> Pertinent, perhaps, but the article doesn't make any sense. "We need to
> raise prices because you're using less, but if you use more, we'll have
> to raise prices even more." It would make more sense if they simply
> said something like "we need to raise prices to repair/replace aging
> infrastructure." Isn't that what they're really saying? Conservation
> is simply delaying it a little.
Yes. But why would you expect a government to make sense?
> If Saskpower had any brains and less political interference from Mr.
> Prebble (who still owes me $20 -- no I don't want to collect it, I want
> to hold it over his head forever) they would build a nuclear reactor at
> La Loche, and string some lines over to Fort Mc. I've been saying that
> for years, and it seems recently that a former SK NDP, who now works for
> a large oil firm in AB agrees.
Thats not saskpower's choice.
But I've always said I'd rather have a nuclear power plant in my back
yard over a coal plant.
Chance of being radioactive > not being able to breath
Received on Wed Mar 28 11:09:54 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Mar 28 2007 - 11:26:23 CST