Dear Editor:
I read Mark Pavely's recent letter to the editor, and I must agree with his statement, nuclear energy is the cheapest and cleanest in the world. About 80 percent (documented in the past) of what is produced at the local nuclear plant is sold to out of state users and not for Missouri needs. Consequently, their coffers are enhanced at our expense.
Natural gas used to produce energy is also a cheap/clean method. Both methods are kind to our environment, massive reduction to air pollution, no residues to cope with, as Ameren is experiencing right now. Additionally their preventative maintenance costs with either option has to be reduced significantly over their current production mode. If Ameren is faced with constant increases in coal prices, then why aren't they pursuing options to improve their bottom line, versus an annual request for rate increases.
I object to the constant demand for rate increase due to the fact that our energy rates have skyrocketed over the past six years over 40 percent. I'm sure Pavely and other energy consumers will agree that their household income has increased only a fraction of that. If I were a shareholder or an executive I would be extremely pleased with my financial benefits from these increases.
In closing, I wonder what happened to the refund ($26.3 million) that the MPSC ordered back last August, that was to be reflected by adjusting our fuel charge. To date, no adjustment has occurred. Rumor has it that they are contesting this decision. So, that $26 million is gathering interest money.
Do I trust Ameren, absolutely not.
Movie title
Grade: grade here
Cast: cast here
Director: director here
Rating: rating here
Running time: minutes
Showtimes and Ticket Info