Kansas' top environmental regulator today approved an air permit for a new coal-fired power plant in the southwest part of the state.
Acting Health and Environment Secretary John Mitchell announced his decision Thursday. It allows Hays-based Sunflower Electric Power Corp. to move forward with its $2.8 billion project outside Holcomb.
http://www.kmbc.com/...
Mitchell, you may know, was installed after Rod Bremby, the KDHE head under former Governor Kathleen Sebelius was shown the door by the new governor for actually enforcing environmental laws and respecting the decision by the US Supreme Court that said carbon should be regulated to protect public health.
Bad move for Kansas
Long-term Health and Financial Consequences
The proposed new coal-fired power plant would emit millions of tons of pollutants each year over the 50+ year life of the project, posing substantial risks to human health and the environment. The pollutants emitted by the plant will include fine particulates, ozone forming constituents, hazardous pollutants such as mercury and greenhouse gases, all of which EPA has found pose serious risks to human health.
Sunflower has itself admitted that there is no need in Kansas for the vast majority of the capacity from this massive new polluting plant-instead, Tri-State, a Colorado utility, is slated to receive the majority of the power. But Tri-State's recent long-term resource plan shows that Tri-State has no need for the capacity either, and Tri-State has not yet committed to the project. Sunflower still hasn't paid back the federal government the millions of taxpayer dollars it owes for its existing coal plant at the Holcomb station. Given Sunflower's massive debt and precarious financial situation, it can't possibly finance this new coal plant itself without putting Kansas ratepayers at risk.
And the process of approving this thing before new EPA standards take effect in in January, is just embarrasing to the state.
A Politicized Process
The permitting process requires public comments to be thoroughly considered. Instead, review of nearly 6,000 public comments apparently was cut short in an attempt to avoid new national environmental regulations, which become applicable on Jan 2, 2011.
The permitting process has been a national embarrassment for Kansans, as the state, blessed with some of the country's best wind resources, vigorously pushes forward with plans for an unneeded coal plant, which would burn Wyoming coal while other states begin retiring their existing coal plants. This politicized fiasco was plagued with leaked emails exposing permit process manipulation, backroom deals, unwarranted involvement from the state legislature, and the abrupt and suspicious removal of former Secretary Bremby from KDHE.
"The rushed job on this permit is an injustice to the thousands of citizens who participated in the process with the belief that their input was meaningful," said Stephanie Cole of the Kansas Sierra Club. "By turning the permitting process into a race against the clock, the state has signaled that it does not value public involvement."
While Sunflower may now have a permit for the project, they are far from breaking ground on a new coal plant. In fact, coal plant construction has been on the wane for years, and it is unlikely Sunflower, already highly indebted to the federal government, will break coal's multi-year losing streak anytime soon.
While Kansas is rushing to build a coal plant for a Colorado utility, which would receive most of the power, the rest of the country, including Colorado, has moved beyond coal. For example, just last week Colorado announced plans to begin retiring existing coal plants.
Common Dreams
Here's a great summary of the dirty politics behind this decision to embrace America's dirtiest power source.
The Kansas City Star had this to say about the project...
Coupled with lame-duck Gov. Mark Parkinson’s abrupt dismissal of former health and environment director Roderick Bremby, a voice of caution on the plant, the speeded-up process indeed looks suspiciously like a rush to a foregone conclusion.
Helping a power company avoid eco-friendly updates, however, is not in the best interests of the state or its citizens.