Nevada Coal Power Costlier Than Renewable: Study
US: November 22, 2007
LOS ANGELES - Nevada will likely save money and surely cut pollution if it
goes for renewable power instead of building three huge coal power plants as
proposed, an independent economic consultancy said on Tuesday.
ECONorthwest said uncertainty over higher construction costs and the value
of what the group says is an inevitable tax on carbon dioxide emissions will
cause the cost of coal power to skyrocket as wind, solar, and geothermal
power costs decrease.
Currently, renewable power is costlier to generate than coal and unlike the
black rock that now provides about 13 percent of Nevada's power is not a "baseload"
source -- a large plant that can run around the clock.
Renewable power paired with a more aggressive energy efficiency program will
mean "Lower costs and lower risks for ratepayers and probably will produce a
higher number of job opportunities for Nevadans," Ernie Niemi, ECONorthwest
analyst and primary author of the report, said during a Tuesday telephone
press conference.
The report by ECONorthwest of Eugene, Oregon, is titled "Economic Analysis
of Nevada's Future Electricity-Generating Alternatives" and can be viewed at
www.econw.com.
David Sims, director of project development for Sierra Pacific Resources,
which owns both major Nevada utilities, said the report is a "rehash" of old
studies given by a collection of environmental groups last year before the
Nevada Public Utility Commission, which must approve all power projects.
"The report ignores the fact that we are closing 300 megawatts of coal power
in southern Nevada," Sims said.
Sierra Pacific is adding US$2 billion by 2015 in renewable power projects
and already has an active energy efficiency program Sims says is
undersubscribed by customer option.
While Tom Darin of Western Resource Advocates in Boulder, Colorado, said a
combination of solar, wind and geothermal power can support building large
transmission lines, Sims said the baseload of coal-fired power is needed
before a north-to-south large power transmission line is built.
Sims said Sierra expects the cost of emitting carbon to be between US$4 and
US$6 per ton, based on testimony of experts before the Nevada PUC last year,
making it less volatile than natural gas power.
John O'Donnell, executive vice president solar thermal developer Ausra Inc.
of Palo Alto, California, said some studies show the cost of CO2 emissions
will be US$20 per ton.
"In five years, we believe (Ausra) will be directly competitive with
coal-fired power plants," said O'Donnell. "Within the next five years, some
cost of carbon emissions will come to the US market."
Ausra is competing with several other solar thermal power companies in the
US West to build plants of 500 megawatts and bigger, including two
Israel-based firms: Solel Solar Systems and BrightSource Energy.
The proposed plants are the 1,600-megawatt White Pine plant by LS Power
Group, the 1,500-MW Ely Energy Center by Sierra Pacific Resources , and the
750-MW Toquop Energy Project by Sithe Global Power, which is owned 80
percent by Blackstone Group and 20 percent by Reservoir Capital Group.
(Reporting by Bernie Woodall; Editing by Gary Hill)
Story by Bernie Woodall
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
|