Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

NRG crucial for county

July 14, 2013

Editor’s note: This is the third of a four-part series previewing Monday’s public hearing with the Public Service Commission on NRG....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(16)

Steiner

Jul-14-13 6:07 AM

we need the learned liberal posters to say how green , clean sustainable energy can replace natural gas . judeye, cronig where are you ? The libs took electricity, the best thing ever invented,behibnd all our processes, better than a govt employee and are trying to mess it up to save the planet. Libs ?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HVANCDY

Jul-14-13 7:53 AM

Don't waste your time,summer is to short to be cooped up at some meeting listening to arguements.-Family first !

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Jul-14-13 8:23 AM

If you took any comfort in the Governor's statement you are even dumber than I thought you were. I think what he was saying is good luck with that plan. He supports buying from Canada.....hello. Wake up. They don't care if Dunkirk sinks into the Lake. Dunkirk Who?????

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Jul-14-13 8:31 AM

lets be honest here this a power struggle between NRG and National Grid, all the rest is hoop-la nothing more, as for the Governor he comes on right on Q with the politically correct answer

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

225522

Jul-14-13 9:08 AM

GOOD LUCK. I wish all the best for Dunkirk. It is my hometown and I have wonderful memories of growing up there.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Jul-14-13 9:09 AM

Can Mr. Edwards guarantee that NRG tax payments will not be substantially reduced when the current PILOT grement expires in 2014? No one wants to see NRG close it's doors but let's get to the big question. Can NRG produce electricity at the Dunkirk Plant, at a competitive price, while paying $8 million per year in local property taxes? When we answer that question we will know the future of NRG in Dunkirk.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jul-14-13 10:16 AM

Edwards said: "His answer (Cuomo's) was very clear: "Let's wait..."

This is typically the "clearest" response you can expect from ANY pol. It's no coincidence that the same response gives hope to those who are against re-powering the NRG plant. A successful pol learns how to express concern for both sides of an issue w/o actually taking a "clear" position.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jul-14-13 11:08 AM

Being competitive is the key to any successful company, but please Phil, don't imply (or assume) that labor costs are part of the problem, especially if NRG employees are being paid industry standards. Govt regs & high taxes is more critical in determining just how competitive ANY company doing business within NYS can be. If it were merely a labor cost issue, that can be resolved thru CBA modifications.

Cuomo is "clearly" on record with supporting out of state power companies to provide NYS with the power it needs. Unless there's a need for both, I'd say re-powering NRG would conflict with any agreement the Gov plans on entering into with out of state power plants.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HVANCDY

Jul-14-13 1:21 PM

No Big names are going to be there - Don't waste your time !

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Jul-14-13 2:54 PM

HVANCDY-you mean that those who pay no taxes will not be there correct. They could care less!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Jul-14-13 3:52 PM

CAPTAIN - you had better read my posting again. I never mentioned labor costs - only the impact of excessive taxation. Labor costs could be a factor but only if they are out of line with industry standards.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hadenough

Jul-14-13 3:56 PM

So NRG invested $250 million dollars in the plant six years ago. Fine. Now we want NRG to invest another $500,000 million six years later for a total investment of 750 million dollars. That people is three quarters of a billion dollars. That's billon with a "B". Now if the $250.000 million had to do with the burning of coal that money went up in smoke. We cannot be reactive all the time relying on others to get us out of trouble. Being proactive is much better. Just look how much the seawall is going to cost because it was on the back burner for years. Look at what it is costing us to upgrade the water plant which was long over due. It seems that Dunkirk would rather look pretty rather than be prosperous. Why is that? And the money that made Dunkirk look pretty where did it come from and why didn't the auditors not say anything? Then again the same auditing firm did the last audit. Go figure.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Jul-14-13 5:20 PM

Steinerdzzz...The relentlessly obvious truth to green energy is hundreds, thousands of corporations, from global multinational to small-cap, have themselves made strategic, long-term investments in going green and green energy initiatives. The markets have spoken, have valued the global push for green and renewal energy.

As a Dem and a Lib, if the global capital markets have spoken by all embracing green and renewal energy, then I say there's all the response you'll ever need.

The world has passed you by -- yet again.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Jul-14-13 5:25 PM

I don't see a single*****finger of Edward's raised at all to drive businesses into this county and to help current businesses get funding/financing through any one of the Cuomo's business development initiatives.

Having Edwards lecture us about NRG, is like having Steinerdzzz lecture us about the evils of liberalism whilst he cashes in his monthly Social Security check and has his all medical bills paid by Medicare.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

killers

Jul-14-13 6:09 PM

I hope they succeed in allowing NRG to invest in a new plant. However, one has to wonder is the main motive jobs or tax revenue. I suspect from reading the articles in the observer the last few days it taxes. Remember, if this plant is built the plant will employ around 40, at one time the Dunkirk plant had over 280. I guess a few jobs are better than none, but thanks to our state and federal governments this is what we have to hope for.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Jul-14-13 6:44 PM

As we stated in earlier comment, it is a power struggle, on one side(NRG) is a promise of continued job base and tax revenue, on the other is better transmission lines and service we ask: which is the least of two evils, you can bet that if national grid loses the obscene charges to supply electricity here will double because of increased cost to bring electric here and if NRG loses than the taxes go through the roof, what's most alarming is that there is no plan announced for what to do if NRG loses, either way the consumer and taxpayer gets the short end of the stick, or if you will the shaft

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 16 of 16 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web