To the editor:
I am concerned with Michigan’s energy future and am writing in opposition to House Bill 4297 ( Nesbitt) and Senate Bill 438 (Proos).
We have an opportunity to step positively into the future protecting the environment, our health and becoming less dependent on others for our energy needs. Michigan currently has energy plants that need replacement. We spend approximately $22 billion a year importing the fuel needed to power these plants. This money would go a long way toward repairing our roads and improving our education system.
Making forward thinking decisions now could put Michigan on track to a very positive future and really support the “Pure Michigan” slogan we like to use, leaving a very positive legacy.
A report from the Michigan Public Service Committee determined that Michigan “could cost-effectively reduce electricity demand 31-35% below the forecasted demand by 2023.” While another study estimated that doubling Michigan’s standard to 2% annually could increase the annual net economic benefits to more than $1.6 billion per year. This approach makes perfect sense because it would decrease the wear and tear on the current infrastructure, reduce CO2 and other pollutions, and residents will enjoy immediate savings.
Energy efficiency is quick and affordable. What we don’t use we don’t have to produce.
Another part of the energy program must include renewables. Again the Michigan Public Service Commission reports that Michigan currently has the resources to produce 30% of our energy from renewables. This can be done without redefining the term “renewable” to include the incineration of our trash like HB 4297 would do. Granted our trash is an issue, but adding more pollutants to the air and soil/landfills is not a long-term solution, it is just “business as usual.”
The use of nuclear for energy has economic, environmental and security issues. This is a dangerous option for consideration.
Last, but not least, is the practice of high volume horizontal fracturing in Michigan. There are enough completed studies and media reports on the problems caused by HVHF, such as water consumption/destruction, health issues, decreased property values, the fracturing and industrialization of our beautiful land, and earthquakes are a few. It is not necessary to include the use natural gas as a “bridge” to a real energy plan that can provide true energy independence.
My husband and I are dairy farmers and have experienced the climbing costs of electricity for years. We decided that we had to do something to control this aspect of the cost of farming, so we had 40 solar panels installed, which produces approximately 10,000 kWh/year. This year we have installed geothermal to decrease our heating/cooling costs. We feel confident that these are good investments into our future and our children’s.
Any plan that requires the disposal of more waste such as nuclear, produced water, ashes from incineration and drill cuttings does not look very far into the future and does not leave a positive legacy for our children to live healthy and proudly. The combination of energy efficiency and renewables makes sense for our health, environment, economy and energy independence.
Michigan is rich with choices. We have the capacity and the foresight to make thoughtful, deliberate decisions that will have a positive affect for our future.
Karen Fifelski, Hopkins
