Oct. 9--PacifiCorp is considering building three conventional coal-fired power plants by 2014, an approach that has angered Oregon consumer groups and public officials critical of the pollutants the facilities would emit.

"They're talking about investing billions in old-fashioned coal," said Jason Eisdorfer, an attorney for ratepayer advocacy group Citizens' Utility Board. "We have repeatedly said that it's unhealthy for both the planet and PacifiCorp customers to acquire more coal resources."

PacifiCorp officials say they're still a long way from deciding whether to build the coal plants. The proposal will be used as the benchmark for a rigorous bidding process that will yield the least expensive, lowest-risk option -- perhaps not only coal, company officials said.

PacifiCorp would build any new plants in Utah and Wyoming and use the electricity primarily for customers in those states. Still, Oregon ratepayers probably would be asked to foot roughly 25 percent of the bill because PacifiCorp treats its territory as a single system, basing its allocation of costs on how much electricity each state consumes.

Utah represents PacifiCorp's biggest and fastest-growing region, accounting for about 45 percent of total demand.

The anger that PacifiCorp has whipped up in Oregon illustrates just how controversial it has become for utilities in high-growth territories to add large amounts of traditional generation to their portfolios. As a regulated utility, PacifiCorp is required to provide low-cost, reliable electricity to its customers. But, increasingly, it also must address the rising demand for renewable energy and a declining tolerance for greenhouse gas emissions.

Power plants are responsible for an estimated 40 percent of the country's carbon dioxide, or CO2, emissions, which have been linked to global warming. Coal-fired power plants account for roughly half of the electricity produced in this country and 80 percent of the CO2 pollution.

A new-generation coal-fueled plant -- with the cumbersome moniker "integrated gasification combined cycle" -- would dramatically reduce pollutants and sequester, or geologically isolate, CO2 emissions. But commercialization may be many years away.

PacifiCorp has incorporated a gasification plant into its proposal, but not until 2014 after two, maybe three, more traditional coal plants come online.

These three plants would use so-called supercritical steam, which increases the efficiency of converting coal to power and reduces carbon dioxide emissions, PacifiCorp said.

But that's not good enough for consumer groups, which say PacifiCorp needs to pursue renewable energy and conservation programs more aggressively. Then, they say, the utility might be able to put off building a coal plant until gasification technologies are perfected.

"Are we at loggerheads with PacifiCorp?" Eisdorfer said. "You bet we are."

State officials also don't like the path PacifiCorp appears to be taking.

"It's hard to reconcile PacifiCorp's view of the world with the carbon-constrained world we actually live in," the Oregon Department of Energy wrote in comments filed with state utility regulators.

In the documents, energy officials criticized the proposal and cited evidence linking greenhouse gases to global warming. The construction of coal plants, the documents noted, would clash with Gov. Ted Kulongoski's efforts to combat global warming, limit carbon emissions and rely more heavily on renewable energy.

Energy officials urged the Oregon Public Utility Commission to require the utility to re-evaluate the costs of coal plants, factoring in higher-priced environmental requirements. California recently became the first state to impose limits on greenhouse gas emissions, and other states are certain to follow, officials noted.

PacifiCorp is no stranger to coal. Last year, almost 68 percent of the energy used by its 1.6 million customers -- 527,000 in Oregon -- came from coal-fired plants.

Although it has added a few large wind farms to its portfolio in recent months, renewable energy remains a relatively small piece of its portfolio pie. Realistically, renewables can only complement 24- hour, workhorse power plants fueled by coal or natural gas, PacifiCorp said.

The utility has no coal plants in Oregon. It hasn't built a coal plant since the mid-1980s, before the merger of Pacific Power and Utah Power.

PacifiCorp is now owned by MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a holding of billionaire investor Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway.

Environmental regulations and technological changes have upped the price tag in recent years -- an average-size coal plant can cost $1 billion and take four years to build -- but the economics still remain attractive, PacifiCorp officials said.

"It's the least expensive option out there," said Greg Duvall, PacifiCorp's resource planning director.

Duvall emphasized that PacifiCorp doesn't know yet what the final plan will look like. Nevertheless, he acknowledged, the final plan "will certainly have some coal."

Before PacifiCorp's proposal can enter the bidding process, it must pass muster with regulators in each of the states in which it operates. Rulings by the Oregon and Utah commissions are considered the most important. Almost 80 percent of PacifiCorp's customers reside in the two states.

Utah might be more amenable to the coal plants because that's where the fastest growth is occurring and because some see power plant development as an economic boost.

Public hearings are scheduled for Oct. 26 at PUC offices in Salem. A final ruling won't be issued until weeks later.

Technically, PacifiCorp doesn't need acknowledgement from the PUC to begin making its final decisions. If commissioners fail to support the plan, however, the utility will have a hard time convincing regulators that Oregon ratepayers should bear some of the costs.

But that's another battle.