City Light not to buy power from the Columbia Generating Station, which would eliminate the need to waste the time grandstanding on yet another meaningless resolution. You know, have the City Light employee take the tag off those hideous nuclear-generated electrons. Good luck with that. The obvious pitfall with that approach is it might reveal to Seattle taxpayers just how unnecessary the Silly Clowncil is in the first place.
As the spokesman for Energy Northwest (the people that actually run the Columbia Generating Station, not just badly play politicians) put it: “[Seattle City Council members] just got a lot of really bad
(information) that went unchallenged, and unfortunately, they acted on
it.”
It’s not strange at all how that keeps happening to the Silly Clowncil, it happened on a day that ends with “y”
“….have absolutely no say about whether any generating facility City Light doesn’t own operates or not.”
So, you’re claiming the entire premise of this post is totally wrong, then?
No, that’s your claim. The article states the Silly Clowncil shockingly passed yet another meaningless resolution with the idiotic belief that they have the authority to close the Columbia Generating Station which would put 1,000 people out of work and take $400 million per year out of the economy in the Richland area. It’s a small price to pay for such an important symbolic gesture. $400 million in Richland is an especially small price for Seattle leftists who put symbolism over people.
Either Seattle has the authority to do this, or it does not. If it does not, who cares?
If they had the authority to do this, it would be an ordinance, not a meaningless resolution. But meaningless resolutions are a “symbolic gesture” that liberals eat up since it casts the appearance of accomplishing something without any real action at all. When you have no substance, go with symbolism every time. I’ll translate it from crayon for you: How can we get the most low-information liberals to vote for us?
…it casts the appearance of accomplishing something without any real action at all.
This from a guy who actually paid good money to this blog. Priceless.