photo by: Screenshot

Evergy Kansas Central's plan for additional energy projects in the coming years.

A large solar energy project proposed for Douglas County likely will require an increase in electric rates, as will a pair of natural gas power plants for other areas of Kansas.

During a public hearing on Wednesday via Zoom, Evergy — the state’s largest electric utility — proposed rate increases for customers in Lawrence and elsewhere to help pay for two natural gas plants and the Kansas Sky Energy project, a solar farm proposing to install approximately 8 million square feet of solar panels on farmland north of North Lawrence.

When Evergy talks about rate increases, they mean that people’s electricity bill could go up as a result of these new generation projects. Evergy needs to recover the costs of building and operating these plants, and oftentimes, the way they do this is by adjusting the rates they charge customers.

For example, in the case of the 159 MW Kansas Sky Solar facility, rates are expected to increase by around 0.70% when it starts operating in 2027. Evergy will be the owner of the solar facility once it’s complete, but it is currently being developed alongside renewable energy company Savion.

Similarly, for the gas-fired plants, there would be rate increases as construction progresses and when the plants go online. During construction, it’s expected that the rates will rise from approximately 0.58% to 3.82% per plant as they approach completion. Once the plants begin generating electricity, the rates will increase further to around 4.3% per plant. The two new 705 MW natural gas plants will be built in Sumner County and Reno County, which are expected to begin providing electricity in 2029 and 2030, respectively.

The proposed rate increases are cumulative, and will impact customers throughout the Evergy district, not just the communities nearest the projects. If approved, the three projects could result in an approximately 9% rate increase by 2030.

“We recognize that these do represent increases to customers and will be impactful,” Vice President of Regulatory Affairs at Evergy Darren Ives said.

“The estimated rate impacts we provide don’t reflect benefits from additional electricity sales beyond today’s levels, which will serve to lower the estimated impact on existing customers’ rates,” Ives said. “Additionally, customers will benefit from the reliability and environmental benefits of these new generation resources for the next 30 plus years.”

Both of the plants are known as Combined Cycle Gas Turbine natural gas plants. They operate by first using a gas turbine to generate electricity from burning natural gas – or methane, a greenhouse gas that traps significantly more heat per molecule than carbon dioxide. The system will then capture the waste heat from the exhaust gases to create steam, which further powers a steam turbine to generate additional electricity.

These three projects will impact the rates of people getting energy from Evergy Kansas Central – which serves about 736,000 customers in Topeka, Lawrence, Olathe, Leavenworth, Atchison, Manhattan, Salina, Hutchinson, Emporia, Parsons, Wichita, Arkansas City, El Dorado, Newton, Fort Scott, Pittsburg, and Independence, among other towns and rural areas.

Although the rates are calculated and requested by Evergy, they need approval from the Kansas Corporation Commission, which is the state-appointed utility regulatory board in Kansas. The KCC will conduct its analysis by making sure the application is in line with Kansas law and Evergy’s long-term energy plan. In addition, it will analyze the potential impacts — positive or negative — of the investment requested on the ratepayers, Evergy and the public. The commission will also make sure the projected rate recovery of the investments will be balanced by long-term economic value.

While there were some that echoed support of the projects, some community members asked the KCC to vote against the rate increases for the energy projects. Angela Schieferecke, a public commenter, asked the commission to lower the rate charges. She said the CEO of Evergy, David Campbell, has expressed an interest in keeping rates as low as possible for customers.

“Evergy should invest in improving the transmission infrastructure, improving (battery storage), improving the grid so it continues to operate reliably and safely,” Schieferecke said.

Evergy’s long-term strategy, or the Integrated Resource Plan, outlines how the company will meet customer energy needs. The main goal is for the utility to transition away from coal while maintaining a diverse fuel mix and incorporating renewable energy sources like solar and wind.

Determining whether Evergy has progressed towards its goals has proven challenging. A few years ago, it was announced that the Lawrence Energy Center, Kansas’ largest electric utility and oldest coal plant, would be retired by 2023, with solar power to be added by the end of 2024. However, Evergy Kansas Central has since stepped away from that plan. Instead, Evergy has stated that the Lawrence coal plant will remain online until 2028, and a presentation at the public hearing revealed that solar power won’t be operational until 2027, with the initial step toward solar energy being the Kansas Sky Energy Center.

Even that date is speculative. The Douglas County solar project currently is the subject of litigation, as land owners and businesses in northern Douglas County where the project has been proposed have claimed that it did not appropriately move through the county’s planning and approval process.

Public commenters on Thursday, however, spent more time objecting to the two natural gas power plants that Evergy proposes to build.

A concern that many community members had was the development of the natural gas plants being a continued reliance on fossil fuels. In addition, many pointed out how expensive they are, especially in comparison to the solar project in Douglas County. Jonathan Smith, who works with the Kansas nonprofit Loud Light, said the difference between the rate increases shows that.

“It is financially more respectful to the ratepayers to provide them with more clean and renewable energy options because according to your own statistics, they are less of a price burden,” Smith said.

Ruth Rosell, another public commenter, said she was in support of the solar project but expressed opposition to the two natural gas plants, saying they were not needed or necessary.

“Solar and wind energy are the least expensive energy options now and that was already shown in the presentation,” Rosell said. “All efforts should be made and geared toward expanding these clean energy options, along with battery storage for any increase in energy needs.”

Public comments on the projects can still be submitted until 5 p.m. on Monday, April 7. To submit online, visit https://www.kcc.ks.gov/your-opinion-matters. Comments can also be emailed to kcc.public.affairs@ks.gov, or submitted by calling 800-662-0027 or 785-271-3140. The commission requests that residents include their name and city.