Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KY3 Springfield)   Take your giant fan and shove it   (ky3.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Property, Illinois, Missouri's GOP, Copyright, large wind-energy power line, Kansas, Eminent domain, Electric power transmission  
•       •       •

2765 clicks; posted to Politics » on 25 Feb 2021 at 12:17 AM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



39 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-02-24 8:25:48 PM  
Bets on if this was a gas powered plant instead of wind?
 
2021-02-24 10:46:29 PM  
images-cdn.9gag.comView Full Size
 
2021-02-24 10:47:13 PM  
I doubt I can find my quick and dirty photoshop that makes the guy way bigger than the fan. Might be on photoshop or something.
 
2021-02-24 11:06:45 PM  

baka-san: Bets on if this was a gas powered plant instead of wind?


Or running through an Indian reservation or North St Louis.
 
2021-02-25 12:24:03 AM  
I thought this article would be about Cardinals fans.

/oh, snap
 
2021-02-25 12:27:24 AM  
As I've suggested in another post several days ago, wealthy blue states like CA and NY should buy up swaths of land in red states. So buy up MO land going from KS to IL (and eventually linking to IN). Allow electrical transmission to go through along that swath of land. And, build developments underneath (or over? maybe the electrical transmission should be in pipes buried underground?) the transmission lines. Lots of work in building them, so immediate income and immediate residents. The residents are people from CA/NY/NJ/et al. willing to "colonize" MO for cheap housing and an immediate job working on the transmission lines and related jobs.

Outcome: get the line across the state, within the laws the Rs wrote. Also, have more blue-state people move in, to change election outcome. Third: create more jobs.
 
2021-02-25 12:32:59 AM  
They must be worried that the transmission lines will adversely impact the quality of the meth produced in those areas.
 
2021-02-25 12:34:21 AM  

jaylectricity: I doubt I can find my quick and dirty photoshop that makes the guy way bigger than the fan. Might be on photoshop or something.


Or just make the guy super obese.
 
2021-02-25 12:41:25 AM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2021-02-25 12:51:18 AM  
THE "SHOW ME" STATE HAS COME TO THIS:

Fark user imageView Full Size

 
2021-02-25 12:52:07 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-02-25 12:55:38 AM  
If you think about it for 1/16th of a second, they are dead right.

Why should Missourians have their land taken by force to provide cheap electricity to Illinois or Ohio?

If they want to take the land, Missourians should reap some benefit.
 
2021-02-25 12:57:03 AM  
You want the land you are going to have to pay.  10k an acre should do.
 
2021-02-25 1:03:15 AM  

Saiga410: You want the land you are going to have to pay.  10k an acre should do.


pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
2021-02-25 1:32:55 AM  

baka-san: Bets on if this was a gas powered plant instead of wind?


I'd be a gotdam millionaire?
 
2021-02-25 2:21:11 AM  
They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.
 
2021-02-25 2:28:24 AM  

Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?


Well.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled as follows: "Screw you individual actual living human beings with birth and death dates, companies are humans, and superior to the other living and breathing humans."
 
2021-02-25 2:29:12 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-02-25 2:42:26 AM  

BuckTurgidson: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

Well.

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled as follows: "Screw you individual actual living human beings with birth and death dates, companies are humans, and superior to the other living and breathing humans."


Not the first time those Farkers were dead wrong. They think money is speech.
 
2021-02-25 3:14:40 AM  
What Republicans think "eminent domain" means:

Fark user imageView Full Size

"MINE NOW, BIATCH! NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, PLIEBIAN! HA HA HA!"
 
2021-02-25 5:12:22 AM  

FatherChaos: What Republicans think "eminent domain" means:

[Fark user image 309x378]
"MINE NOW, BIATCH! NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, PLIEBIAN! HA HA HA!"


I'm not a Republican, and that's what I think it means.

/How partisan was opposition to Kelo v. New London?
 
2021-02-25 5:52:04 AM  
Lawmakers in a voice vote approved legislation that would prevent the use of private land for the Grain Belt Express power line without property owners' permission.

If I owned a wheat farm, I'd happily lease a couple acres to the power company to plop a couple wind turbines on my farm.  It would be a second source of income with a reduction in my harvest.
 
2021-02-25 7:16:31 AM  
This is actually okay.

Its likely the project was pushing heavily for an imminent domain where the landowners had no say in the matter. Now it forces negotiation with the people who own the land plus alternative routes.
 
2021-02-25 7:22:01 AM  
Lawmakers in a voice vote approved legislation that would prevent the use of private land for the Grain Belt Express power line without property owners' permission.

So string them all along I-70.
 
2021-02-25 7:51:28 AM  

Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.


They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.
 
2021-02-25 8:48:20 AM  
If you want to push cheaper electrical power across my land I would like the opportunity to buy some.
 
2021-02-25 8:58:06 AM  

paulleah: If you think about it for 1/16th of a second, they are dead right.

Why should Missourians have their land taken by force to provide cheap electricity to Illinois or Ohio?

If they want to take the land, Missourians should reap some benefit.


Well, you're assuming that people actually read the article.
 
2021-02-25 9:05:06 AM  

numbers17: This is actually okay.

Its likely the project was pushing heavily for an imminent domain where the landowners had no say in the matter. Now it forces negotiation with the people who own the land plus alternative routes.


Maybe they just need a little time to get set up. If you change zoning from agricultural to industrial you can command a must higher price for eminent domain purchase. Don't ask me how I know this.
 
2021-02-25 9:14:02 AM  

His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.


That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.
 
2021-02-25 10:44:48 AM  

Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.


It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.
 
2021-02-25 11:04:44 AM  

Muta: If I owned a wheat farm, I'd happily lease a couple acres to the power company to plop a couple wind turbines on my farm.  It would be a second source of income with a reduction in my harvest.


One of my neighbors had a triangle shaped plot next to 405 in Bothell.  Cell phone tower went up in one corner, Cell company paid 1,100/month lease for it.  Guy subdivided plot, sold the house plot and kept the cell plot (and income).

why yes, he was the village douche - why did you ask?
 
2021-02-25 11:24:17 AM  

Fursecution: Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.


I guess it takes money to make money.

I don't like eminent domain. If it's done for a public purpose, like a road or a National Park, I still don't much like it but understand.

If it's done so some company can make money it should at least have a much higher bar, and price tag.
 
2021-02-25 12:07:25 PM  

Jeff5: Fursecution: Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.

I guess it takes money to make money.

I don't like eminent domain. If it's done for a public purpose, like a road or a National Park, I still don't much like it but understand.

If it's done so some company can make money it should at least have a much higher bar, and price tag.


It's done to have an improved infrastructure. I'm not sure why you think that the company that is funding the project shouldn't make a return. The whole point is to get a large supply of renewable energy to where there's large amounts of demand when needed.
Since Missouri is right next to Kansas, it already has access to this energy at minimal transmission losses.
Making local connections defeats the purpose of HVDC is against the whole purpose of the line.
There's no obligation to have people along the route benefit from the project.  As long as they are fairly compensated.
It's like pipelines. Just because it goes through your land doesn't mean the company is obligated to to get you your own special little princess connection.
 
2021-02-25 12:14:00 PM  

Fursecution: Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.


Not very feasible. Different construction of cables, so I don't think the same pylons would work.
 
2021-02-25 12:21:14 PM  

Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.


If it's a national scale infrastructure meant to transmit electricity for 700-1000 miles , with  minimal transmission losses, a substation every 50 miles is very onerous.
 
2021-02-25 1:00:05 PM  

His Mexcellency: Jeff5: Fursecution: Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.

I guess it takes money to make money.

I don't like eminent domain. If it's done for a public purpose, like a road or a National Park, I still don't much like it but understand.

If it's done so some company can make money it should at least have a much higher bar, and price tag.

It's done to have an improved infrastructure. I'm not sure why you think that the company that is funding the project shouldn't make a return. The whole point is to get a large supply of renewable energy to where there's large amounts of demand when needed.
Since Missouri is right next to Kansas, it already has access to this energy at minimal transmission losses.
Making local connections defeats the purpose of HVDC is against the whole purpose of the line.
There's no obligation to have people along the route benefit from the project.  As long as they are fairly compensated.
It's like pipelines. Just because it goes through your land doesn't mean the company is obligated to to get you your own special little princess connection.


I don't object to the company making a return.

I object to the government telling a landowner they have to let the company make a return across their land.
 
2021-02-25 1:09:25 PM  
Fursecution:

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.


Citation needed.
 
2021-02-25 3:30:17 PM  

fasahd: Fursecution:

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.

Citation needed.


Boop
 
2021-02-25 3:34:05 PM  

Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: Fursecution: Jeff5: His Mexcellency: Jeff5: They have a point, why should the landowners be forced to give up land they don't want to give up with no benefit?

They want to sell electricity sell some of it on Missouri.

They do benefit. They get paid for it
The question is why should the whole nation suffer because some guys want to over charge for their worthless land?

The Midwest has more wind energy potential than they can use.  It needs to be exported to load centers. These guys are halting the progress of the whole nation that's needs to update it's grid.

That's compensation for something happening to them against their will, not any sort of benefit.

Requiring a substation every 50 miles and that some of the electricity be sold to the affected areas doesn't strike me as onerous. I saw no requirement that they sell it cheaper there than at the intended destination, they are generating it to sell, just sell some of it in the communities they are using governmental power to run over.

It's high-voltage DC. They need special (expensive) components on both ends to do the AC conversion.
If I were them, I'd upgrade pylons of existing lines to carry the extra lines, but I don't know how feasible that is.

I guess it takes money to make money.

I don't like eminent domain. If it's done for a public purpose, like a road or a National Park, I still don't much like it but understand.

If it's done so some company can make money it should at least have a much higher bar, and price tag.

It's done to have an improved infrastructure. I'm not sure why you think that the company that is funding the project shouldn't make a return. The whole point is to get a large supply of renewable energy to where there's large amounts of demand when needed.
Since Missouri is right next to Kansas, it already has access to this energy at minimal transmission losses.
Making local connections defeats the purpose of HVDC is against the whole purpose of the line.
There's no obligation to have people along the route benefit from the project.  As long as they are fairly compensated.
It's like pipelines. Just because it goes through your land doesn't mean the company is obligated to to get you your own special little princess connection.

I don't object to the company making a return.

I object to the government telling a landowner they have to let the company make a return across their land.


So you object to infrastructure projects that benefit the nation.  How patriotic.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.