Power
Plant Rejected Over Carbon Dioxide For First Time
By
Steven Mufson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 19,
2007; A01
The
Kansas Department of Health and Environment yesterday became the first
government agency in the United States to cite carbon dioxide emissions as the
reason for rejecting an air permit for a proposed coal-fired electricity
generating plant, saying that the greenhouse gas threatens public health and
the environment.
The
decision marks a victory for environmental groups that are fighting proposals
for new coal-fired plants around the country. It may be the first of a series
of similar state actions inspired by a Supreme Court decision in April that
asserted that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide should be considered
pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
In
the past, air permits, which are required before construction of combustion
facilities, have been denied over emissions such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides and mercury. But Roderick L. Bremby, secretary of the Kansas Department
of Health and Environment, said yesterday that "it would be irresponsible
to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and
other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our
environment and health if we do nothing."
The
Kansas agency's decision caps a controversy
over a proposal by Sunflower Electric Power, a rural electrical cooperative, to
build a pair of big, 700-megawatt, coal-fired plants in Holcomb, a town in the
western part of the state, at a cost of about $3.6 billion. One unit would have
supplied power to parts of Kansas; the other, to be owned by another rural
co-op, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, would have provided
electricity to fast-growing eastern Colorado.
Together
the plants would have produced 11 million tons of carbon dioxide annually,
nearly as much as a group of eight Northeastern states hope to save by 2020
through a mandatory cap-and-trade program they plan to impose. The attorneys
general from those states had written a letter opposing the permit.
The
proposed Holcomb plants had become the center of a political dispute in Kansas,
inflaming traditional tensions between the eastern and western parts of the state,
dividing labor unions and posing a test for the energy policies of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who is head of the
Democratic Governors Association and is believed to harbor aspirations for
federal office.
Kansas,
long a conservative Republican stronghold, is not generally considered to be on
the leading edge of environmental causes. The GOP leadership in both the state Senate and House of Representatives endorsed the project.
Although the regional United Steelworkers union opposed the plant,
the state AFL-CIO supported it.
"Now
the Sebelius administration rockets to the forefront of the states [working] to
solve the global warming crisis," said Bruce Nilles, a Sierra Club lawyer.
Like
many governors, Sebelius has been promoting the expanded use of renewable
energy, especially wind. In her state of the state address this year, she said:
"The question of where we get our energy is . . . no longer just an
economic issue, nor solely an issue of national security. Quite simply, we have
a moral obligation to be good stewards of this state."
But
she said she was leaving the air permit decision on the Holcomb plants to
Bremby, her close political ally.
Tri-State
and Sunflower spokesmen sharply criticized the decision and said they were
examining their legal options. Bremby's decision "has no basis in law or
regulation," said Steve Miller, a Sunflower spokesman. "We
still believe fiercely that this is the right project, that this is the right
thing to do for customers and that the secretary has made a horrible
error."
Miller
said that Sebelius had pledged not to oppose the plants but that her position
was clear after her "moral steward" remark. "That implies that
we're not moral stewards of the land, which we don't appreciate one bit,"
he said.
Lee
Boughey, a spokesman for Tri-State, said Bremby had disregarded his own staff,
which had recommended issuing the permit.
The
plants' powerful supporters included the speaker of the state House, Melvin
Neufeld, who had earlier gathered the signatures of 46 GOP members, including
key committee chairmen, for a letter to Bremby. The letter said, "Without
your approval of the permit as proposed by Sunflower, our state and its
citizens will lose access to the low-cost energy source and millions in
economic development." Thirty-one Republican House members declined to
sign the letter.
Neufeld
said the plants would bring in new tax revenue, create hundreds of jobs, prompt
the expansion of transmission lines that could also be used for wind power and
keep energy costs low for Kansans by producing enough power to export to other
states.
But
the plants had aroused strong opposition, especially in the half-dozen eastern
counties from Topeka to Kansas City, which have enough voters to carry
statewide elections.
Bob
Eye, a former state legislator, said of yesterday's decision: "Is it
without precedent? Yes, as far as I know, in this state or any other." But
he argued that "CO{-2} . . . is a pollutant, not just because the Sierra
Club says it, but because the Supreme Court said it."
Holcomb's
previous claim to fame had been the savage murders that Truman Capote described in his book "In
Cold Blood." Holcomb was a place, Capote wrote, that stood "on the
high wheat plains of western Kansas, a lonesome area that other Kansans call
'out there.' "
But
Eye argued that wind projects were building a new constituency for renewable
energy resources even "out there" among the people who were supposed
to be the biggest backers of Sunflower's plans. FPL Group, a Florida power firm with a wind farm in Kansas,
said it is making payments to about 30 landowners there.
Sunflower,
which already has a smaller coal-fired plant in Holcomb, has portrayed the
proposed plants as part of a "bio-energy center" that would include
an ethanol plant and an $86 million facility that would use a
still-experimental algae process to capture carbon dioxide emissions from the
proposed generating units. But one investor in the center had pulled out before
yesterday's decision.
Even without yesterday's permit denial, the Holcomb project faced economic challenges. A proposal to build a third new unit there was dropped earlier. Tri-State must also meet a renewable portfolio standard adopted recently by Colorado. (Tri-State supported the measure.) That requires utilities to use renewable energy sources to meet 10 percent of their sales. Because Tri-State's purchases of hydropower do not count, it uses less than 1 percent renewable resources. Two-thirds of its power comes from coal. It is negotiating to acquire some wind power.