Next week, the House Environment, Energy and Technology Committee will consider legislation that would place a two-year moratorium on building coal-fired power plants. They also have the ultimate authority on the adjudication of water rights!
San Diego Union-Tribune
Sempra plans for plants run into trouble
State rules, water rights jeopardize 2 proposals
By Craig D. Rose
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
February 24, 2006
A Sempra Energy plan for two new coal-fired electric generating plants in the West is hitting snags.
The San Diego-based energy company says it is re-evaluating the “size and scope” of its proposal to build a 1,200 megawatt coal-fired plant near the northern Nevada town of Gerlach, while a plan for another plant in Idaho is also generating opposition.
Sempra spokesman Art Larson said the review of the proposal in Nevada has been prompted by regulatory actions in California that could limit the purchase of electricity generated by burning coal.
Beyond the possible regulatory limitations, a Gerlach-area opponent of the Sempra project said the company faces substantial obstacles in securing water rights the plant would require and in winning approval of the proposed plant's environmental impact.
“Adjudication of the water issues could take five to 10 years, and we think they will have a lot of trouble on the air quality permit,” said David Rumsey, owner of the Parker Ranch, near the proposed Gerlach plant.
A Sempra official earlier this week also told an Idaho House committee that the company will scuttle plans for a coal-fired generator there if lawmakers approve a two-year moratorium on building such plants.
“It would send a very strong signal to us that, basically, you're not interested,” Bruce McCulloch of Sempra told the House Resources and Conservation Committee on Wednesday, The Times-News of Twin Falls reported.
Sempra has applied for permits to build a $1 billion, 600-megawatt coal-fired plant in southern Idaho's Jerome County – a proposal that has generated opposition in the downwind Magic Valley and Sun Valley areas, which include Twin Falls.
Next week, the House Environment, Energy and Technology Committee will consider legislation that would place a two-year moratorium on building coal-fired power plants.
McCulloch told the resources panel Wednesday that Sempra officials are troubled by the proposal, drafted by Rep. Sharon Block, R-Twin Falls.
“We believe the market is here and now,” McCulloch said.
Electricity generated by the plant would be sold in the Pacific Northwest, which McCulloch said will need 6,000 megawatts of coal-fired power by 2015.
McCulloch, Sempra's manager for the Idaho project, told the committee that the company is also concerned about legislation recently introduced by House Speaker Bruce Newcomb, R-Burley, that gives the Legislature ultimate authority to approve the transfer of water to be used by power plants.
McCulloch said Sempra would not be interested in spending an estimated $10 million to get the necessary permits for the plant if the company didn't have a guarantee that the Legislature would approve the water transfer under Newcomb's bill.
“It's a huge problem for us or for anyone who wants to develop a thermal plant in Idaho,” he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
San Diego Union-Tribune
Sempra plans for plants run into trouble
State rules, water rights jeopardize 2 proposals
By Craig D. Rose
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
February 24, 2006
A Sempra Energy plan for two new coal-fired electric generating plants in the West is hitting snags.
The San Diego-based energy company says it is re-evaluating the “size and scope” of its proposal to build a 1,200 megawatt coal-fired plant near the northern Nevada town of Gerlach, while a plan for another plant in Idaho is also generating opposition.
Sempra spokesman Art Larson said the review of the proposal in Nevada has been prompted by regulatory actions in California that could limit the purchase of electricity generated by burning coal.
Beyond the possible regulatory limitations, a Gerlach-area opponent of the Sempra project said the company faces substantial obstacles in securing water rights the plant would require and in winning approval of the proposed plant's environmental impact.
“Adjudication of the water issues could take five to 10 years, and we think they will have a lot of trouble on the air quality permit,” said David Rumsey, owner of the Parker Ranch, near the proposed Gerlach plant.
A Sempra official earlier this week also told an Idaho House committee that the company will scuttle plans for a coal-fired generator there if lawmakers approve a two-year moratorium on building such plants.
“It would send a very strong signal to us that, basically, you're not interested,” Bruce McCulloch of Sempra told the House Resources and Conservation Committee on Wednesday, The Times-News of Twin Falls reported.
Sempra has applied for permits to build a $1 billion, 600-megawatt coal-fired plant in southern Idaho's Jerome County – a proposal that has generated opposition in the downwind Magic Valley and Sun Valley areas, which include Twin Falls.
Next week, the House Environment, Energy and Technology Committee will consider legislation that would place a two-year moratorium on building coal-fired power plants.
McCulloch told the resources panel Wednesday that Sempra officials are troubled by the proposal, drafted by Rep. Sharon Block, R-Twin Falls.
“We believe the market is here and now,” McCulloch said.
Electricity generated by the plant would be sold in the Pacific Northwest, which McCulloch said will need 6,000 megawatts of coal-fired power by 2015.
McCulloch, Sempra's manager for the Idaho project, told the committee that the company is also concerned about legislation recently introduced by House Speaker Bruce Newcomb, R-Burley, that gives the Legislature ultimate authority to approve the transfer of water to be used by power plants.
McCulloch said Sempra would not be interested in spending an estimated $10 million to get the necessary permits for the plant if the company didn't have a guarantee that the Legislature would approve the water transfer under Newcomb's bill.
“It's a huge problem for us or for anyone who wants to develop a thermal plant in Idaho,” he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
posted by:
|
Unsubscribed |
-
Re: A moratorium on building new coal plants proposed!!!
Fri, February 24, 2006 - 5:42 PMdo you think this is somehow related to the recent human tragedy in the coal mines in the east?
-
Unsu...
Re: A moratorium on building new coal plants proposed!!!
Thu, March 16, 2006 - 10:01 AMIf the US Government had ratified the Kyoto Protocol, or established a carbon dioxide or similar pollution tax, such a moratorium would be unnecessary. Regulations in general are such an inefficient means of dealing with the problem -- it means more food for the lawyers.
But at least things are going in the right direction...
-
Re: A moratorium on building new coal plants proposed!!!
Thu, March 16, 2006 - 10:13 AMIt's good to see the that these coal plants in the West are being reviewed suspiciously by the states involved, both in the Idaho legislature and the California legislature, and it's very interesting that WATER use is the overarching issue in both cases. I don't think the coal mining accidents have had much direct impact on these proposals, but it sure is odd that the entire coal industry is getting such bad press from different angles.
-
Re: A moratorium on building new coal plants proposed!!!
Thu, March 16, 2006 - 2:28 PMi would think that to support the dependance on coal, especially with all the recent press, is becomming a new political faux pas. i agree it's a step in the right direction, but likely just a long delay for something bad to happen...
