May 4 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Mike Fitzgerald Belleville News-Democrat, Ill.

When the Prairie State Energy Campus cranks out its first kilowatt hour of electricity -- which is scheduled for two years from now -- it could end up costing ratepayers way more than anyone had predicted.

That's because of recent efforts by the Obama White House and Democrats in Congress to begin the regulation of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas blamed for global warming. More than half the world's industrial CO2 comes from coal power plants.

The Prairie State Energy Campus is a nearly $4 billion power plant and coal mine project under construction in Washington County. It's designed to generate electricity for 2.5 million customers in nine states.

Whereas the Bush White House fought off efforts to regulate greenhouse emissions, the Obama administration already has signaled that, environmentally at least, a new sheriff is in town.

In late April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency made the first move toward regulating greenhouse gas emissions. It announced plans to declare them a cause of global warming and a danger to public welfare.

Then, a week later, hearings began in the House of Representatives on a hotly debated climate bill that aims to set a price tag on carbon emissions through a cap-and-trade system. Such a system could force coal power plants to undertake measures that would raise the prices their customers will pay by as much as 50 percent.

Peter DeQuattro, Prairie State Generating Co.'s top executive, wrote in an e-mail for this story that while his firm supported the EPA's effort "to take meaningful steps" to reduce our carbon footprint, "we believe advanced technologies and a more diversified fuel supply are the solution to improving our nation's environmental profile."

The EPA's endangerment finding, if enacted under the Clean Air Act, "would have far reaching consequences on every sector of our economy," DeQuattro wrote. "The financial implications on our region's workers, consumers, families, and communities could be devastating to our already fragile economy."

Verena Owen, chairwoman of the Illinois Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign, is shedding few tears for owners of coal power plants. They "knew this was coming. Global warming is real. People realized that a long time ago," Owen said. "To build a coal plant these days -- I am not sure why people would do that."

Republican lawmakers, including U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, of Collinsville, have drawn a line in the sand regarding the Democrats' climate bill. During hearings more than a week ago, Shimkus called it "the largest assault on democracy and freedom in this country that I've ever experienced."

Shimkus also criticized plans to cut carbon dioxide emissions, claiming they are "taking away plant food from the atmosphere."

David Byford, a spokesman for Houston-based Dynegy Inc., which owns the coal-powered Baldwin Energy Complex in Baldwin, echoed DeQuattro's assessment, contending that a cap-and-trade system "would raise the price of electricity for consumers throughout the U.S."

Byford noted that 30 years ago, the electric power industry was faced with the problem of trying to eliminate sulfur dioxide and other pollutants blamed for acid rain.

The industry found solutions "that reduced those emissions significantly, up to 90 percent," he said. "Just because there isn't a commercial solution right now doesn't mean there won't be one tomorrow."

The problem is, no one can say what form that technology will take. The only technology being touted on a large scale for coal-based electricity depends on a system where the coal is not burned, but baked, with the carbon dioxide chemically extracted and stored deep underground.

But the technology remains unproven, with a big question being whether the carbon dioxide will stay put or slowly leak out -- a vast variable in view of the fact that human activities combine to emit almost 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide annually.

Meanwhile, time is running out, according to most climate scientists.

To avert truly catastrophic climate change -- such as mass species extinctions, droughts and flooded coastlines -- the nations of the world must ratchet down their greenhouse emissions by 80 percent by 2050. That's no small trick, since America, China and other major polluters continue to emit higher levels of such gases year after year.

The only large-scale project to demonstrate the feasibility of carbon dioxide capture-and-storage was set to be built 140 miles north of Prairie State, amid rolling cornfields outside Mattoon.

Called FutureGen, the $2 billion project was supposed to be a shining example of "clean coal" technology: a near zero-emissions coal-fueled power plant that would generate hydrogen and electricity while storing at least one million tons of carbon dioxide each year for four years.

But last year, the U.S. Department of Energy -- the project's chief funder -- announced it was pulling the plug because of higher than anticipated costs. Recently, energy department leaders announced they will reconsider the project after concluding a math error had led them to overstate its costs.

Owen, of the Sierra Club, called for a ban on all new coal-fired power plants until capture-and-storage technology can be proven safe and effective.

"By all means, until we know for sure, let's not build any more coal plants," she said.

Contact reporter Mike Fitzgerald at mfitzgerald@bnd.com or 239-2533.

(c) 2009, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services