Archive for Friday, December 29, 2006

Westar delays decision on building coal-burning plant

December 29, 2006


— Westar Energy, the state's largest electric utility, announced Thursday it was postponing a decision on whether it will build a coal-burning plant because of skyrocketing construction costs.

"When equipment and construction cost estimates grow by $200 million to $400 million in 18 months, it is necessary to proceed with caution," said James Haines, Westar's chief executive officer.

Environmentalists said Westar's decision should give Sunflower Electric Power Corp., which has proposed a larger coal-fired project in western Kansas, something to think about.

In May 2005, Westar started considering sites for a new $1 billion, 600-megawatt plant in the eastern third of the state to serve its 670,000 customers in Kansas.

Sunflower Electric has a permit pending for three 700-megawatt plants at a cost of $3.6 billion near its existing 360-megawatt facility in Holcomb. Two of the plants would be owned by Denver-based Tri-State Generation and Transmission and 90 percent of the electricity from the project would be sold out of state.

Environmentalists, eight states and the Lawrence City Commission have opposed the Sunflower project, saying the carbon dioxide emissions will worsen destructive climate change. Sunflower, backed by many supporters in western Kansas, said the plants will be more efficient than older ones, and the project will spur the rural economy.

While the proposals from Westar and Sunflower are different, Westar's decision to postpone a decision probably came because the company looked into the future at possible federal regulations or taxes on carbon dioxide emissions, according to Bill Griffith, president of the Kansas chapter of the Sierra Club.

He said the increasing costs of coal and plant equipment are narrowing the gap between renewable energy sources and fossil fuels.

"This certainly makes wind energy look cheaper," Griffith said.

Topeka-based Westar planned to select a location by the end of this year but has now postponed that indefinitely.

At the outset, a coal-burning plant was seen as the least expensive way to increase capacity, Westar said. But recent demand nationwide for coal plants has increased equipment and construction costs.

The company stated: "These dynamics have caused the gap in cost between coal plants and other methods of meeting customers' need for energy to narrow."

Steve Miller, a spokesman for Sunflower Electric, said Westar's decision would have no effect on Sunflower's proposal.

The increasing construction cost "is an ongoing matter that is always being analyzed," he said.

Conversely, Westar officials said public opposition to the Sunflower project had no effect on Westar's decision. The company also noted that even though it has put off its coal plant proposal for now, it will have enough capacity to handle growing demand for electricity.


LogicMan 11 years, 4 months ago

How 'bout a second nuclear unit at Wolf Creek?

preebo 11 years, 4 months ago

...or how about alternative sources say like, wind, hydro, or solar. I know it may seem like these are too sophisticated for Kansas, but believe me this is the perfect state for progressive thinking. Look to the future not the immediate.

Richard Heckler 11 years, 4 months ago

Nuclear power generates dangerous waste material,very expensive to build plus heavy cost overruns and could be targets for terrorists. They also require tax subsidies to keep rates artificially low.

doubledogleg 11 years, 4 months ago

how do the "wind advocates" and those opposing Sunflower coal plant `feel about nuclear power?

Pete Kennamore 11 years, 4 months ago

I don't have strong feelings one way or the other with regard to wind power but I definitly oppose building more coal based generation.

I would support more nuclear power in Kansas.

Jamesaust 11 years, 4 months ago

All-in-all, an odd story.

What should be a short piece noting that the local utility has postponed making a decision while it makes certain its expense estimates are correct incorporates a different (non)story about a different utility elsewhere without any identical expense issue. Very odd (assuming this is meant as a "news" article).

MyName 11 years, 4 months ago

There may be some filler, but it's more about the timing (in relation to what's been going on with Sunflower electric) more than the content of the story that motivated the extra column space.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.