Kansas Coal Power Proposal a Significant Risk to Ratepayers

Tue, 2008-03-25 10:42Kevin Grandia
Kevin Grandia's picture

Kansas Coal Power Proposal a Significant Risk to Ratepayers

A new report has been released providing further evidence that Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius made the right decision in vetoing a Bill calling for the expansion of coal-fired electricity generation in that State.

The report, prepared by financial research firm Innovest Strategic Value Advisors, concludes that the proposed coal-fired plant in Kansas could end up costing consumers between $22.4 million and $51.6 million annually.

Innovest found that:

the decision to build new coal generating capacity will put Sunflower Electric’s ratepayers – who in this particular case are the actual owners – at significant risk.”

Even in the face of this recent study and the well-documented negative environmental impacts of coal-fired electrical generation, State legislators have already introduced a second bill trying to ramrod through the expansion proposal.

Check out Solve Climate for an in-depth look at the Innovest report.

Comments

Pretty much kills the “deniers’ ” argument that measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would destroy the economy and make us all poor.

Excellent work, Gov. Sebelius!

So…why don’t you disclose who actually paid for this “study” by this credible “firm?”

The answer - it was funded by NRDC.

So how can this study be viewed as an unbiased view of the situation.

The answer….

IT CAN’T!

Another thing you fail to mention here…..
The analysis is flawed in at least two critical aspects: 1) failure to analyze increasing gas price risks (reliance on Nov 2007 EPRI data “reported” in the New York Times and 2) omission of phased CCS retrofit potential at Sunflower , i.e., installing CCS technology such as chilled ammonia in 2030 when carbon prices increase (and gas is through the roof), to reduce exposure to carbon allowance costs.

Hmmmm……biased studies at their finest!

[x]
A U.S. District Court judge ruled on June 27 that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service both wrongly approved expansion of the West Elk coal mine in Somerset, Colo., because they failed to take into account the economic impacts greenhouse gas emissions from the mining would have.
 
The federal agencies said it was impossible to quantify such impacts, but the court pointed out a tool is...
read more