Editorial: Xcel, regulators out of touch with times

  • Article
  • Updated: November 29, 2009 - 11:26 AM

Utility customers shouldn't foot the bill for luxury travel.

  • 10
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 10 of 10
sense4uNov. 28, 0910:46 PM

Why don't you compare the rates and service of Xcel with other utilities in the region? Shouldn't that be the real issue? Xcel is a huge company with efficiencies created by multiply mergers. The jets are saving us all money by saving those execs extremely valuable time. It's simple math people. I hardly think the rate increase requests even keep up with inflation. Do you? 3 Percent over 3 years. Hmmm I think that's less than one percent a year on an annual basis. My cell phone and cable bill are higher than my electric bill. I think the Star Tribune should figure out how to run a profitable newpaper rather than micro manage a utility company.

7
8
notmetooNov. 29, 0910:28 AM

Give me the $814 you spent on that dinner and I could live for a month.

6
5
DrMarkNov. 29, 0910:32 AM

With all the breaking news happening in England. The new cap and tax bill and Obama, agreeing to reverse all growth in America soon. Why does this newspaper not cover the real news? Cap and tax will cost the average family $1,000's a year. Reversing growth, millions of jobs. Yet..... not a word in this paper. Must not be important.

9
14
garagewineNov. 29, 0911:32 AM

So, let me get this straight. After the "bulldog" effort by Lori Swanson to look into the extravagant spending by Xcel, the proposed 3-year rate hike was reduced by $3.9 million, or around 2.9 percent. Wow, thank goodness for that. Perhaps the attorney general and the Strib should look more deeply into Xcel's cost structure and find out what is really driving the increase in energy rates. It wouldn't have anything to do with our renewable energy mandates, would it? That must be a matter for another expose.

7
7
orvestaNov. 29, 0911:57 AM

The real scam or true shame is DrMark and the false and fallacious comments spread. The "breaking news" in England does not change the underlying science. The stolen emails in England do not make everything said by science deniers like DrMark true. FOR EXAMPLE, it's not "cap and tax" that is a false and inaccurate and ignorant cliche, that uses namecalling, not science or economics. Another DrMark lie: Nobody has agreed or will agree to reverse all growth in America. Cap and trade will be economically neutral according to independent analyses. It will CREATE millions of jobs. Effectively DrMark, you are factually wrong on every one of your items... and you cannot provide any CREDIBLE, independent analysis which backs you up. Now THAT is the hallmark of ignorance.

9
13
lahdedNov. 29, 0912:11 PM

Wow, you must live in an apartment, my electric bill is definitely higher than both my cable and cell phone bills. (cable with internet and blackberry) You are flawed in stating that the private jet creates efficiencies, it doesn't. Ever heard of web conferencing or teleconferencing? That's how the vast majority of companies deal with distances between offices. If someone needs to go to another location, they either book a normal flight or if they are a higher up, take a private jet (if available). But, they don't do this multiple times per day. They wouldn't survive the board meetings for expenditures.

7
9
louorlandoNov. 30, 09 3:30 PM

The real story, not mentioned, is the constant abuse of business aircraft by our government! Billions are spent on moving these people around the world, for no good reason. If they travelled by mule, our country would be better served. Just take a look, thousands of business type planes are owned by the taxpayers!

2
3
davehougDec. 1, 09 9:41 PM

Pakistan kickes out the Taliban and all good things happened when we leave. Isn't this what some called for in Iraq BEFORE the surge quelled a civil war? Hope and change but no effort - - - heckuva a way to run a war.

0
2
redorblueDec. 3, 0910:53 AM

Xcel would not be building wind farms if they were not contractually obligated to by their contract for shipping/storing spent uranium because wind farms are not financially viable without subsidy, much like ethanol. Wasteful spending with no return on investment is a far greater rip-off than some travel budget. Hey Strib - how about finding out how much Xcel spends on renewable energy (marketing, R&D, engineering, construction, etc.) and what they revenue/profit they gain on this investment. You'll find that it is not viable without taxpayer/customer subsidy.

1
2
garagewineDec. 3, 09 6:26 PM

Which "independent analysis" claimed that climate change would be economically neutral? I've never seen one.

0
0
  • 1 - 10 of 10

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT