Welcome Guest!
 LTUDelphi
 Previous Message All Messages Next Message 
RE: Comments on Delphi  Sarver, John H (DLEG)
 Jul 28, 2004 10:12 PDT 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C474C5.FCFDE00A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Kurt makes an interesting suggestion but a broader Delphi approach would require broader participation as well. The MREP process is including a macro economic analysis and benefit cost analysis of renewable energy options. This will be different from Kurt's suggestion since it won't include fossil fuels and nuclear.

Related to the issue of why to do the study after siting guidelines have been published, the Energy Office is looking for additional input on the various issues........John

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel a. [mailto:galactic-@nethere.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:38 PM
To: mw-@topica.com
Subject: Re: MiWWG: Comments on Delphi


Kurt,

You are correct when you say we need to define the subject of the study. I believe the policy issue you suggested is beyond the scope of the Wind Working Group. (I'm still relatively new to the group, so John Sarver can correct me if I am mistaken.) But it would be good to know if Next Energy is studying that issue.

I have been given a preliminary goal of identifying all the issues to be considered when locating (siting) wind turbines, and ranking these issues in order of importance.

Which brings up an important question: Why should I conduct such a study AFTER siting guidelines have been published?

-Daniel



From: kurtguter <kurtg-@cablespeed.com>
Reply-To: mw-@topica.com
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:34:42 -0400
To: mw-@topica.com
Subject: MiWWG: Comments on Delphi




Dear Daniel,
Unfortunately I missed the last meeting but I am very interested in better understanding this process. I am particularly interested in defining the subject that will be the focus of the process.

If the Delphi is used to try to achieve consensus on policy issues, I believe the policy issue we should be addressing is, "What should be the means of generating electricity in Michigan in the future?" Or rank the following sources of electrical generation (nuclear fission, solar, coal, wind, biomass, natural gas, oil, geothermal, nuclear fusion, hydro, other) from most desirable to least desirable as the preferred electrical generation in the future. Once these policy issues are agreed to, the details of implementing a preferred policy can be developed.

I will be curious to hear other ideas on this topic to see if there is consensus on what this proposed Delphi effort should address.

Thank you for the opportunity for input.
Kurt Guter


Kurt Guter
4045 Cygnet Court
Williamston, MI 48895
517-655-8171
kurtg-@cablespeed.com





------_=_NextPart_001_01C474C5.FCFDE00A
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Re: MiWWG: Comments on Delphi</TITLE>

<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2713.1100" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=508094516-28072004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Kurt
makes an interesting suggestion but a broader Delphi approach would require
broader participation as well.  The MREP process is including a macro
economic analysis and benefit cost analysis of renewable energy options. 
This will be different from Kurt's suggestion since it won't include fossil
fuels and nuclear.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=508094516-28072004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=508094516-28072004><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Related to the issue of why to do the study after siting guidelines have
been published, the Energy Office is looking for additional input on the various
issues........John</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Daniel a.
[mailto:galactic-@nethere.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, July 28, 2004
12:38 PM<BR><B>To:</B> mw-@topica.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: MiWWG: Comments
on Delphi<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Kurt, <BR><BR>You are correct when you say we
need to define the subject of the study.  I believe the policy issue you
suggested is beyond the scope of the Wind Working Group. (I'm still relatively
new to the group, so John Sarver can correct me if I am mistaken.) But it
would be good  to know if Next Energy  is studying that issue.
<BR><BR>I have been given a preliminary goal of  identifying all the
issues to be considered when locating (siting) wind turbines, and ranking
these issues in order of importance. <BR><BR>Which brings up an important
question: Why should I conduct such a study AFTER siting guidelines have been
published?<BR><BR>-Daniel<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BR><B>From: </B>kurtguter
    <kurtg-@cablespeed.com><BR><B>Reply-To:
    </B>mw-@topica.com<BR><B>Date: </B>Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:34:42
    -0400<BR><B>To: </B>mw-@topica.com<BR><B>Subject: </B>MiWWG: Comments on
    Delphi<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>Dear Daniel,<BR>Unfortunately I
    missed the last meeting but I am very interested in better understanding
    this process.  I am particularly interested in defining the subject
    that will be the focus of  the process.<BR></FONT></FONT><BR><FONT
    size=2><FONT face=Arial>If the Delphi is used to try to achieve consensus on
    policy issues, I believe the policy issue we should be addressing is, "What
    should be the means of generating electricity in Michigan in the future?"
     Or rank the following sources of electrical generation (nuclear
    fission, solar, coal, wind, biomass, natural gas, oil, geothermal, nuclear
    fusion, hydro, other) from most desirable to least desirable as the
    preferred electrical generation in the future.  Once these policy
    issues are agreed to, the details of implementing a preferred policy can be
    developed.<BR></FONT></FONT><BR><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>I will be
    curious to hear other ideas on this topic to see if there is consensus on
    what this proposed Delphi effort should address.<BR></FONT></FONT><BR><FONT
    size=2><FONT face=Arial>Thank you for the opportunity for input.<BR>Kurt
    Guter<BR></FONT></FONT><BR><BR><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>Kurt
    Guter<BR>4045 Cygnet Court<BR>Williamston, MI
    48895<BR>517-655-8171<BR>kurtg-@cablespeed.com<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C474C5.FCFDE00A--
	
 Previous Message All Messages Next Message 
  Check It Out!

  Topica Channels
 Best of Topica
 Art & Design
 Books, Movies & TV
 Developers
 Food & Drink
 Health & Fitness
 Internet
 Music
 News & Information
 Personal Finance
 Personal Technology
 Small Business
 Software
 Sports
 Travel & Leisure
 Women & Family

  Start Your Own List!
Email lists are great for debating issues or publishing your views.
Start a List Today!

© 2001 Topica Inc. TFMB
Concerned about privacy? Topica is TrustE certified.
See our Privacy Policy.