There is much political and emotional debate regarding enlarging the power grid capacity.   Locally the debate centers around AES and a non-local companies desire to build additional coal sourced generation facilities within the River Valley area.

Not to minimize the various concerns from job opportunities to health concerns - this really is a simple equation.  

America consumes 50% of all the energy produced in the world, yet we only make-up 10% of the population.

Will it cost us more $$$$ up front to dramatically lower our energy requirements?   Yes, But it is critical that we move from a FIRST COST mindset to a LIFE CYCLE COST approach to our homes, new or existing, and our city leaders (made up of tax paying citizens) begin to take a proactive approach to municipal projects.

EXAMPLE: A local libraries energy cost to heat and cool the structure, by following life cycle construction methods, will spend $32,000 Vs. $125,000 over the next 25 years.  

Our tax dollars pay this bill, but the mindset is, "We do not have the money right now, although we may be tokenly concerned - energy usage / cost does not drive our decision making.

The loan payment on the additional $42,000 needed to follow a systems approach, whether from a bond, millage increase Etc. will be covered by the LIFE CYCLE energy savings, plus pocket an additional $300 month over and above the cost of the loan.

If WE THE PEOPLE began to understand and look farther into the future than next week, we can radically change the emotional and political impact our children will be faced with.