Topeka — House Speaker Melvin Neufeld says the "cleaner" western Kansas coal-fired power plants should be built, and the Lawrence Energy Center coal-burning plant shut down because of carbon dioxide emissions.
Neufeld's comments were published recently by the Hillsboro Free Press after he spoke to the Learning in Retirement Program at Tabor College.
"What we really need to do, and what the goal is, is to get (a base-load plant) built and the transmission lines built and shut down the seventh dirtiest coal plant in America - the one at Lawrence," said Neufeld, R-Ingalls.
"The Lawrence people are opposed to the cleaner one - the Holcomb plant is supposed to be the cleanest and lowest emissions of any plant in the nation. But they don't want to trade. So we need to build something like that and shut down the Lawrence unit and clean up the air," he said.
State Rep. Barbara Ballard, D-Lawrence, said Neufeld's comments may stem from his frustration about the decision by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to deny permits for the two 700-megawatt coal-burning plants near Holcomb.
"I understand the concerns of western Kansas, but I hope this doesn't become an east Kansas versus west Kansas issue," Ballard said.
State Rep. Tom Sloan, R-Lawrence, a national energy expert, said Neufeld's suggestion to shut down the Lawrence Energy Center is "neither feasible nor desirable."
Sloan added, "We have to look at energy needs statewide."
On Oct. 18, KDHE Secretary Roderick Bremby stunned Sunflower Electric Power Corp. by rejecting the plants, citing concerns about carbon dioxide emissions and global climate change. Lawrence City Commission had officially opposed Sunflower's plants.
Hays-based Sunflower has appealed the decision, which is now before the Kansas Supreme Court.
Part of Sunflower's arguments is that it isn't fair for KDHE to stop its proposal based on CO2 emissions when there are other plants in Kansas emitting carbon dioxide.
Westar Energy Inc.'s Lawrence Energy Center was ranked this year by an environmental group as one of the worst in the nation in "dirty kilowatts" for emitting 4.18 million tons of carbon dioxide while producing 3.26 million megawatt hours of electricity in 2006.
The western Kansas plants would have emitted about 11 million tons of CO2 per year. Approximately 85 percent of the power would have been sold out of state.
When asked to elaborate on Neufeld's comments, his spokeswoman Sherriene Jones-Sontag said he had no plans to try to shut down the Lawrence Energy Center.
Jones-Sontag said Neufeld was trying to make the point that if cleaner-burning coal-fired plants are constructed then less efficient ones could be taken out of the mix and the environment will benefit.
"He wants the state to work toward a sound energy policy that will benefit the short- and long-term energy needs of the state," she said.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
merrill (anonymous) says…
House Speaker Melvin Neufeld you are almost correct. However think of windpower as money for so many of your constituents throughout western Kansas. Western Kansas is considered one of the gold mines in the USA for wind power.
I have no problem shutting down our local dirty coal powered plant. Build in it's place a large solar
generator combined with additional new technology hydropower at Bowersock and plant acres and acres and acres of switch grass. Let's move into the future.
There is no such thing as clean coal. In its' place bring on Wind energy for western Kansas ratepayers that will provide economic growth throughout western Kansas for many many decades to come. Ranchers and farmers will benefit their operations with annual income from leased land for wind energy.
toefungus (anonymous) says…
The east west war was started by our Governor. This is just the first round. The Lawrence plant should be shut down. It is very dirty and unsightly from Fall Creek.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Shutting down old coal-fired plants (perhaps even the Lawrence plant) and replacing them with newer ones will likely be part of our energy future. But doing so willy-nilly just to satisfy a legislator's political grandstanding would be the height of stupidity.
deskboy04 (anonymous) says…
I don't know what he's talking about...people in Lawrence don't use electricity. The citizens of Lawrence don't eat red meat, drive SUVs, or smoke in bars.
MCwzMC (anonymous) says…
Nothing Neufeld says surprises me. He is a demagogic wacko who is incapable of anything constructive. All he ever does is spout hyperbole concerning subjects he knows nothing about. Kansas deserves better.
sinedie (anonymous) says…
This is the same guy who said that jogging two miles emits the same amount of CO2 as driving two miles?
Left_handed (anonymous) says…
Hey, why we're at it, why not build a couple of cold fusion plants to replace coal power. What, you say, it won't work? What an amazing coincidence. Wind and solar won't replace coal either.
JOEHAWK (anonymous) says…
My brother and his wife are in the solar industry. They realize that the midwest uses the most energy from 4pm-8pm to cool houses and do laundry. They also realize that Solar by itself cannot meet these needs. What they want is a dual power source, solar during the day and coal or gas or even nuclear at night. It's cleaner but the capital cost is double what 1 power plant costs. Until people realize this, solar and wind have little chance.
magnus (anonymous) says…
toefungus
I have no sympathy for the wealthy folks that built homes at Fall Creek because of their view of the Lawrence Power Plant! I do hope you were being sarcastic. They have plenty of other directions in which to direct their views.
That said, I believe Westar should be obligated to provide additional equipment to clean up the emissions of the Lawrence Power Plant AND continue investments in wind energy as others have suggested above, both in Western KS. And those of us in eastern KS should look at wind & water energy on a smaller scale.
dirkleisure (anonymous) says…
He is correct. The problem is Westar will not purchase power from Sunflower, because Sunflower prefers to sell all of its power to CO.
It is a lovely suggestion, too bad he refuses to broker a deal between Westar and Sunflower to make it happen. He has no one to blame but himself.
average (anonymous) says…
Informal poll here: Who would be willing to pay 1c/kWh extra to go toward replacing Lawrence Energy Center and other old coal plants with a modern nuclear plant, either nearby or Wolf Creek 2-3 (if Coffey County will have them and it's more cost-effective)?
average: Aye.
lunacydetector (anonymous) says…
we should put our money where our mouths are and build gigantic wind turbines on all the available rolling hills around lawrence and parts of douglas county.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"average: Aye."
A very emphatic "no."
dirkleisure (anonymous) says…
bozo, define "wily nily."
If Sunflower can't fulfill its agreement with its CO partners but still wants to build the plant, why shouldn't they sell the power to Westar instead?
The bigger question, Why isn't Neufeld actually working to make this happen?
This isn't an attack on Lawrence. This is an attack on Westar.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
If they were planning on building wind-generation facilities, you might have a point, dirk.
georgeofwesternkansas (anonymous) says…
Oh Yea, lets build gigantic wind turbines on all available hills around Lawrence and close school and businesses when the wind is not blowing. And then just before the wind starts to blow we will all get on stationary generation bikes and get the transmition lines and sub stations fired up and ready to accept generation. Lets start tomorrow.
georgeofwesternkansas (anonymous) says…
Dirk, Weststar has had years to get in on these plants. The power must be sold before you can barrow the money to build the plants. Sunflower has spent at least 5-10 years getting this power sold. The fact remains that Weststar can produce dirty generation at Lawrence and Jeffery cheeper than buying clean coal from Sunflower. It is funny that you care about what others do while you are the guilty party when it comes to this issue. It is also funny how crackpots like you come out of the woodwork when your area is under the gun.
KsTwister (anonymous) says…
"The western Kansas plants would have emitted about 11 million tons of CO2 per year. Approximately 85 percent of the power would have been sold out of state."
Good for Kansas??!! Last time I checked coal prices keep increasing too. These guys will line their pockets and leave after they polluted this state,left the aquifers dry and overprice the taxpayers. And here's a thought, if they know the Lawrence plant is toxic then why are they not trying to clean it up? Right, there's no money in it, dead Kansans are cheaper.
Montana (behind Kansas in wind availability) is getting ahead without strip mines or Chavez oil.
http://www.mtstandard.com/articles/20...
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
"And now we know where Bozo is relative to this debate. He/she wont pay a penny more for dependable non CO2 producing power. Bozo can thereby discard ALL of other power ideas, because they too cost more."
You're getting colder.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
I remember that excuse from 3rd grade, warmer, "well, everybody else is doing it." Used often as not when everybody else wasn't doing it.
average (anonymous) says…
getting_warmer: "won't happen until transmission infrastructure is built and paid for by someone (maybe Bozo and everyone else in Lawrence?)"
How can I do that? I'm already buying "credits" from Renewable Choice Energy who are building farms. I have some money invested in turbine firms (they've been a great investment, btw). But, I'd really like some *choice*, like many other states have, to buy wind energy on the market and not support Westar's lobbying wing.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
" I don't know where Bozo pulled out his non sequitor response,"
Non sequitur? Have you stopped beating your wife?
average (anonymous) says…
Except that there is no marketplace in Kansas. My choice is either generate my own, use Westar, or move. Other states have at least some degree of choice. Of course, both Sebelius and Neufeld get money from Westar (out of your electric bill and mine) so that monopoly isn't going to change any time soon.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
Your wife is looking pretty raw there, warmer. Don't you think she's had enough?
average (anonymous) says…
In many states, you pay for local transport for a flat rate from your incumbent regulated monopoly. This covers the cost of maintaining wires to your house, etc. You then pay for who you want to generate wholesale electricity based on price and where they get their power from. Kind of like being able to choose your long-distance telephone carrier on your land-line telephone.
http://www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower...
justfornow (anonymous) says…
"I understand the concerns of western Kansas, but I hope this doesn't become an east Kansas versus west Kansas issue," You just remember Neufeld, R-Ingalls, you're dealing with a very small but vocal minority of the Lawrence community. I've heard rumors that your getting 150 or so armed western Kansas men on horses and will attack soon, just keep in mind that the rest of "US" will not stand by and let you plunder our town. Just a warning
dirkleisure (anonymous) says…
george, I said Neufeld was dead on. You called me a crackpot. Seems to be a disconnect there.
warmer, I'm asking why Neufeld doesn't put his money where his mouth is and broker a deal between these two utilities.
As for the idea that Westar can produce power cheaper at its dirty plants, I think Westar would disagree with that. Westar looks at power production on the 20 to 30 year timeline, and there is no way it is going to be cheaper for them to sell power off the Lawrence plant in 2027. They know that.
So, the issue remains, Sunflower and Westar. I apologize, george and warmer, if my comments slanted towards Sunflower being the sole unwilling partner. As you see in my second comment, I see Rep. Neufeld's comments directed not at Lawrence, but at Westar.
Finally, warmer, if you read george's rants again, I think you will be more careful in associating yourself with him. He isn't really thinking straight...
Oh, and warmer, you're gonna have to name some possibilities to back up this comment :"Tri-State and others will generate the electricity with coal somewhere"
Haiku_Cuckoo (anonymous) says…
Lawrence has the seventh dirtiest plant in America? Yeah, right. Neufield is making things up. Here is a list of the top fifty dirtiest power plants in the US. Lawrence isn't even ranked among them.
http://www.environmentalintegrity.org...
dirkleisure (anonymous) says…
1.4M megwatts of new coal-fired energy. What state is going to build a new plant to provide that amount of electricity?
You are pointing to states, such as CO and Utah, where there are plants that are approved, but no plans for further expansion. CO is so obviously not going to build a new plant as to make the suggestion laughable. Utah's approvals are facing litigation.
New Mexico? Please. It is like you aren't even trying.
I would give you Montana and Wyoming, but the problem is there is nothing even remotely close to being on the table in those two states. That's a minimum 5 year window, then, to even get permitted. 5 years from now, permitting a plant similar to the Holcolmb expansion is going to be an extremely expensive proposition. Your national guidelines will likely be in place.
You refer to a "narrow focused fix." Fix to what? This mysterious lack of baseline power? According to Sunflower, their 1.4M MW plant exceeds in-state needs by 85%. What is so narrow about selling that "clean coal" energy to a utility in Westar that needs to shut down their aging plants?
I'm not proposing anything from the state legislature. The Speaker of the Kansas House has influence that goes a little bit beyond getting a bill passed. This isn't Boys State.
Again, Neufeld's comments aren't about Lawrence. They are about Westar. Stop reading headlines.
Oracle_of_Rhode (anonymous) says…
While it's a lowdown lie that Lawrence has the seventh dirtiest power plant in America, we are proud to be home to the nation's third dirtiest hippie.
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
More brash, intemperate ranting from Neufeld. This guy needs to think before he speaks. Instead, he lets his knees do the jerking for him.
Good thing Tom Sloan is there to keep folks in the legislature like Neufeld in check.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"Start with Colorado plants proximate to new ones being considered or in construction: Pueblo, Limon, or Lamar."
That proposed plant for Limon sounds scary. They will use lignite coal for that proposed plant. Lignite coal is not exactly "clean"
snowWI (anonymous) says…
its_getting_warmer (Anonymous) says
"Neufelds idea is not a "willy-nilly" one. It is policy-based. On the very policies articulated in the strongest of terms by most from Lawrence on these boards (SnowWI, Cool, where are you this morning). and applauded by the same here"
Hmm. This could be interesting. Clean coal is a falacy but the proposed Holcomb plant would be "relatively" cleaner than the big polluters such as Jeffrey, etc. I would prefer to see a mix of base load sources, and a rapid expansion of wind energy. A dirty coal plant is definitely not a good thing for the environment considering the Lawrence plant was originally constructed all the way back in the 1950s with upgrades since then. However, problems exist with Sunflower's focus aimed at Colorado while Westar has a focus on eastern Kansas. This is the problem when you have a state as large as Kansas that encompasses a huge area. More cooperation between the utilities would ultimately be a better solution instead of exporting 85% of the electricity from Holcomb out to the Front Range.
deskboy04 (anonymous) says…
I wish that they'd build three or four new power plants.
georgeofwesternkansas (anonymous) says…
"Holcomb plant would be "relatively" cleaner than the big polluters such as Jeffrey" Come on Snow, get a grip on reality.
I drive by the current Holcomb plant once a month and there is no visable belch from the stack at 5 miles, and the new plant will be even cleaner.
Two weeks ago I went to the Chumps game in KC and drove by the Lawrence plant on I-70. If this plant is your point of refrence on coal generation I can understand why you react as you do. There was brown crap spewing from the stack, and it was not due to the weather. Please do a visual compairson on what we in western Kansas demand, I promise we would never ever stand for what is being put into the air above Lawrence. Not all utilities are like Westar, and some utility customers demand performance from our utility providers.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"Two weeks ago I went to the Chumps game in KC and drove by the Lawrence plant on I-70. If this plant is your point of refrence on coal generation I can understand why you react as you do. There was brown crap spewing from the stack, and it was not due to the weather."
I agree with that point. The older coal plants are dirtier than the more modern coal plants. I have driven by the current existing coal plant in Holcomb and it is obviously "cleaner" than the Dinosaur plant at Lawrence and Jeffrey, which is one of the dirtier coal plants in the U.S.
Jackalope (anonymous) says…
It is interesting to read the near hysterical responses when someone has the audacity to suggest that Lawrence's old filthy dirty power source be shut down for any reason. Let's once again hear how irresponsible the folks in western Kansas are acting in wanting to poison their neighbors. Actually, we don't need to even discuss such a thing as Lawrence is dead set upon poisoning itself and its neighbors. Such a right should never be given away to the cretins in western Kansas. Western Kansas simply could not appreciate the skill and skulduggery it takes to mount huge back door campaigns against other parts of Kansas for something northeastern Kansas has been doing all along.
I have often thought that to be a public official and living in northeast Kansas one must swear to be stupid, pompous, condensing, underhanded and shady. And, no one has proven me wrong yet.
konzahawk (anonymous) says…
For once, I agree with Neufeld. I can't believe it!
Jackalope (anonymous) says…
By the way, it has never been an east vs. west thing in Kansas. It has always been a Northeastern Kansas v. The Rest of Kansas with the Northeast always cast as the plaintiff. I have never heard of any campaign starting in Western Kansas or Southeastern Kansas to stop any lawful activity in the Northeast. When will three fourths of the state finally become fed up with being the whipping boy of the Northeast? When will the Northeast cure its own ills before casting about for people to blame? How did the Northeast get to the point that it was so full of itself that everybody else is subhuman?
I have lived in both Lawrence and Topeka time and have over the years spent quite a bit of time and money in Lawrence and Topeka. I have also lived in central and western Kansas and done business all over the state. I don't think I want to deal with northeastern Kansas anymore as it is apparent that if a person resides outside of the Northeast they are good only for one thing - giving the merchants and schools in the northeast money. I'm tired of it. I have lived too long to think there is no other choice available. Wichita, Salina, Amarillo, Colorado Springs, Denver, Springfield, Tulsa, Hutchinson, Dodge City, Garden City, Pittsburg, Oklahoma City (Even places like
Concordia.) are all reasonable alternatives to anything available in the Northeast and you don't have to put up with the guff. You don't have to pretend and believe you are better than other people in the state.
snowWI (anonymous) says…
"I have lived too long to think there is no other choice available. Wichita, Salina, Amarillo, Colorado Springs, Denver, Springfield, Tulsa, Hutchinson, Dodge City, Garden City, Pittsburg, Oklahoma City (Even places like
Concordia.) are all reasonable alternatives to anything available in the Northeast and you don't have to put up with the guff."
Have you considered Midwest cities instead of those in the Great Plains and the Southwest? I would rather live in a city like Des Moines or Iowa City than some of the cities you mentioned.