Energy & Environment Daily, July 26, 2006

ON HILL, FUTUREGEN SHORT LIST SEPARATES WINNERS FROM LOSERS

By Darren Samuelsohn, E&E Daily senior reporter

Four sites in Illinois and Texas were named the finalists for hosting the $1 billion FutureGen project yesterday, prompting mixed reactions from the congressmen and senators who have been trying to land the prototype coal-fired power plant for their constituencies.

The winners had nothing but praise for the announcement, starting with Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Barton welcomed the news that his district is home to one of the sites that made it through the vetting process. The Jewett County location near College Station "provides the infrastructure, resources and geography that FutureGen needs to advance clean fossil fuel energy production around the globe," Barton said.

"Texas has long led the nation in energy production and is a natural home for this next-generation project," Barton added.

Farther West, freshman Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) celebrated word that a site in his Permian Basin district had made the short list. The Odessa County area "possesses all the requirements necessary to make FutureGen a success," Conaway said.

Republican Rep. John Shimkus, whose central Illinois district abuts the state's two finalists in Mattoon and Tuscola counties, said he was "thrilled" with the announcement. "Our coal reserves and geology match the needs" of FutureGen, Shimkus said.

The two Illinois' sites are in Rep. Timothy Johnson's (R-Ill.) district. A Johnson spokesman could not be reached for comment.

'The sum of many scores' Industry experts on power plant siting and carbon sequestration evaluated a dozen proposals from seven major coal-producing states before whittling down the list. Officials charged with evaluating the bids worked from about 100 criteria, including sequestration potential, location size, access to energy transmission and water and proximity to sensitive areas.

"It was the sum of many scores, of many different criteria," said Michael Mudd, a senior official at American Electric Power and also executive director of the FutureGen industry coalition, at a Washington press conference.

Even so, political questions have dogged the site-selection process since President Bush first unveiled details of the plan in 2003. Homestate lawmakers, eager for the notoriety of hosting the plant as well as the jobs that would come with its construction and operations, have enacted significant incentives to make their bids look more attractive.

Lawmakers with powerful positions on Capitol Hill have also ramped up their activity to land the site in their district. Bush's own homestate tie also has been raised as an underlying factor in the site selection process.

But industry representatives involved in the process brushed off reporters' questions yesterday about pressure from high-ranking government officials in naming the finalists. "There was absolutely no political influence that went into the final site selection," Mudd insisted.

Bryan Hannegan, former chief of staff to White House Council on Environmental Quality Chairman Jim Connaughton, said in an interview he did not think political considerations were taken into account at a "very high level." More likely, Hannegan said he expected the losing state bids to pressure the industry coalition in charge of FutureGen to get their sites back on the short list.

Losing bids also may request the Energy Department hand out conciliation prizes, in the form of other types of research and development projects, Hannegan said.

"Part of the challenge with a site selection is there's going to be winners and losers," Hannegan said. "The unfortunate fact of this process is you have to select one site, and there's a number of sites around the country that you'd like to try this on."

FutureGen officials told reporters they were not planning on holding an appeals process.

Losing bids

Two other Illinois counties, as well as Kentucky, North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia and Wyoming were not selected for FutureGen.

"We're disappointed because we know Ohio would have made a great home for FutureGen," said Chris Paulitz, a spokesman for Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio).

Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.) said he would work on other measures to expand use of Wyoming coal, which has been the largest source of coal burned in the United States for nearly two decades. "FutureGen is one way to prove the use of Wyoming coal," said Thomas, explaining that integrated gasification combined cycle plants need to be developed before FutureGen comes online in 2012.

A final decision on a FutureGen site will be made in September 2007.

If Congress and industry maintain financial backing, construction on the near-zero emission, 275-megawatt coal plant is scheduled to start in 2009. The power plant will turn coal into both electricity and hydrogen fuel with minimal air pollution. It also is being designed to bury its heat-trapping greenhouse gases deep underground.

Copyright 1996-2007 E&E Publishing, LLC