Printer-friendly version
E-Mail This Story
By MIKE CORN
Hays Daily News
Not so many years ago, Sunflower Electric wanted to build a single 600-megawatt coal-fired power plant.
And virtually nobody cared. Not the public, not the media, not the environmental groups.
At the lone public hearing conducted in Garden City virtually no one showed up, let alone protest.
"No written comments were filed," said Wayne Penrod, Sunflower Electric's environmental manager.
The air quality permit necessary to build the plant was routinely approved by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, he said.
It took about 15 months for the Sand Sage project, as it was called, to obtain a permit from KDHE.
That permit was ultimately issued Oct. 8, 2002. Construction didn't begin as planned and an 18-month extension was requested and granted.
The permit expired Oct. 8, 2005, without any construction taking place.
Along the way, it passed by the application process that is now under way.
Its demise fell on the lack of transmission lines to transfer the power that could have been produced by Sand Sage, which would have most likely been a "merchant" plant, producing electricity to sell on the open market.
Before that happened, Sunflower started talking with Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association and Golden Spread Electric Cooperative about the possibility of building three new 700-megawatt coal-fired power plants at its Holcomb facility. Initially, the idea was for Tri-State to pay for construction of two of the plants, while Golden Spread would take the bulk of the remaining plant. Sunflower's six member cooperatives would take the rest, and Midwest Energy in Hays would purchase 75 megawatts of power from the plant.
The permitting process, quite simply, hasn't been nearly as easy as the Sand Sage project.
It's now nearly 15 months later, and KDHE Secretary Rod Bremby is mulling over a decision on what to do about a permit for two of the proposed plants. Tri-State, along the way, opted not to build one plant.
Bremby is promising to make a decision by month's end, and on Tuesday acknowledged that his air quality bureau had recommended approval of the permit.
But there are now many other factors at play in Bremby's decision-making process:
* His bosses, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson have come out opposed to the notion of coal-fired plants, favoring renewable energy instead.
* The Kansas Sierra Club, with the backing of the national organization, and chapters in Missouri and San Francisco, for example, have waged war on the permitting process. Thursday, the Sierra Club launched an advertising campaign in western Kansas against the plant. The group has already filed a lawsuit against KDHE, as have Raymond and Sarah Dean, a Lawrence couple who asked KDHE to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.
* The Deans' lawsuit might be bolstered -- depending on who is talking -- by an April 2 U.S. Supreme Court decision and a Sept. 24 attorney general's opinion that says Bremby can deny or modify a permit if he determines that "a particular emission constitutes air pollution... ."
The Supreme Court ruling could support that as well, although proponents and opponents of the plants disagree on what effect it might have.
"Under the clear terms of the Clean Air Act, EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do," Justice Paul Stevens wrote for the 5-4 majority court.
No matter, says Sunflower spokesman Steve Miller.
"I can't see that at all," Miller said of Bremby's decision hinging on the Supreme Court ruling. "That was about cars, not about power plants."
Perhaps, said Craig Volland, a spokesman for the Kansas Sierra Club, but it's not much of leap from cars to power plants.
"I think KDHE has really been put in a box by the ruling," Volland said. "There's a definitive connection between the Supreme Court ruling -- and I'm not an attorney -- and the KDHE deliberations."
Volland and Miller also disagree on what they think KDHE will ultimately do on the air quality permit.
Volland, for example, no longer thinks the agency will "tweak the permit and pass it on through."
Now, he's thinking that if they don't reject the permits outright, there would be some conditions attached.
That's also what Rep. Eber Phelps, D-Hays, is thinking. Phelps is one of the six representatives on the newly created Electric Generation Review Panel in the Legislature.
"The modification thing I think could probably be something he's considering," Phelps said of what Bremby might ultimately do.
While that might be speculation, Phelps admits, it's something that he picked up on when Bremby was meeting with the committee on Wednesday.
Miller said there's just no way to know what Bremby will do.
* * *
There's a world of difference between the environment KDHE faced when it was asked to rule on the Sand Sage permit and what is happening now.
With Sand Sage, virtually nobody objected to the notion of building another plant.
"It wasn't really on our radar," Volland said of that proposed power plant.
With the current permit, Volland said, attention turned because at one time it would have been the largest energy center west of the Missisippi River.
Miller is quick to admit that the difference rests with the objections filed by others.
"Not just the Sierra Club, but environmental groups," he said.
Volland said his group sponsored a regional meeting on global warming in 2000, and the focus turned to coal.
Sierra also fought KCP&L and its quest to build coal plants. In fact, the two reached agreement for Sierra to drop a lawsuit and the utility company moved ahead with big renewable energy plans and conservation measures.
Sierra has been working with Sunflower as well, Volland said, but hasn't been able to reach a compromise.
Miller, however, thinks environmental groups should be working with Sunflower on its efforts to make its generation plants carbon-neutral.
"This is the right policy," he said. "This is the right thing to do. The environmental groups ought to be out here helping us expand the bioenergy center."
"This is really in its infancy," Volland countered of the bioenergy center. "We're very early in the process. It's experimental."
* * *
Miller scoffs at the idea of Sunflower scrapping the plants.
"Not possible," he said.
If a permit is rejected, two possible scenarios exist: determining what demands on the system might be and purchasing power off the open market or see if a natural gas plant is warranted.
But it costs more to produce electricity with gas.
If Sunflower loses its partners, it could lose its plans for the bioenergy center as well.
"We don't have the money to do that," Miller said.
It's questionable if a series of transmissions lines -- touted as a means to move wind power around the state -- would be built without the Holcomb power, he said.
Wind power, Miller said, can be included in the inventory, but there is still a need for the base load -- the every day use that must be constantly available.
That's important to Phelps as well.
"As an elected official, the last thing you want to hear is shortage," he said, noting that it doesn't matter if it's dealing with electricity or wheat.
Cost is another concern.
For Volland, however, the threat to the environment from greenhouse gases outweighs some of the cost concerns.
Even if prices double.
"That's not the end of the world," he notes.
Most people could afford that increase, Volland said, and the shock can be tempered with better insulation and the use of more efficient light bulbs. Helping poor people who are unable to pay the increased bills, he said, should be a top priority for Kansas and other states.
Volland and the Sierra Club are strong proponents of enhancing wind energy's portfolio.
While he's in favor of making some scenic sites off-limits, Volland said much of the state should be targeted for use.
"I think it's perfectly fine for Ellis County," Volland said, referring to the controversy that has swirled around the idea of a wind farm southwest of Hays. "But I don't live there. So that's up to you."
* * *
The one thing that both Volland and Miller agree on is that the case could end up in court.
Volland unequivocally says his group would be willing to go to court to stop construction.
What form that might take is uncertain, depending on what is ultimately decided by Bremby.
"I hope that doesn't happen," Miller said of a lawsuit ultimately deciding the issue, "because that's not good for the ratepayers."
Special-projects coordinator Mike Corn can be reached at (785) 628-1081, Ext. 129, or by e-mail at mcorn@dailynews.net.
COMMENT ON THIS STORY
All comments are subject to approval before being posted. Please keep comments constructive and relevant. Opinions certainly can be expressed, but comments that are rude, abusive, slanderous, threatening, sexually oriented, contain profanity or are vulgar will not be tolerated. Comments will not be edited. Any comment that violates the above-listed rules will be deleted.
