2/16/2008

By DUANE SCHRAG

Salina Journal

The question no longer is whether a new coal plant will be built in Holcomb, but how big it will be, said Rep. Charlie Roth.

"It looks like both sides have conceded a coal plant will be built," said Roth, R-Salina. On one side is Sunflower Electric, Hays, which initially proposed three 700 megawatt units but ultimately requested permission to build two. About three-fourths of the electricity is to be purchased by people outside Kansas.

On the other side is Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, whose Kansas Department of Health and Environment four months ago denied the permit to build the 1,400 MW plant, citing concerns that the 2.8 million pounds per hour of carbon dioxide from the plant would contribute to global warming.

Sebelius' subsequent proposal of a single 600 MW unit was rejected by Sunflower.

On Thursday, the Senate approved a bill that would clear the way for construction of a plant with two 700 MW units. Sens. Pete Brungardt, R-Salina, and Jay Emler, R-Lindsborg, were among those voting in favor of the bill.

That bill could be taken up as soon as Monday by the House. The vote in the Senate -- it passed 33-7 -- indicates there is enough support to override a governor's veto. The big question is whether the House will do the same.

Brungardt was somewhat ambivalent about the bill adopted by the Senate.

"I don't know if it's a good bill," he said. "We are going to need more power in the future. Conservation is a good thing to talk about, but our demand for power will increase."

The plant, which would cost $3.6 billion, would create hundreds of temporary jobs during construction and 105 full-time jobs to operate the plant. Brungardt said electricity demand outside the state ensures a power plant will be built, one way or another.

"I think it's very likely it would be built in Colorado or Oklahoma or Texas," he said.

Opponents of the plant suggest just the opposite: Kansas was chosen because it was viewed as being less hostile to a new coal plant than any of the surrounding states.

Emler, who is chairman of the Senate Utilities Committee, has been sharply critical of the decision by Rod Bremby, secretary of KDHE, to cite carbon dioxide emissions as the basis for withholding the permit, even though carbon dioxide is not yet regulated at the state or federal level.

The most positive thing about the bill is that it "returns us to the rule of law instead of the rule of whim," said Emler.

Because of Bremby's decision, an ethanol plant that was to be built in Kansas will be built in Texas instead, he said. In addition, Emler said he has spoken with other groups that told him the decision convinced them not to establish a new business in the state. He declined to name the businesses or their lines of work.

Critics of the coal plant have argued that Americans should address its projected energy needs by limiting consumption and relying more on renewable sources. In the past two years, interest in wind energy in Kansas has skyrocketed.

Roth doubted those measure would suffice.

"I don't think wind and conservation or efficiency is going to do the deal unless people are interested in a real change in their lifestyle," he said.

Ironically, Sunflower is pushing for a much larger plant than it needs because it is unable to get financing for a project that would meet only its needs. Roth said Sunflower needs only 200 MW but cannot get financing on its own.

He was uncertain how the Legislature might react to a proposal that would help Sunflower obtain financing for a 600 MW plant.

"A lot of us would have liked to have the governor and Sunflower resolve this," Roth said.

n Reporter Duane Schrag can be reached at 822-1422 or by e-mail at dschrag@salina.com.

---

Discuss This Story:

---