80923 
Member since Nov 5, 2010

Currently

Just a citizen, ratepayer, and voter.

Updated on April 2, 2013 at 1:51 AM

Latest Review

Re: “Copperhead Road

The place sucks!

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by 80923 on 09/16/2012 at 11:55 PM

Recent Comments

Re: “Utilities makes a conservative play on final decommissioning of downtown eyesore

Thanks Tom I just saw your reply. I guess I wasn't subscribed to the thread. I'm not sure I understand the $5.1B present value of Drake. Does that mean that's what we spend if we keep it going until 2035? If so, then the PV cost of the other option(s) is what that should be compared to.

I'm fairly sure replacement of 254MW will be in the $1B to $1.5B range (for firm reliable generation, not the undependable wind and solar stuff), but my City Council person tells me that it will only be a quarter of a billion and a 2% rate increase on average for 20 years. I'm not buying that. I think double or triple rate increase over the long term sounds more reasonable, not 48.6% (1.02^20). The last I knew, generating units cost about $2,000 to $3,000 per kW, and that was a long time ago. Those costs have not gone down. It will be incredibly expensive regardless of the generation type.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 01/24/2016 at 9:57 PM

Re: “UPDATE: The cowardly lions — overly conservative Council delays EIRP's final hurdle, again

Lisa,
They have to stop burning coal on Drake 5 in the short term due to environmental deadlines and the lack of space to install a scrubber. Burning gas on it is probably not cost effective the majority of the time, so keeping it in service long term was never an option. Decommissioning or replacing Drake 5 is the viable only short term option. Replacing it with a new generating unit of any kind is very expensive. Drake 6 and 7 are a completely different story.

"Mr. What the World", there is not enough excess capacity on Front Range Power plant units to replace all three Drake units during peak hours. Who told you that was possible? Was it Tim? And the capacity needed grows every year, so that solution looks worse every year. The reason for keeping feasible Drake units "alive" was to make your Utility bill lower, like most customers want. Are you personally willing to write a big check to do what Tim would like? I didn't think so...

10 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by 80923 on 12/24/2015 at 9:06 AM

Re: “UPDATE: The cowardly lions — overly conservative Council delays EIRP's final hurdle, again

Tim admits that his education on this topic is only 5 minutes long, and it shows. He pulled the same tricks as a Council person and didn't get re-elected. Good!

He talks about generation cost savings but forgets to mention (or doesn't know) that building new combined cycle generation costs a lot and takes a significant amount of time. Tim would shut down the coal plants and then learn those important details later, at your expense. Then he doesn't consider or mention the cost of natural gas and how volatile it's pricing has been historically. Don't believe everything you are told Tim, and look into the details before writing letters that get published. Don't believe that everyone is as gullible as you. Also keep in mind that when you do not generate your own power, you are at the mercy of the seller every time the contract is renewed (Just like business space leasing, right Tim!).

20 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 12/22/2015 at 9:38 PM

Re: “Utilities makes a conservative play on final decommissioning of downtown eyesore

As Drake Unit 5, then 6, then 7 are decommissioned and replaced by other resources, it will cause rate increases. These increases need to be estimated now and communicated to all ratepayers (the actual Owners and people most affected). Utilities' Energy Supply group can supply us with this information. Too few people in this town are influencing the direction and future of OUR Utility and the resulting rate increases we will be forced to live with. What are the anticipated future rate increases? Funny that nobody is offering up this information. I'm sure it has already been estimated. We need to know... now. CSU speak up please.

7 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 11/26/2015 at 10:56 PM

Re: “Case by case

Alexis Acker - Guilty of being more than a jerk. Maybe she learned a lesson... probably not. The officer's action was justifiable. You can't have jerks acting out however they want. Action has to be swift. She doesn't like that she lost out in that situation. Too bad. If I was on the jury and saw that video, she would get zero $.

21 likes, 60 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 07/15/2015 at 9:59 AM

Re: “UPDATE: Joel Miller: Why Collins shouldn't be censured

Miller is wrong. He is siding with her because they agreed on one past issue??? What Collins has done in her personal business dealings (in-State and out-of-State) and done with her poor choice of close friends while holding the Council position is enough reason for her to be dismissed. We don't need those kinds of unethical people making decisions for our City, period.

3 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 07/07/2015 at 6:50 PM

Re: “New clerk: more to tell

Three years later... good riddance to Bach. He is not running for Mayor again because he cannot win, due to his own actions and words. There is justice after all. :)

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by 80923 on 03/15/2015 at 8:13 AM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent   |   Website powered by Foundation