 |
Utahns back alternative fuels

Polled residents
want to fight global warming
Copyright 2007 Deseret
Morning News
By
Joe
Bauman
Deseret Morning News
By enormous margins,
Utahns want alternative fuels developed in a fight against global
warming. Their support even extends to the construction of nuclear
power plants.
Soaring concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and other gases
are caused by power plant emissions, vehicle exhaust and the
destruction of forests that otherwise would convert carbon dioxide
to oxygen.
Mankind's carbon footprint stretches from airliners streaking
contrails across the sky to pig farms wafting up methane.
According to the U.S. Department of
Energy, carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere amounted to 280 parts per million in pre-industrial
times. Now the gas is at about 375 ppm, up by a third.
The dramatically higher CO2 concentration is suspected of locking
in more of the sun's warmth, causing a gradual worldwide heating.
When glaciers melt, polar bears drown and deserts grow, demands for
action reach a crescendo.
A minority opinion is that humans are not the main reason for
global warming or they are, indeed, blameless. This argument
attributes climate change to long-term natural cycles.
Lawmakers' concerns
But according to Utah's state
energy adviser, Dianne
Nielson, regardless of the cause, people can be part of the
solution.
During a meeting of the Legislature's Public Utilities and
Technology Interim Committee this week, Rep. Michael E. Noel,
R-Kanab, asked Nielson what is meant by greenhouse gases. Methane
and other gases, called carbon-dioxide equivalents, she replied.
In coal-fired power plants, she added, a principal emission is
carbon dioxide.
This colorless and odorless gas resists attempts to capture it in
large-scale generating plants. Methods to reduce emissions range
from using alternative fuels to pumping carbon dioxide underground
to placing such a high "carbon tax" on fossil fuels that people are
forced to use alternatives such as wind-driven generators and
nuclear power.
Noel asked her if one has to "buy into the theory" that global
warming is human-caused to support an agenda to limit emissions.
"I don't think that's necessarily true," Nielson replied. "We
need to be in the process of controlling these emissions" to effect
climate change. Reducing greenhouse gases "will make a difference in
terms of climate change," she said.
Nielson added that developing diverse
energy sources also will
help industry and allow Utah to "be able to continue to be a part of
the economy in the West.... If we are to compete, this is an
important issue to deal with."
One alternative that has been gaining ground rapidly is the use
of fuels made from biological material, as opposed to fossil fuels.
Ethanol and other fuel made from organic material are already in
use.
During the interim committee meeting, Rep. Steve Mascaro, R-West
Jordan, asked Nielson if agricultural bio-mass fuel production is
part of the energy-diversity
discussion.
"It is," she said, "and it has been in terms of generation of
fuels from corn, which is a significant component of the ethanol
production." Also, she said, animal waste could be used to generate
fuel. She said the waste component may be more useful in this state
because of the great number of livestock here.
What Utahns think
Utahns overwhelmingly agree with Nielson about the importance of
developing new fuel sources, according to a Deseret Morning News-KSL
TV survey, carried out by Dan Jones & Associates June 26 to 28. With
410 people interviewed statewide, the
poll has a possible error
rate of plus or minus 5 percent.
Asked whether they thought it's a good idea to make major changes
in sources, such as switching to
renewable
energy,
46 percent said it was definitely good and 39 percent said it was
probably good, for a combined total of 85 percent positive.
"Probably bad" was the answer of 4 percent, and "definitely bad"
accounted for 2 percent, meaning 6 percent were opposed. (Three
percent said it "depends," and 6 percent did not know.)
To say there's a groundswell of enthusiasm for non-traditional
energy
is an understatement. Responses were not exclusive, with residents
expressing approval or disapproval of six
energy sources.
Those surveyed were asked if they favor government investment and
incentives to encourage development of various ways to reduce
emissions of greenhouse gases. Listed in order of their popularity
with Utahns, these are:
• The greatest support goes to
energy efficiency and
conservation, with 94 percent of those surveyed saying they would
definitely or probably support this option. Those opposed amount to
only 3 percent, with the remaining 3 percent uncertain.
• Solar power seems like a solid investment to 92 percent, with
most (64 percent of the total) saying they definitely support
developments in this field and 28 percent agreeing that government
probably should support it. Opposed were 4 percent.
• Wind power incentives are favored by 90 percent, with 7 percent
opposed.
• Geothermal power, using the heat inside Earth to generate
power, gained the support of 80 percent: 45 percent definitely
supporting providing incentives to improve this option, 35 percent
saying they probably would. Those opposed to government investment
in geothermal energy
were 4 percent.
• Support of ethanol and biofuels to power vehicles was approved
by 74 percent, but in this case those saying they "probably support"
it outnumber the "definitely support." The breakdown is 35 percent
think the government definitely should help the budding industry, 39
percent "probably," with 8 percent probably opposed and 8 percent
definitely opposed.
• Nuclear power has the least support, but here too the number of
people favoring it outnumber those against by a hefty majority.
Altogether, 63 percent of Utahns
polled like the idea of
government investment and incentives for nuclear power while 29
percent oppose it. In this category, too, those saying "definitely"
were outnumbered by those giving "probably" answers, 30 percent to
33 percent.
Finally, Utahns were grilled on their support for the call by
Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. to search for alternative fuels and/or
energy
technology, although the state is a major coal producer.
Sixty percent said they strongly agree with Huntsman; adding the
30 percent who somewhat agree, the positive reaction is 90 percent.
Those disagreeing were 6 percent, evenly split between "somewhat"
and "strongly opposed."

|
|