Posted on 09/26/2007 10:42:51 AM PDT by trane250
Reid cites other states that are turning away from coal By JOHN G. EDWARDS Stephens Media Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., on Friday advanced a new argument in his campaign to block development of conventional coal-burning power plants in Nevada, citing reports that coal-fired plants are being canceled and curtailed in seven other states.
"All these states are saying no to coal power plants that use inefficient and polluting technology," Reid said in a statement. "Instead, they're investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency because that makes so much more sense in the long run for the environment, consumers and their economies."
The report comes as part of Reid's promise to use all his power to stop coal-fired power plants under development in Nevada. He opposes coal power plants being developed by Sierra Pacific Resources of Reno, LS Power of East Brunswick, N.J.; and Sithe Global Power of Houston.
Top executives at Sierra Pacific, the parent company for Nevada Power Co. and Sierra Pacific Power Co., disagreed, citing statistics that indicate numerous coal-fired power plants are in late stages of development around the country.
Sierra Pacific Chief Executive Officer Michael Yackira counted 100 coal power plants under development around the country. Half of those projects, with total generating capacity of 24,000 megawatts, are in advanced stages of development or permitting, Yackira said.
But Reid said the Department of Energy reported two dozen coal projects have been canceled since early last year.
Although Nevada's electric utilities are getting more power from renewable resources such as sunlight, wind and geothermal or hot underground water, Yackira contends that the utilities must also develop conventional coal plants.
"We simply need to have more coal in our fuel mix," Yackira said.
Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific Power get 70 percent of their electricity from plants that use natural gas, which has shot up in price in recent years. The utilities want to use coal for part of the power plants to reduce reliance on gas.
Reid argues that Nevada utilities can satisfy growing demand by developing more renewable resources, promoting energy conservation and fostering combined heat and power or cogeneration plants that efficiently use energy for multiple functions in large buildings.
Executives with the Nevada utilities say they also support energy efficiency and renewable energy but argue that they also need more conventional power.
Reid suggested Nevada follow the example of Colorado, Florida, Kansas, North Carolina, Texas, Oklahoma and Washington where regulators, public officials or utility executives postponed, curtailed or canceled coal plants.
The last coal power plant in Nevada, Valmy unit two in Northern Nevada, was completed in 1985.
Roberto Denis, senior vice president of Sierra Pacific Resources, said the long duration since the last coal project reflects a decision by Nevada to stop building all kinds of power plants in the 1990s when utilities relied on then cheap wholesale power from other states. Wholesale power prices skyrocketed during the western energy crisis of 2000 and 2001, leading Nevada officials to build and buy power plants in Nevada.
Sempra Energy shelved plans to build a 1,450-megawatt, coal-fired plant in Northern Nevada a couple of years ago, but Nevada utility officials said the plant provoked controversy because it was going to use Nevada resources to generate power for California and other states.
Sierra Pacific executives say their coal-fired power project near Ely will be used to generate electricity for use in Nevada.
State regulators in Florida rejected a coal plant project there this year. Florida Gov. Charlie Crist urged utilities to stop relying on coal and gas-fired plants because conventional plants produce carbon dioxide, which may lead to global warming.
Two cooperative electric utilities reduced the size of a coal-fired power project in Kansas this year, Reid reported. Duke Energy dropped plans this year for a coal plant in North Carolina after the project's costs increased. Avista Utilities decided to rely on gas-fired power plants and windmills for power instead of new coal plants, Reid said. Oklahoma regulators rejected an application for a coal-fired plant this month.
The Edison Electric Institute has pointed to rapid increases in recent coal-fired and renewable energy power project costs, but Yackira said Sierra still estimates a total cost of $3.8 billion for the 1,500-megawatt Ely Energy Center and a related transmission line.
http://elynews.com/articles/2007/08/22/opinion/oped01.txt
Wow, obviously an endorsement for nuclear power, right?
He said "renewable energy" so of course he must be talking about breeder reactors......heh!
Senators Byrd and Casey got anything to say about this?
Harry puts out enough wind and gas along with his cohorts in Congress, therefore he figures we don’t need no steenkin’ coal.
The Leftists like Harry never look beyond their noses for consequences.
Logic says Nuclear would be most efficient, but no...wind and gas is what you get from the Democrats.
Coal and nuclear are the only way we get weened from oil.
I now think that everyone is missing the 800lb gorilla in the room - the paper, the public, and perhaps even some public officials in White Pine County.
Those power plants have applied for a change-of-use on over 10,000 AF of water rights from ranches and farms they bought up. If Harry denies those power plants the ability to use those water rights for five years, the state can grab them back for non-use.
As a result, if Harry can delay the industrial use of those water rights long enough, the power company will simply sell the water down the pipeline to the SNWA (of which, Rory Reid, Harry’s son, is co-chair) when Pat Mulroy comes calling with the checkbook.
I think this is now about water. The coal/pollution/power business is being used as the talking point, but it isn’t Reid’s real agenda.
And Webb, who’s originally from Southwest Virginia, where coal is the big industry.
The solution to the problem is for Reid to go to Las Vegas and tell all the hotels and casinos to set their thermometers at 78 degrees in the summer and 68 degrees in the winter.
Thirty percent of the outdoor lighting should be curtailed and watering of grass should be reduced to zero.
The resulting drop in power consumption will provide the excess needed for thirty years. This is the green way. Power to the people!!
So why is our country investing $12 million dollars in China’s coal mine development. He talks out of both sides of his mouth.
This jerk should check with his friends and neighbors over in CA to see how well this strategy has worked for them. CA builds nothing new (other than expensive, polluting, non-baseload gas turbines) and trashes perfectly good generators (Rancho Seco, SONGS-1), and brags about "replacing" them with wind, solar, and conservation. Guess what? It didn't work. Those things can't carry the load. As a result, they get shortages, brownouts, blackouts, and sky-high prices for electricity. Real smart move there, wackos.
While not wanting to agree with Reid on anything, in 2003 while touring Norfolk Shipyards with my elderly folks, there were train tracks and machinery for loading coal in one particular area. When we inquired, the person leading the tour indicated that a high percentage of the coal that’s dug out of America is exported primarily to other countries with Italy being primary, and what we were viewing was the loading dock. As the train cars came in, the coal was loaded on the ships.
Since 65% of electricity in the US is generated by burning coal, the Dems could really trash the economy by blocking it.
The dims are trying to take over the energy business. If something goes wrong, it is just an excuse for exercising more control over the industry.
Investing exclusively in renewable energy and energy efficiency makes sense only in a political sense. If the dims control the energy industry, they can brag about all the jobs created and coerce industry executives to promote the dim way. The dims want to impose national mandates so it is not just California that will have high costs and unreliable power.
Is there something wrong with the coal industry having exports? We have the most abundant supply in the world. Did you know that coal is also imported into the US? And do you have any idea what types of coal are being exported or imported? Soft coals, hard coals, lignite, metallurgical coals?
In my county, the environmentalists have shot down two geothermal developments, are advocating to remove 4 hydropower dams and blocked the devlopment of a 14 Megawatt biomass plant (sent back for additional impact studies.) We also have wind to develop, but being on the Pacific Flyway, why even try.
If the environmentalists are claiming to support alternative energy sources, they lie. I have yet to see them pull for one in actual development.
Texas has canceled coal burning plants and is on its way to building nuclear plants. How about that, Harry? There is absolutely no reason that Texas, Louisiana and Oklahoma should feel obliged to provide their oil and natural gas to states that do not contribute anything to the nation’s fuel supply. States that refuse to kick in what they have, CA and FL for example, should be cut off from oil and gas shipments from states that have for decades shouldered the burden of supplying energy to the parasite states. That should come to an end as Gulf supplies dwindle.
I'll Repeat it for you and SECOND THAT MOTION
You got figures to back that up?
BTW....Wasn't "Power to the People" a LEFTIST slogan?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.