Topeka ? Water from the Kansas River could be used for a potential expansion of the Wolf Creek nuclear power plant, officials say.

Tracy Streeter, director of the Kansas Water Office, says a pipeline from the Kansas River would probably be the cheapest and one of the quickest ways to deliver water to the plant near Burlington in Coffey County.

“There is adequate water available in the Kansas River,” Streeter told a panel of legislators who asked for information on the issue.

Westar Energy, one of the owners of Wolf Creek, has said expansion of the one-unit, 1,200 megawatt facility is a possibility, and has noted that the site was designed for two units.

But the company has not announced any specific expansion plans.

If the nuclear plant about 60 miles south of Topeka were expanded, it would need a new water source, officials said.

In testimony to the House-Senate Committee on Energy and Environmental Policy, Westar spokesman Mark Schreiber said the current cooling lake capacity may not support a second similar-size unit. And, he added, the possibility of buying more water in that area was uncertain.

Streeter said the Neosho River basin couldn’t support a second nuclear power unit, which would require about 20 million gallons of water per day.

The existing plant receives water from the John Redmond Reservoir, and even that supply is diminishing because sediment is building up in the lake much faster than originally projected, Streeter said.

Redredging the reservoir would cost approximately $553 million and require five to 10 years of preparation work, he said.

Building a second reservoir would cost approximately $450 million and could require 20 years of work to get all the necessary environmental permits.

Drawing from the Marais des Cygnes River would not provide enough water and would take away water sources needed for the developing area south of Kansas City to Ottawa, Streeter said.

He said pumping water from the Kansas River would probably cost upward of $100 million and take five years to 10 years to build the necessary infrastructure.

“Clearly this is the cheapest,” he said.

But he said it would be politically unpopular to transfer water from one part of the state to another. And, he noted, the project would not increase the state’s overall water supply.

With the effects of climate change, he said, “We should be looking at storing more water.”