Topeka ? Three-fourths of the electricity Kansans use comes from coal-fired generating plants, and that heavier-than-average reliance on coal helps explain why the state is among the top 10 in carbon dioxide emissions per person.

Because most scientists link CO2 to global warming, such a heavy reliance on coal worries environmentalists. Two Lawrence environmentalists are suing the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to force it to regulate CO2 emissions.

Global warming is an issue both as a western Kansas utility pursues plans to build new coal-fired plants and as Gov. Kathleen Sebelius works with utilities to develop more wind energy.

Concerned about meeting future demands for power, most legislators still see new coal-fired plants as a significant portion of any future mix. They’ve concentrated on providing incentives for companies to capture and store carbon dioxide and develop other electric sources, including nuclear power.

“Folks are probably not willing to go back to the days of the pioneers and have conveniences only periodically,” said Sen. Jay Emler, a Lindsborg lawyer who’s chairman of the Senate Utilities Committee.

The Associated Press analyzed federal CO2 emissions data for states and the District of Columbia for 2003, the latest figures available. They showed Kansas with emissions of nearly 80 million metric tons, or more than 29 metric tons per person, ranking it 13th in the nation.

The biggest single source of emissions is electric generation, at nearly 38 million metric tons in 2003. And Kansas’ per capita figure of 13.8 metric tons is 10th in the nation.

“None of that’s a surprise,” said Raymond Dean, who is suing KDHE with his wife over carbon dioxide emissions. “To a large extent, there’s a direct competition between coal and wind power.”

In Kansas, Sunflower Electric Power Corp., based in Hays, plans to build two 700-megawatt, coal-fired plants next to its plant outside Holcomb in southwest Kansas. That puts it at the center of the national debate over global warming.

But coal is king in Kansas, and utilities use it to meet around-the-clock demand because, Emler said, “We don’t have a way to regulate when the wind blows.”

Utilities in Kansas generated 45.9 million megawatt-hours in 2005, and 75 percent of it came from coal-fired plants, according to the federal Energy Information Administration.

The next-biggest source of electricity in Kansas is the Wolf Creek nuclear power plant near Burlington, accounting for 8.8 million megawatt-hours in 2005, or 19 percent of the total.

Renewable resources, such as wind and solar, generated less than 1 percent, about 426,000 megawatt-hours.

Kansas’ electricity also is cheaper than average, 6.55 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2005, compared to a national average of 8.14 cents. And some states with the lowest per capita CO2 emissions from their utilities – California, New Jersey and Vermont – have the highest electric costs per kilowatt-hour.

“I think we have to take a balanced picture of the whole situation, not just hone in on one fuel,” said Rep. Carl Dean Holmes, chairman of the House Energy and Utilities Committee. “If we want economic development, economic development is going to go to where low energy prices are.”

Some states relying more heavily on nuclear power have lower per-capita CO2 emissions from their utilities than Kansas. For example, nuclear energy provides 71 percent of Vermont’s power, and it ranks last.

Other states rely more on water-powered turbines. Idaho – ranking third from the bottom in CO2 emissions per capita from its utilities – gets 79 percent of its power from hydroelectric plants.

That’s simply not an option in Kansas, Emler said, because the state doesn’t have the river flow necessary.

But wind energy is an option, and Sebelius and six utilities, including Sunflower, announced last week they’re committed to having wind account for 10 percent of the state’s generating capacity in 2010 and 20 percent by 2020.

Sebelius has said collaborating with utilities is more productive than fighting with them.

The Legislature has taken much the same approach, this year approving tax incentives for developing carbon-capture technology and expanding Wolf Creek. Holmes said regulating CO2 emissions is best left to the federal government to develop a national standard so all states will abide by the same rules.

“Let the federal government do the mandates,” Holmes said. “We’ll come in with incentives to try to accomplish what we need to.”

Dean acknowledges the efforts of Sebelius and Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson, co-chairman of the Kansas Energy Council, to promote wind energy.

“There are some favorable signs in the state government that are encouraging, but, gee, we’d like to have a lot more,” he said.