Reno (Nevada) Gazette-Journal  [Printer-friendly version]
January 14, 2008

COAL PLANTS BOOM, OPPONENTS TAKE ACTION

By Matthew Brown, Associated Press Writer

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) -- In federal and state courtrooms across the
country, environmental groups are putting coal-fueled power plants on
trial in a bid to slow the industry's biggest construction boom in
decades.

At least four dozen coal plants are being contested in 29 states,
including Nevada, according to a recent Associated Press tally. The
targeted utilities include giants like Peabody Energy and American
Electric Power down to small rural cooperatives.

From lawsuits and administrative appeals against the companies, to
lobbying pressure on federal and state regulators, the coordinated
offensive against coal is emerging as a pivotal front in the debate
over global warming.

"Our goal is to oppose these projects at each and every stage, from
zoning and air and water permits, to their mining permits and new coal
railroads," said Bruce Nilles, a Sierra Club attorney who directs the
group's national coal campaign. "They know they don't have an answer
to global warming, so they're fighting for their life."

Industry representatives say the environmentalists' actions threaten
to undermine the country's fragile power grid, setting the stage for a
future of high-priced electricity and uncontrollable blackouts.

"These projects won't be denied, but they can be delayed by those who
oppose any new energy projects," said Vic Svec, vice president of the
mining and power company Peabody Energy.

While observers say forecasts of power grid doom are exaggerated, the
importance of coal -- one of the country's cheapest and most abundant
fuels -- is undeniable.

Coal plants provide just over 50 percent of the nation's electricity.

They also are the largest domestic source of the greenhouse gas carbon
dioxide, emitting 2 billion tons annually, about a third of the
country's total.

Environmental groups cite 59 canceled, delayed or blocked plants as
evidence they are turning back the "coal rush." That stacks up against
22 new plants now under construction in 14 states -- the most in more
than two decades.

Mining companies, utilities and coal-state politicians promote coal in
the name of national security, as an alternative to foreign fuels.

With hundreds of years of reserves still in the ground, they're also
pushing coal-to-diesel plants as a way to sharply increase domestic
production.

The outcome of the fight over coal could determine the nation's
greenhouse gas emissions for years to come, said Gregory Nemet,
assistant professor of public affairs at the University of Wisconsin.

"It's pretty much irreversible," Nemet said. "Once a coal plant is
built, it will last 50 years or so."

But in opposing coal projects across the board, environmentalists risk
hobbling more advanced coal plants that could rein in at least some of
those emissions, Nemet said. He added that rising demand for
electricity means more power "has to come from somewhere."

"There's too much pressure -- in terms of energy independence and the
inexpensiveness of that resource -- to not use that coal," Nemet said.

One of the latest challenges to a utility came in the heart of coal
country -- Montana, which boasts the largest coal reserves in the
nation.

On Friday, a state panel refused to rescind an air-quality permit it
had granted for a plant proposed for the Great Falls area by Southern
Montana Electric, despite concerns about the plant's carbon dioxide
emissions. The 250-megawatt plant is projected to emit the equivalent
of 2.8 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, as much as a half-
million vehicles.

The Montana Environmental Information Center, which had asked the
panel to review the permit, vowed to appeal the ruling.

Nilles said the Sierra Club spent about $1 million on such efforts in
2007 and hopes to ratchet that figure up to $10 million this year.

Meanwhile, coal interests are pouring even more into a promotional
campaign launched by the industry group Americans for Balanced Energy
Choices. It spent $15 million last year and expects to more than
double that to $35 million in 2008, said the group's director, Joe
Lucas.

Funding for the group comes from coal mining and utility companies
such as Peabody and railroads that depend on coal shipments for a
large share of their revenues.

Peabody's Svec acknowledged a rush to build new plants, but denied the
goal was to beat any of at least seven bills pending before Congress
to restrict carbon dioxide emissions -- a charge leveled by some
environmentalists.

Rather, he said, the construction boom is driven by projections that
the country will fall into a power deficit within the next decade if
new plants are not built.

Industry attorney Jeffrey Holmstead said that could lead to a future
of rolling blackouts as the economy expands and electricity
consumption increases. Holmstead was in charge of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency's air program during the first five
years of the current Bush administration.

The power deficit cited by industry officials is based on projections
from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation. NERC vice
president David Nevius said his group is "neutral" on what kind of
plants should be built to meet rising demand.

"We're not saying the lights will go out. We're just saying additional
resources are needed," Nevius said. "We don't say coal over gas over
wind over solar."

Utilities currently burn more than 1 billion tons of coal annually in
more than 600 plants. Over the next two decades, the Bush
administration projects coal's share of electricity generation will
increase to almost 60 percent.

That projection held steady in recent months even as courts and
regulators turned back, delayed or asked for changes to plants in at
least nine states.

Other projects in Utah, Texas, Wyoming, Florida and several other
states have been abandoned or shelved.

Some were canceled over global warming concerns. Utilities backed off
others after their price tags climbed over $1 billion due to rising
costs for materials and skilled labor.

Environmental opposition to coal plants was galvanized by a U.S.

Supreme Court decision in April that said carbon dioxide is a
pollutant open to regulation.

The case, Massachusetts vs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
involved vehicle emissions. But environmentalists aim to use the
decision as a fulcrum to leverage regulators to take a harder line on
greenhouse gases in several emerging power plant disputes.

The result could serve as an early barometer of the reach of the
Supreme Court ruling.

More tests of the two sides' arguments are certain. Industry groups
say at least 15 coal-fired power projects are nearing the end of the
approval process and could soon start construction.

Copyright Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal