[var top_story_head]
Panel avoids climate
Published on -11/9/2007, 12:21 AM
Printer-friendly version
E-Mail This Story
Lawmakers' concern is reversal of KDHE decision
By CHRIS GREEN and
SARAH KESSINGER
Harris News Service
TOPEKA -- A legislative panel seeking to reverse a regulator's decision to block coal-fired power plants in southwest Kansas likely won't consider the generators' potential affects on global warming.
Lawmakers serving on the Electric Generation Review Panel say that determining whether science backs up last month's denial of a permit for Sunflower Electric isn't part of their committee's charge.
The six-member committee, which consists solely of project supporters, could help lead an effort to rewrite air-quality rules or draft other legislation designed to overturn the permit denied by Kansas Secretary of Health and Environment Rod Bremby.
The committee's approach prompts criticism from environmentalists. They argue that the committee's bias in favor of Sunflower prevents it from addressing the larger issue behind the ruling.
"There's a lot more diversity of opinion than what is reflected in those meetings," said Bob Eye, an environmental attorney based in Topeka and Lawrence. "The public is very much aware of greenhouse gases and global warming and they expect their leaders to do something about it."
Bremby decided to stop the Holcomb project because its carbon dioxide emissions could worsen global warming, a move that has outraged supporters who believe the $3.6 billion is crucial to the western Kansas economy.
The project would have emitted an estimated 11 million tons of CO2 annually, although the utility says it is developing environmental controls to partially reduce them.
Some lawmakers on the panel express skepticism about the scientific consensus that humans are influencing global warming.
They question whether it's reason enough to deny Sunflower's permit.
Panel member and state Sen. Jay Emler, R-Lindsborg, said Bremby didn't adequately defend his decision during the panel's Tuesday hearing, in part because he didn't explain what level of CO2 he considered to be dangerous.
That leaves lawmakers with little to explore as the scientific basis for Bremby's decision, he said.
Emler also says that Bremby didn't follow requirements set out in law or in an attorney general's opinion giving him leeway to deny permits to protect Kansans from air pollutants not regulated by state or federal laws.
But even if he had, Emler said, any regulation of CO2 needs to come through national policy and Kansas doesn't have the power to go it alone.
"We don't have the political clout in Washington to force this issue," said Emler, although some 36 states are now addressing the issue.
Legislative leaders formed the electric generation review panel earlier this fall to inquire why the permitting process had taken 15 months and to study possible changes to the state's clean-air laws.
The first meeting since the denial was Tuesday and lawmakers heard criticism of the decision from Earl Watkins, Jr., chief executive officer of Sunflower Electric.
Lawmakers also heard about the economic benefits of the plants and concerns from other utilities and industries about Bremby's ruling. The session ended with comments from Bremby and his agency's attorney.
The committee has heard from no scientists or other experts on carbon emissions or global warming. No environmental groups testified at the hearing.
The panel's chairman, Rep. Carl Holmes, R-Liberal, declined to answer questions from Harris News Service.
Craig Volland, air quality committee chairman for the Kansas Sierra Club, said his group, which supports Bremby's decision, didn't ask to present at the meeting. Nor was the group invited to do so, he said.
Volland said he believes legislative leaders clearly set up the committee to pressure Bremby into approving Sunflower's permit. As a result, he said the group sees little to be gained from bringing information about global warming to the panel.
"It would be essentially a waste of time," Volland said. "They're really not going to pursue that in an unbiased way."
Eye said he believes the inquiry is not serving the interests of the public, who wants to see global warming addressed.
"I suppose they can listen to the proponents of coal plants as much as they want, because it's their committee and they run it as they see fit," he said. "But I don't think it's consistent at all with what the public expects these discussions to focus on."
All six committee members have publicly supported the Sunflower project, none more so than Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton, and House Speaker Melvin Neufeld, R-Ingalls, who hope to reverse Bremby's decision.
Rep. Eber Phelps, D-Hays, and Sen. Janis Lee, D-Kensington, also serve on the committee with Emler, Holmes, Neufeld and Morris and also support the project.
The ties between lawmakers and the utility extend into campaign contributions. All six committee members received contributions from Sunflower last year and panel members have taken in $6,950 altogether since 1995, according to state records.
It is not unusual for top legislative leaders or members serving on a utilities committee to receive campaign donations from established power companies.
Emler said there's not a lot of cause to question the makeup of the committee.
After all, he, Holmes and Lee all serve as leaders on legislative utilities committees while Morris and Neufeld are their chamber's top leaders.
Those are exactly the type of lawmakers who'd be expected to serve on a panel dealing with a utilities issue of immense statewide importance, Emler said.
"You need to have people who," Emler said, "at least have some understanding of the issues involved."
Phelps admits the panel's slant could be seen to favor the needs of the power industry.
"As you see panels put together covering gaming, you seldom see people who are anti-gaming on the panel," Phelps said. "It's pretty much pro-gaming people. Just like if you have some committee on the aircraft industry, it's often people with a large amount of aircraft manufacturing background on that committee. It's not a precedent-setting move."
Morris said he's sure that lawmakers will have a debate on the evidence of climate change in the upcoming legislative session and whether it justified Bremby's decision.
"I think the scientific community is certainly divided on global warming, so there might be discussion on both sides," he said.
Most of what he's learned about global warming has been from reports on television saying there's more concern about the issue, Morris said.
"But I think the jury's still out on how significant a health threat it really is."
When it comes to granting Sunflower's permit, Morris said he expects his side to prevail after a "full and balanced debate on the issue."
"Ultimately people will realize we need to go ahead with those plants."
Yet Eye said Kansas is at a watershed moment, where it could move to more fully embrace wind, solar and other forms of renewable energy over fossil fuels.
Kansans will look back in 20 years with questions, he said: "Why didn't we regulate carbon dioxide sooner? And why didn't we convert to renewables much sooner rather throwing money after 19th century technology?"
"Those questions are going to emerge as indictments against our generation," Eye said. "It would be one thing if we didn't know about the greenhouse gas effects. But we do know."
