I had the honor of being part of a panel discussion on Colorado’s New Energy Economy at the “Building to Be the Change” Conference in Denver on January 13. My colleagues on the panel talked about promising news from Congress, Colorado’s new Democratic Governor, investment opportunities, etc. I, on the other hand, felt the need to sound a warning about “The New Coal Rush” spreading across Colorado, America, and the World.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We’ve heard a lot lately about clean energy: solar, wind, biomass, efficiency, etc. Yet the vast majority of our electricity still comes from burning fossil fuels, mostly coal. The utility industry is aware of global warming, and see the writing on the wall that some form of “carbon regulation” (caps, taxes, or ?) is almost sure to happen … maybe even before the Bush Administration leaves
Washington(?!).
Until then, however, utilities are scrambling to build as many new coal plants as possible in an effort to “grandfather them in” before any new regulations occur:
- 2-3 new coal plants in
Colorado &
Kansas;
- 11 new coal plants in
Texas
- As many as 150 more new coal plants throughout the rest of the
U.S.;
- And as many as 500 more new coal plants throughout the rest of the World!
And they’re only “new” in the sense of when they come on-line. Utilities say these will be their “cleanest coal plants ever,” with filters, scrubbers, and other technologies that lessen the total amount of emissions. But these plants will still use essentially 19th-Century technology: pulverize the coal, burn it to spin the turbines, and send all the waste through smokestacks and into the sky.
You may have also heard more about other clean coal technologies like carbon sequestration (i.e. “burying emissions underground”), IGCC (convert waste heat from coal into a gas and burn it again), etc.
But almost none of these new coal plants will take advantage of them. There is also currently no way to retrofit pulverized coal plants in order to accommodate these clean technologies, so the industry really is trying to “grandfather them in!”
Xcel Energy and “Comanche 3”
To be fair, Xcel Energy has come a long way since they opposed the “Amendment 37” campaign for a Colorado Renewable Energy Standard in 2004. Most notably, they now include wind power – and soon solar power – as part of their own “baseload” electricity. Xcel will probably meet their own Amendment 37 requirements (of at least 10% of their electricity coming from renewable energy) as early as next year, about seven years ahead of schedule. They will also take their own shot at IGCC, upgrading an existing coal plant near Brush over the next few years (although they’ll face significant costs, while only treating a small percentage of the waste heat). And Xcel’s CEO Dick Kelly is saying all the right things about environmental protection, fighting global warming, etc. But then, there’s also the Comanche 3 coal plant.
Thanks to an agreement with a large coalition of environmental groups like CRES, Xcel is building the Comanche 3 plant while promising increased energy efficiency and renewable energy efforts elsewhere in its system. And thanks to Ratepayers United of Colorado (Leslie Glustrom, Alison Burchell, et. al.) and other groups, Xcel has still not received all of the approvals it needs. So Comanche 3 is not yet a “done deal.”
Comanche 3 is also 25% owned by Intermountain Rural Electric Association (IREA), a rural co-op based in
Sedalia, CO. Rural co-op’s don’t usually own their own power plants, so IREA is now not only responsible for part of its construction, but also for whatever liabilities may arise over the next 50 years or so (e.g. carbon taxes, an eventual white elephant of a power plant, etc.). IREA’s General Manager himself has admitted that he did not include the possibility of any carbon taxes or additional costs from carbon regulation when making the decision to join in on Comanche 3, thus exposing its customers to unprecedented financial risks. That may be part of IREA’s own efforts to prolong the “debate” over global warming, but that’s for another conversation.
Tri-State and the Holcomb Coal Plants
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association of Westminster, Colorado, is part of a rural electricity landscape that’s so convoluted and complicated that I would need more like 5 hours than 5 minutes to explain it!
Tri-State is a “co-op of co-op’s,” generating and supplying electricity to its 44 member co-op’s in
Colorado,
New Mexico,
Wyoming, and
Western Nebraska. Through their own opposition to Amendment 37 (even though it did not pertain to them … !) and other past experience, they are not at all “renewable-friendly.”
Tri-State is currently filing a new “Integrated Resource Plan” (IRP). Tri-State evaluated all of the different resources available for producing electricity, and (surprise!) decided on pulverized coal for most of its future needs. They’ll spend $3 to $6 billion on these new coal plants in Western Kansas, and those costs will ultimately get passed on to individuals & businesses in those rural areas, many of whom are already having enough trouble paying their bills.
This plan blatantly ignores the fact that Tri-State’s service territory has some of the most abundant renewable energy resources in
America:
- steady winds throughout
Wyoming and the Eastern Plains;
- over 300 days of sunlight throughout
Southern Colorado and
New Mexico;
- geothermal resources in
Western Colorado;
- and biomass resources available almost everywhere in Tri-State’s territory.
It is even more ignorant of how much water is needed for coal-fired electricity, especially considering the years-long drought in most of the Eastern Plains. Tri-State plans on using groundwater for these new coal plants, to which they have rights for the next 50 years … !
To simplify: Tri-State wants to take coal from its Wyoming mines, put it on trains that’ll run through Colorado to Holcomb, Kansas (where there is already one coal plant, and where they want to build two more), upgrade the transmission lines between Kansas and Colorado (not necessarily a bad thing, and a whole other discussion in and of itself), and then send the electricity back into Tri-State territory.
Even though the ultimate consumers of this electricity could – and should – keep their money in their communities through local renewable energy development, they will instead have to send their money out of their community – and even out of state – for their electricity.
AND Even by Tri-State’s own projections, this plan will cause retail electricity rates to increase 50-70% over the next 30 years … ?!
Tri-State also has yet to answer why they’re building enough capacity to supply almost double what they project their customers will need over the next 30 years … ? While they have yet to officially admit it, the answer is almost certainly oil shale.
To provide some background: the last time oil shale development was all the rage on
Colorado’s Western Slope was in the 1970s. The Colorado Ute Electric Association built a coal-fired plant to supply Exxon with all the electricity they needed in order to bake the ground(?) and boil the oil out of it. Then Exxon abruptly abandoned its oil shale operations in 1982, and Colorado Ute was stuck with a glut of excess capacity and nobody to buy it. They filed for bankruptcy, and Tri-State was the company that eventually rose from the ashes.
While oil shale may indeed make a comeback on the Western Slope, Tri-State is completely ignoring the boom-and-bust cycle that has become such an integral part of energy development in the West, and was even responsible for its own creation! In fact, while going through the approval process for these new plants, the price of coal has nearly doubled. Prices for steel, concrete, and other raw materials have also risen enough to now make construction of these plants much less attractive. Railroad infrastructure (now used almost exclusively for coal) is in such dire need of repairs and upgrades that it could also jeopardize the whole project through supply disruptions or ?.
People Power is making sure that this plan is not going smoothly for Tri-State. Protests against the coal plants have erupted all over Tri-State territory, and in
Kansas. Some of Tri-State’s member co-op’s have voluntarily “opted in” to Amendment 37, and have refused to sign the contract extension Tri-State needs in order to pay for the new plants.
Thanks also to the efforts of groups like Western Resource Advocates, Environment Colorado, Sierra Club, and others, Tri-State is starting to water down its original plans. While neither of the two new coal plants are needed for actual customer demand over the next 30-50 years, Tri-State may already be taking one of these plants off the table, and reducing the size of the other plant.
To be fair, Tri-State has started offering reduced-cost “Renewable Energy Credits” where customers of member co-op’s can pay a few extra dollars each month to have renewable energy come to them from outside Tri-State territory. This is roughly where Xcel was when it introduced its WindSource program back in the late 1990s: “you can have renewable energy, but you’ll have to pay extra for it.”
But this, and especially Tri-State’s role in The New Coal Rush, is nowhere near where they should be:
- It’s nowhere near where they should be if they want to encourage local economic development for its member co-op’s (e.g. by encouraging the Ag community to produce electricity as another “cash crop”).
- It’s nowhere near where they should be if they want to provide electricity at more stable prices over the next 50 years.
- It’s nowhere near where they should be if they want to preserve groundwater supplies in their territory.
- And it’s absolutely nowhere near where they should be if they want to fight global warming. These two new coal plants alone would produce as many greenhouse gases as would be prevented by Amendment 37.
How Can WE “Be the Change” to Stop the New Coal Rush?
- Xcel:o www.ratepayersunited.org / www.cleanenergycolorado.org o Stay up-to-date on developments with the
Colorado
State Legislature (many bills in ’07 re: energy, transmission, etc.),
Colorado PUC (s/b MUCH more renewable-friendly under Gov. Ritter),
et. al.- Tri-State / Co-op’s:
o Find out who is where
-> http://www.tristategt.org/OurMembers/system-map.cfm,
and then click on your co-op to go to its website.
o Get informed (bylaws, board meetings, etc.)
o VOTE for “the right” board members
(with small customer bases, and even smaller voter turnout,
your vote really DOES count in a co-op)
o OR RUN for your co-op board yourself!
(see above)
- Other
o Tell contacts in Tri-State co-op’s about this,
and get them INVOLVED!
(stress economic concerns over environmental ones, though)
o Become as energy efficient, carbon-neutral, etc. as YOU can
(i.e. it isn’t easy to “boycott” a utility)
o Take yourself off the grid (that IS boycotting the utility!)
- Additional Resources:
o www.cres-energy.org o www.environmentcolorado.orgo www.westernresources.org
o I will also be available all night for any other information you might want about Xcel, IREA(!), Tri-State, and The New Coal Rush.
Thank You, and I hope you’ll join us to “Be the Change” in order to stop The New Coal Rush!PvH
