Friday, September 25, 2015

Kansas hike rate increases residents energy bill [Edit]

On September 24, 2015, the Kansas Corporation Commission approved a $78 million hike rate for Westar Energy, the largest electric company in Kansas. Due to the new hike rate, residents energy bill will rise about $5 to $7 a month per customer starting November 2015. This increase is going to be detrimental to the many struggling low and middle-class citizens throughout Kansas. 

The hike rate will be used for upgrades due to outdated coal power plants near LaCygne. The Kansas Corporation Commission have decided to continue to use these plants for 20 years longer than initially planned. This means they will continue to pollute the environment way past the year 2045.

The residents of Kansas should united to oppose this continued operation of the air-polluting coal power plant, especially since it was supposed to be shut down by 2025, which is still ten years away. Kansas residents should be outraged that this hike rate is justified by the Kansas Corporation Commission on the basis of keeping that power plant in operation. Instead, the increased revenue should be used for increasing use of renewable energy, such as solar power. Some residents may be happier knowing that their increased monthly bill is paying for a good cause, but not something that is outdated and obsolete. For more information, this article can be found here (KENT article here).

20 comments:

  1. The changes that you made we very good. I personally would still try to take out the persuasion that is in the last paragraph "The residents of Kansas should unite to oppose this continued air polluting coal power plants..." and "Kansas residents should be outraged that this hike rate is justified..." Its important that the reader comes up with their own opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Paragraph 1:
    -Sept. 24, 2015
    - change "is going to" to "may" (don't want to make false claims)
    Paragraph 2:
    -Kansas Corporation Commission *has*
    -take out "way past the year" and change to "until after 2045."
    Paragraph 3
    -"should unite" -- if this is an editorial, you can say "should" otherwise, you might consider a different word.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think the changes you made were needed and necessary for the flow of the article. In the last paragraph, "The residents of Kansas should united" should either be "be united or should unite.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is ironic, you made the two major changes I had mentioned in the original post. :) Great edited version. In the paragraph "Kansas residents ...." change United, to Unite. Other than that, looks great!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I like Olivia Marshalls comments on this, I feel like with those changes this would be a great post. Overall this post flows really well.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Due to the new hike rate, residents energy bill will rise about $5 to $7 a month per customer starting November 2015. "Residents" needs to be plural and possessive, change to residents'.

    ReplyDelete
  8. There are also some opinions remaining in the article that need to be omitted. Remember to keep articles objective.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I thought these changes were good and well thought out. I agree, the persuasion needs to be taken out at the end of the article.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good article. and this is still BS.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Awesome job! The only thing I saw was in the third paragraph take the d off united or make phrase it differently.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I thought the edit was good! There is still some opinion that needs to be fixed, but it was a great edit!

    ReplyDelete
  13. The changes made really helped delete the subjective, bias tone from the previous version. New headline is also way better because it tells us what the story will be about.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "The residents of Kansas should unite..." This still presents an opinion, but other than that, I like the new edits and the headline fits well with the story. Good job!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Good edit. Definitely made the article more objective.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good edit. Definitely made the article more objective.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think that the head line is better than the original post. It grabs the readers attention well. I also agree there are some opinions but other than that I thought you did a great job editing

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think that the headline is better than the original post. It grabs the readers attention well. I also agree there are some opinions but other than that I thought you did a great job editing

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good job! I agree with Kara, the opinion need to avoid.

    ReplyDelete