• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

At Wisconsin Power Plants, Where Biomass Plans Are Dead, Work May Be Privatized

February 25, 2011, 1:10 pm

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and his so-called budget-repair bill are making news again, this time for a proposal, buried within the legislation, to privatize state-owned power plants, including the troubled ones that provide power on campuses of the University of Wisconsin. Under the language of the bill, those contracts would be offered to companies on a no-bid basis.

The Daily Kos, Politico, and Paul Krugman, the liberal economist and columnist for The New York Times, have all highlighted the passage in the bill that the state “may sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state.”

Some speculation is that the power plants would be offered to Koch Industries, which is owned by Charles and David Koch, billionaire benefactors of conservative causes. This week David Koch made headlines in the Wisconsin controversy by not doing anything at all. A blogger pretending to be Mr. Koch recorded a phone conversation with Mr. Walker, in which the governor seemed to be cozying up to the billionaire.

But how would a potential privatization affect the operation of the plants? Perhaps not much. Jeff Plale, a former Democratic state senator who is administrator of the Division of State Facilities, played down both the potential for privatization and the controversy around a no-bid acquisition.

“This is the beginning of a very long process. … I don’t think you are going to have a whole lot of people lining up to take them off our hands,” said Mr. Plale, who was hired by Governor Walker in January. The power plants around Wisconsin campuses have been under scrutiny by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency for coal emissions—scrutiny that was prompted when the Sierra Club started investigating the plants.

Would privatizing the power plants make it harder for activists and other groups to review their operation? Mr. Plale said any private operator would be accountable to the state for the price, reliability, and stability of the power. As for their cleanliness, he said, “I don’t think there are any incentives to getting into the cross hairs of the EPA.”

Jennifer Feyerherm, who works in Wisconsin on the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, seems to agree. “With the state-owned plants, we’ve had trouble because the [state's Department of Natural Resources] seems to have a hard time enforcing against a sister state agency,” she said. “If they were privately owned, we would have different challenges.”

One thing that has disappointed Ms. Feyerherm and other activists: the fate of Wisconsin’s biomass plan. After the Sierra Club successfully sued the state over coal emissions in 2007, then-Gov. Jim Doyle announced a plan to replace coal with biomass at the plant in Madison that supplies power to the university’s flagship campus. State officials hoped that the conversion would help kick-start a biomass industry in the state.

But the biomass plan was one of the first things that Mr. Walker killed when he took office. The Madison plant will burn natural gas only.

“The biomass plant was an opportunity to invigorate our local economies,” Ms. Feyerherm says. But state officials said it would be too expensive and had a number of difficult logistical challenges, like figuring out how to transport the biomass by train to a busy section of Madison.

Mr. Plale said the biomass plan would have cost $100-million, which was about $75-million more than one using natural gas. He added that university officials were among those happiest with the decision to dump the plan. (Alan Fish, associate vice chancellor for facilities at Madison, did not return a call from The Chronicle.)

To the Sierra Club’s Ms. Feyerherm, expense is all relative. “‘Too expensive’ is the shortsighted way that people are preferring to do their money math,” she said. “It keeps our money local. … We don’t make natural gas.” When the state sent out a call for proposals on fuel streams, she said, “the response was more than they ever guessed—there were lots of folks out there who were offering a variety of fuel streams.”

(Flickr photo of the Madison, Wis., power plant, on Charter Street, by Turbo!!!)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • corwinamber

    This is such a corporate scam there ought to be a federal criminal investigation.

  • akprof

    That Governor should be recalled!! He is such a transparent crook!

  • redsucker

    Transparent crook…..hmmmmm no basis for the latter, the former is what Obama promised and is definately NOT, being instead the Czar-master. As they say, ‘zat the best you can do?

    Fixing a budget by goring your favorite prejudices shows more of the real you, than of the budgeter who is openly working on his work.

  • rgregory

    Easy to say when it isn’t your job being gored.

  • rgregory

    He can’t be for another 12 months or so.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gary-North/100000049168139 Gary North

    What a joke! College presidents such as Mr. Schulz may not realize it,but “the dog-tail and all- is out of the kennel  and most don’t know that the the gate was left open”. Presidents come out with such platitudes from time to time ,and perhaps with some degree of sincerity .But the commercialization of “big time”college sports has advanced so far that even if presidents had the will to attempt to retake control ,too much money is involved,too many fans,donors and trustees would not tollerate it and too many athletic directors and coaches would find ways to roadblock the effort. Not only is the tail wagging the dog,but many presidents of “big time’ programs are out in front leading the cheers. Tune in – long after Mr. Schulz has passed from the scene -,big time sports will still be rolling along,unchecked…unless the money drys up.

  • manoflamancha

    Socratease2: well, you sure change stripes easily! I still say we shut the whole enterprise down. We can not afford it. A good practices formula should be: does this activity enhance the academic program? If no, then it must go!

  • goxewu

    Apparently, these new sports-concussion studies should extend to college presidents, who, also apparently, should be wearing helmets when they cogitate about big-time college sports (i.e.,
    D-1 football and men’s basketball programs). A few examples of semi-consciousness from the keyboard of President Schultz:

    * “Presidents need to reassert our national leadership on college sports.” Where does he get the “re-”?

    * “When was the last time a university president was interviewed on ESPN concerning an issue in college athletics?” As if it matters. And if one was, he/she would probably say something like Ohio State’s President Gee saying that he hoped the football coach wouldn’t fire him. (That football coach resigned, but not for usurping the president’s power, but for lying to the NCAA.)

    * “Deregulation of the NCAA rulebook, which he likened to the federal tax code in its complexity.” Oh yeah, that’ll help, just like getting rid of all those pesky regulations on Wall Street over the last twenty years brought us the 2008 economic meltdown. (If Schultz does want to go simple, here’s a suggestion: No. Athletic. “Scholarships.” Period.)

    * “We need the NCAA to take a firm stand on the airing of high school
    football games on national TV networks,” he said, withholding any
    outright reference to fellow Big 12 member Texas.” Typical: Take a stand in the abstract, leave the “stand” philosophical, and certainly don’t mention a specific perp. Kids, can you spell c-h-i-c-k-e-n-s-*-*-t?

    * “…it will need action from the NCAA.” First, the presidents need to take strong stands, re-assert, blah, blah, blah. But when it comes down to *doing* anything, it’s up to the NCAA, the very billion-dollar organization whose existence, huge budget, and executive perqs depends on–get this–college presidents ceding authority over their big-time sports programs to the de facto autonomous athletic departments. This is like a police chief saying its up to the mafia to do something about crime.

    * “It is important for university presidents to publicly show that we are in control of college athletics…” They aren’t in control, so how can they publicly show it? He must mean “to publicly create the illusion that we are in control.”

    If mealy-mouthed, plausible-deniability, all-talk-and-no-action President Schultz is representative of the putatively reasonable university presidents (OSU’s Gee representing the yahoo, gut-bellied tailgater side), then the only solution is manoflamancha’s: Shut ‘em all down.

  • Socratease2

    No, you misunderstand what I am saying, I did not alter my stripes at all. My response concerning the role of Presidents, the actual institutional representative who supposedly help “self-govern” the NCAA, has nothing to do with whether athletic departments should be maintained or abolished. Every post I have put out concerning this topic has supported the role of athletics at the university level. But, do I have major criticisms about how athletics is governed and how media dollars has transformed much for the negative. I want to see the system improved, not cancelled. So, in my opinion, athletics does enhance that academic mission. And if anyone who enjoys calling athletics corrupt actually worked in an athletic department  they would see very quickly that there is a lot of good work, work that supports and enhances the  overall education for most student-athletes. Is it a perfect institution? No it is not, but that is the nature of human affairs, the pursuit of the “good” can have negative side-effects. Is the solution not to do anything and sit on your hands if  some unobtainable, ideological goal is not possible. The world is material and messy, get used to it and celebrate the good that is there.

  • prfsr1

    I wish President Kirk well – it is an honorable goal.  A little over 10 yrs. ago, I was a social science adjunct at Kansas State which had a winning football team.  I have 3 stories about this experience and want to be clear that this is by no means an indictment of Kansas State. There were many more stellar and academic proficient students than the substandard.  The experiences I had are repeated hundreds, if not thousands of times every year across the nation.

    Many colleges have a tutoring unit just for athletes and in the athletic areas.  It is well known on campus that these are dens of counterfeit term papers and assignments completed by tutors but submitted by the athletes in class.  Now, my stories:

    1) Another adjunct was asked by an athletic department representative to change the grade for an athlete in order for him to be eligible for the sports program.

    2) An athlete submitted a hand written assignment with 3 different colored inks and 4 different writing styles.

    3) One assignment I had given was a brief research paper of 5 pages with 3 required sources cited. Students were told their reports would be presented in class in order to share the info with other students.  One athlete could not even express the topic of his paper without looking at it.  He had no clue about his findings and did not know what sources he had used. 

    Good luck Mr. Kirk.

  • manoflamancha

    We are all waiting to hear  how: “…athletics does enhance that academic mission”. I suspected all along that you were an insider. Spare us the pity for million dollar coaches!

  • Socratease2

    We are all waiting to hear  how: “…athletics does enhance that
    academic mission”. I suspected all along that you were an insider.
    Spare us the pity for million dollar coaches!

    I am not a coach, trainer or anything related to the pursuit of athletics. If I were a million dollar coach do you think I would be sitting around wasting my time arguing with you? I have no pity (or enmity for that matter) for million dollar coaches just like I have no strong feelings about the fact entertainers/celebrities make obscene amounts of money in this society. Do you send Sandra Bullock rants about her making $20 million for a crappy romantic comedy? No you don’t.

    First of all, I am still waiting to hear how athletics detracts from the education received by Joe Student at the average Big Time University. Please explain how that works, I keep asking but all I hear is irrelevant hyperbole supported by minimal analysis and evidence. You provide no evidence but I can go one for quite a while explaining how athletics is a positive. It would include ideas related to increasing diversity on campus, increasing self-esteem and confidence in young women, developing many positive character traits such as teamwork, leadership, perserverance, accountability, good time management skills, etc. What most students learn from books/class at college is irrelevant in terms of their future lives. What does count are the life skills they take away, things that help them work together with others and that provide motivation to be productive and to excel at whatever life goal is faced. You may not want this to be true but those are traits enhanced through participation in athletics. And that will be true no matter how many of my posts you choose to reply to. Find a new hobby horse and spare me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=8314701 Jonathan Kotinek

    This is not a reactionary move.

    Certainly the schedule for this decision has been accelerated by the recent publicity surrounding the University of Texas’ Longhorn Network, but to focus squarely on this issue would be to flatten out some very important topography of our context. When Texas A&M kept the Big 12 together with our decision to stay last year, it was with the understanding that the unequal distribution of conference revenues was going to be addressed by Commissioner Beebe.

    The developments of past twelve months suggest that no progress has been made, or may even be possible, given the players and leadership in the issue. A move to the SEC puts Texas A&M in a position of relative strength in that we are a school that the conference wants and is willing to work for and with.

    From a recruiting standpoint, being in the SEC gives Texas athletes a way to be affiliated with the most exciting and successful conference in the nation without leaving their home state. A large number of Aggie Former Students and fans see this as a proactive decision and a move that is net positive for all involved.

    Admittedly, the decision is dollar-driven. I’d be happy to see us drop the current pretense of “student athlete” and either do away with athletic scholarships altogether or pay athletes for the service they do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=8314701 Jonathan Kotinek

    I appreciate your attention to these facts. I admit that my perspective might be skewed by hanging around those of like mind, but the groundswell of support for a move to SEC is real, and gained clout when the 12th Man Foundation (private development foundation) and the TAMU Association of Former Students sent notices to members over the weekend encouraging legislative contact in support of A&M “charting our own course.” For TAMU’s part it sounds like *if* there is a move we will hold the door open for a game against Texas on Thanksgiving. If the rivalry fizzles…it won’t be because of us.

  • civilprof

    “Texas is really good about saying it loves the Big 12.”  What incredible spin! This is not evident to anyone outside the Texas Athletic Department as the nation watches Texas crush the remaining ten members of the Big 12 into submission. Texas demonstrates no loyalty to the Big 12.

  • 1021ajr

    While I’d love to see A&M remain in the Big 12, I can understand their desire to seek their fortunes elsewhere.  There are benefits to the political and financial power wielded by the University of Texas, especially for schools in a less favorable geographic, demographic, and financial position (Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Kansas).  But feeling completely beholden is tiresome for everyone, especially for rival institutions like A&M and member schools who feel like they can or should stand toe-to-toe with UT.  While the Big 12 tries to project a “happy family” image, my guess is the dynamics are and always will be a bit strained given the flagship status granted to UT last summer.

  • sand6432

    Speaking as one who worked for a Big Ten institution for 20 years but now as a Texas resident, I’d compare the Big Ten and Big 12 by saying that the latter is dominated by one institution, UT-Austin, in a way that the other is not, both athletically and academically. In the Big Ten, on the other hand, UT-Austin would be more an equal among peers, not a dominant force. Maybe that is why, despite the many academic advantages that would accrue to UT-Austin by joining such a league, it seems not interested in doing so. It wants to be the big fish in the pond.—Sandy Thatcher

  • awegweiser

    What’s a football conference? What do they confer about? Why aren’t there basketball or baseball conferences?

  • stuaff

    Many schools have rivalries that are not in the same conference. Florida and Florida State and Virginia and Virgina Tech are a couple of examples.  There are several more.  Each school simply needs to commit to keeping that game on the schedule.

  • hoodlib

    Didn’t this flap start because of the talk of one TAMU cheerleader Rick Perry (not Rick pArry).  He has the making of another Texas cheerleader turned president.

  • commentarius

    I think what really chaps A&M people is that the “rivalry” is increasingly one-way.  UT fans rank the A&M game a distant second to the OU matchup, and in recent years it’s been rather ho-hum since the two teams were not really that close in ranking (including last year, when the usual positions were reversed).  A&M, on the other hand, builds its entire annual calendar around this game, with its crazed and often hilarious (yet sometimes tragic) obsession with bonfires and rallies and “traditions” that eclipse all other activities for months on end.  So it just drives Aggies wild that UT fans, for the most part, don’t seem to care much.  Sure, it’s a rivalry that’s occasionally entertaining, but it’s not the center of the Longhorn season.  The two teams are rarely evenly matched.  The series record is 75-37-5 in favor of UT, after all. 

  • juan2012

    http://www.dunkskobillige.com)

    Billige Timberland Støvler, Nike Shox sko , Nike sko,
    Rabat Shox Sko

    Shox Sko Billig, billige Shox Sko , Shox Sko danmark, Shox Sko to the Damer

  • juan2012

    http://www.dunkskobillige.com)

    Billige Timberland Støvler, Nike Shox sko , Nike sko,
    Rabat Shox Sko

    Shox Sko Billig, billige Shox Sko , Shox Sko danmark, Shox Sko to the Damer

  • whynotwhynot

    Facts are great but beliefs matter more… That’s why the culture wars are so important… Problem is a culture around which facts are valued has yet to figure out how to assert itself… and supposing a culture like this could exist a lot of ugly realities will have to be confronted.

    Those who believe in facts feel that facts alone speak for themselves… that belief has consequences.

    People who want facts to hold more value are going to have to fight for that existence… Odds are they won’t though…

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037