Jan 31 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - David Klepper and Karen Dillon The Kansas City Star, Mo.

A controversial coal plant expansion in Western Kansas could move ahead despite a regulator's objection under a plan pitched Wednesday by coal plant supporters.

But the plant would have to reduce the amount of carbon it puts out and meet new emissions standards designed to address global warming. That provision is an attempt to address the concerns that the plant would add to global climate change.

"This is really a bill that's fair to both sides," said Rep. Rob Olson, an Olathe Republican and vice chairman of the House Energy and Utilities Committee. "It's a great compromise and it's groundbreaking action."

While supporters touted the bill as being the first of its kind in the nation, many states already have placed restrictions on their coal plants' carbon emissions. And critics of the bill say it could actually represent a step backward because the penalty for emitting excessive carbon dioxide "is a pittance."

The bipartisan legislation was designed to defuse what became the state's hottest political fight after a top state regulator rejected Sunflower Electric Power Corp's plans to expand its Holcomb, Kan. plant. The ensuing debate put Kansas in the center of the debate on energy policy and the states' response to climate change.

But critics promise that it will rev up the controversy.

They said the bill moves Kansas backward because it will actually allow carbon dioxide emissions to increase and could result in Kansas becoming the "ashtray of the Midwest."

"Kansas is the first state that we know that is proposing to accelerate global warming," said Bruce Nilles, director of Sierra Club's Midwest Clean Energy Campaign. "That is a real black eye for Kansas to be the one state right now proposing to accelerate global warming in the face of scientists warning that we need to do more -- not make the problem worse."

It also strips the emergency powers of the secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to deny a permit for proposed power plants.

And it also appears to be crosswise with Kansas voters. A poll earlier this month found that likely Kansas voters by a 2-to-1 ratio agreed with the state to block construction of the two coal plants

The poll by Cooper and Secrest Associates, a Democratic political consulting firm, found that the 62 percent margin of support was less in western Kansas, but still a majority -- 51 percent, while 40 percent disagreed and 9 percent weren't sure.

The coal plant debate exploded in Kansas in November when Department of Health and Environment Secretary Rod Bremby rejected Sunflower Electric Power Corp.'s proposal to expand its Holcomb, Kan. coal-fired plant. Bremby, an appointee of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, cited estimates that the plant would emit 11 million tons of carbon dioxide, a leading contributor to global climate change.

Many lawmakers, especially those from Western Kansas, cried foul: the plant, they said, would be cleaner than any currently operating, create jobs and investment in a struggling region, and provide a reliable and affordable energy source.

On Wedneday, Sebelius had not yet weighed in on the bill. Bremby also declined comment.

Any attempt by her to fight the bill or veto it should it be passed could set up a political standoff that could threaten progress on a range of other issues.

The bill has several pieces, some meant to satisfy environmental groups and others meant to please supporters of the coal plant. But the most significant portions would make it more difficult for regulators to reject plants, and put in place new emission rules for plants that are built.

The bill would rewrite state law to say the Secretary of Health and Environment can't hold utilities to a standard higher than the Federal Clean Air Act unless he has legislative approval first. That would take away the discretion Bremby used to reject the Sunflower plant expansion last year. Missouri already precludes regulators from going beyond federal law.

But a legal expert said the "no stricter than federal law" is a "non sequitor" in this case.

"It only applies when the federal government has acted, but the federal government has no CO2 restrictions, so 'no stricter than federal law' does not apply."

The bill, if made law, would also give Sunflower 60 days to ask KDHE to reconsider its proposal. Bremby would then have 15 days to issue a new decision.

"And this time he better have a good reason (if he rejects the plan)," said Sen. Jay Emler, a Lindsborg Republican who chairs the Senate Utilities Committee. Emler, like many lawmakers, criticized Bremby for rejecting the plant even though it met all current environmental standards.

If Sunflower's proposal is approved, the new plant would have to reduce its carbon output by 20 percent within one year and an additional 10 percent within 10 years. The bill would allow utilities to offset their carbon levels by investing in renewable energy, conservation or new technology to reduce or secure carbon emissions.

Coal plants that fail to meet the standards would pay a carbon tax of $3 per ton of carbon dioxide.

But Nilles said that $3 fee "is a pittance." In Europe, the cost of a ton of CO2 is running from $20 to $30 a ton.

"This demonstrates this is not a serious proposition," Nilles said. "It falls far short."

The low amount of the carbon tax also has some lawmakers questioning the sincerity of the proposal.

"Basically you can pollute and then buy your way out of it," said Sen. Chris Steineger, a Kansas City, Kan., Democrat. It's too liberal and too generous."

Sunflower spokesman Steve Miller said the utility believes it can meet the new rules, which would make the Holcomb plant cleaner than any other coal plant in Kansas.

"It's quite a step," Miller said. "But I don't think it will harm our project. We're going to be for this bill one way or another."

Lawmakers who drafted the proposal said they don't know what Sebelius will do.

"I'm not going to make that prediction," said Rep. Carl Holmes, a Liberal Republican and one of the authors of the bill. "I feel this is what is best for the state."

The bill also includes new energy conservation standards for public schools and state government buildings; a new energytask force; new rules to allow consumers with solar panels to sell excess power to utilities; and a ban on so-called "merchant" power plants that sell wholesale power to utilities.

Lawmakers are pushing for quick passage. Hearings are set for next week and committee votes could come on Feb. 8.

For more on the subject, visit The Star's climate change webpage at kansascity.com.

States with renewable electricity standards:

www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies/state-clean-energy-maps-and-graphs.html

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or RGGI, is a cooperative effort by Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states to reduce carbon dioxide emissions:

rggi.org/

The West leads the way on climate protection

www.open-spaces.com/article-v9n4-sheets.php

------

To reach David Klepper, call (785) 354-1388 or send email to dklepper@kcstar.com.