[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Kansas' energy future contains coal and wind  

With a lump of coal in one hand and the prairie wind in the other, Kansas is marching into its energy future.

The state is poised to approve one of the largest coal power plants ever built west of the Mississippi, even as officials announced plans last week for transmission lines designed to encourage more wind farms.

To utility companies and key officials, this is the right direction. They say the state must embrace an energy mix of coal and wind and that pitting the two sources against each other is wrongheaded.

“Adding wind generation to the Kansas electrical generation portfolio is part of the solution – but we cannot expect it to be the solution,” Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said in a written statement.

But environmental groups want a greater focus on wind and conservation. They argue that another big coal plant – and its carbon emissions – is the wrong direction as concerns about global climate change mount.

Tom Thompson of the Kansas Sierra Club said that with all the talk about wind energy and conservation, a new coal plant is “a self-defeating proposition.”

“Kansas has the third greatest potential for wind in the country,” Thompson said. “We should be able to do better.”

While the debate plays out, developments show Kansas’ energy future is starting now:

• Transmission line regulators announced plans last week to create new lines that will knit eastern and western Kansas, and allow much greater production and transmission of wind energy. Already, utility companies have announced plans to surpass Sebelius’ goal of generating 10 percent of the state’s energy through wind by 2010.

• State environmental regulators are expected to announce soon whether to grant a permit for Sunflower Electric’s plans to build two new, 700-megawatt coal-fired power generators near Holcomb. Much of the energy will go to customers out of state.

The two developments may appear to have little in common, but they highlight the state’s energy strategy: Work to expand renewable, clean energy sources like wind while depending on tried-and-true sources like coal.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment continues to review Sunflower’s permit application. A Sunflower spokesman said the company hopes to have a permit by the end of summer.

The plant prompted criticism in Kansas and complaints from officials in California, New York and six other states.

Initially, Sunflower proposed three generators, but rising construction costs and environmental concerns prompted it to scale back.

It’s part of a national trend. As the Wall Street Journal reported last week, nearly two dozen of the 150 or so coal plants in development in the U.S. have been shelved, canceled or scaled back. The Journal cited rising costs and environmental worries.

States like Florida are focusing instead on conservation efforts as power plant proposals are put on hold. Other projects have been canceled in Oregon, North Carolina and Texas.

Sunflower officials say the new plant will employ the latest technology to capture sulfur and mercury emissions.

“The cleanliness of this plant will be second to none,” said Sunflower spokesman Steve Miller. “We are committed to providing the lowest possible cost for the most reliable energy.”

Rep. Vaughn Flora, a Topeka Democrat who pushed a failed attempt to stop the plant, said he’ll watch to make sure Sunflower runs a clean plant.

A study released last week found some Kansas and Missouri power plants to be among the worst in the nation for carbon and mercury pollution.

That study, by the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project, reviewed emissions and pollution from 378 U.S. power plants. The report said Kansas City Power and Light’s Montrose plant was seventh worst for mercury pollution; Sunflower’s existing Holcomb plant was 11th worst. Westar Energy’s Lawrence plant was ranked 12th worst for carbon emissions.

Sebelius angered some environmentalists by saying coal will continue to play a vital role in Kansas’ energy mix. Sebelius, whose office has successfully pushed for greater wind energy, has chosen negotiation with utilities over mandates or difficult political fights.

This pragmatism appears to be achieving results. In January, Sebelius pressured utilities to generate 10 percent of the state’s power through wind by 2010. Wind generates about 3.6 percent of the state’s electricity, but projects in the works will boost that number to 11 percent by the 2010 deadline.

“With the track that we’re on, I think we’ll have more wind energy than any other state in the nation on a per-capita basis” in 2010, said Rep. Carl Holmes, a Republican from Liberal and the chairman of the Kansas Electric Transmission Authority.

By David Klepper
Eagle Topeka bureau

The Wichita Eagle

30 July 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter