Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Tri-State contemplates nuclear plant in Colo.

April 9, 2008

Advertisement

— The main utility company behind the controversial proposal to build coal-fired power plants in western Kansas also is considering constructing a nuclear plant.

Recently, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association directed its staff to study whether to build a nuclear power plant in southeastern Colorado and to consider potential partners to help pay for construction.

In Kansas, Tri-State, which is based in Westminster, Colo., has partnered with Hays-based Sunflower Electric Power Corp. and a Texas company in the proposal to build two 700-megawatt coal-burning plants near Holcomb.

The $3.6 billion project was rejected by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' administration because of concerns about the plants' annual emission of 11 million tons of carbon dioxide and its effect on climate change.

The Legislature has approved a bill to reverse that decision and build the plants, but Sebelius vetoed that measure. Supporters of the plants continue to work on ways through the Legislature and courts to get around Sebelius' opposition.

Meanwhile, Tri-State's board of directors is looking toward the development of a site near Holly, Colo., where the company already has secured water rights for a plant that could be either coal-fired or nuclear.

"We are looking into the long-term," Tri-State spokesman Lee Boughey said. "We need to evaluate different resources."

Boughey said Tri-State's interest in possibly building a nuclear plant would have no effect on its proposal in Kansas, nor was it prompted by concerns that the Holcomb project will not get off the ground.

Tri-State sells power to 44 rural cooperatives that serve 1.4 million people in Colorado, New Mexico, Nebraska and Wyoming.

The company says it needs the Holcomb project because of increased demand in eastern Colorado.

But Stephanie Cole, a spokeswoman for the Kansas chapter of the Sierra Club, said Tri-State and other utilities should look toward conservation to reduce demand and the use of renewable energy sources, such as wind.

"Our position is that rather than assuming that we need more plants, we need to aggressively pursue conservation, efficiency and renewables," she said.

Under the Holcomb project, Tri-State would own one of the 700-megawatt units, while Sunflower and Golden Spread Electric Cooperative of Texas would own the other. Only about 200 megawatts of the total 1,400 megawatts of power would be used in Kansas.

Comments

Travis Shinkle 6 years, 8 months ago

"...But Stephanie Cole, a spokeswoman for the Kansas chapter of the Sierra Club, said Tri-State and other utilities should look toward conservation to reduce demand and the use of renewable energy sources, such as wind..."Wind power is JUNK! It "pollutes" the scenery. It takes tons of those nasty turbines to equal a single coal plant.Sure reducing demand is a good thing but more people equal more demand. They can't build coal plants, so why not a single nuclear plant that'll do the work for several coal plants?Sometimes I wonder if some of those environmental groups live on the same planet as the rest of us...

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 8 months ago

"Wind power is JUNK! It "pollutes" the scenery. It takes tons of those nasty turbines to equal a single coal plant."Aside from your ignorance about the capability of wind generation, have you have been to an area strip-mined for coal or uranium? What about coastal areas flooded because of global warming? Or vast areas made uninhabitable because of nuclear waste or a nuclear accident?

standuporget 6 years, 8 months ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus have you?

Lindsey Buscher 6 years, 8 months ago

Since when are any electricity plants pleasant to look at? At least you can't see wind, unlike the plumes of black smoke pouring out of coal plants.

hipper_than_hip 6 years, 8 months ago

Unless there's more than one unit planned, they'll have less MW than what they wanted at Holcomb. Nuc plants are about 1000 MW, and Holcomb was 2 x 700 MW.

knowone 6 years, 8 months ago

"[U]nlike the plumes of black smoke pouring out of coal plants."Actually, it's white because it's primarily water vapor. Representative Holmes' comedic conclusion to the House Holcomb bill hearings reminded us all of that. You're probably thinking of a smoke stack at a manufacturing plant.

lounger 6 years, 8 months ago

Tri State is old State and they dont give a damn about people or the environment. Get off of your a*s Tri-State and realize its 2008 not 1908! Your Ideas are old (coal) and dangerous (nuclear). And..dialupandy. nuclear is not clean! Where are you putting all of the spent nastyness that goes with a nuclear power plant? Its such an silly thing to say!

snowWI 6 years, 8 months ago

dialupandy,Thank you for that updated information. If demand increases down the road I think Kansas will likely choose the path to expand Wolf Creek instead of building another coal plant.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.