Posted on 12/09/2021 8:45:10 AM PST by george76
Colorado regulators will kick off a series of hearings Wednesday that could determine how the state’s largest utility generates its energy in the coming decades — and how much it will contribute to global warming.
Xcel Energy, which supplies electricity to 1.5 million people across Colorado, announced plans to phase out its remaining coal plants earlier this year and instead rely more on natural gas, renewable energy, and emerging technology such as hydrogen power.
The utility’s plans came as the state, pushed by activists and environmental groups, set a goal to slash its greenhouse gas emissions by half of its 2005 levels by the end of the decade. Increased urgency to prevent the worst effects of human-caused global warming pressured Xcel to close its coal plants sooner than it originally planned, including the Comanche Generating Station, one of the state’s single-largest sources of carbon emissions.
Xcel and other groups, including the city and county of Pueblo, unions and state agencies, agreed last month to close Comanche’s newest coal-fired unit by 2035. The move could cut Xcel’s emissions by nearly 90 percent this decade — but would likely require additional investment to replace and cut short millions in property taxes it was paying to Pueblo. Major environmental groups like Western Resource Advocates and Sierra Club did not sign the agreement, saying it did not go far or fast enough to cut emissions.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission, a three-member body appointed by the governor, will preside over the hearings, scheduled through Dec. 17. The commission could decide the fate of Xcel’s coal plants as early as February.
Several groups are expected to testify in the coming days. Here’s where they stand:
Xcel Energy.
Xcel, which initiated the settlement discussions, has faced constant backlash for its management of Comanche’s newest coal-fired unit, Comanche 3. Despite nearly two cumulative years of unplanned shutdowns, the company pushed against closing the plant by 2030. Xcel-Colorado President Alice Jackson said the company needed more time for emerging technologies to develop before they could become a part of the grid. Jackson said the agreement balances the needs of the company, customers and Pueblo, where the Comanche plant is located.
Environmental groups..
Environmental groups and coalitions did not support closing Comanche by 2035, stressing the need to stop burning fossil fuels as soon as possible to slow down the rate of global warming. A Sierra Club representative denounced a clause in the agreement that would allow Xcel to own at least $626 million of generation from the coal-fired unit’s replacement. Gwen Farnsworth, the managing senior policy advisor for Western Resource Advocates, said that while there were important compromises in the agreement, it would lead Xcel to acquire more natural gas resources.
Pueblo.
The city and county of Pueblo have expressed frustration that Xcel moved up Comanche’s retirement date, saying they were expecting the company to pay property taxes through 2070. Despite efforts to keep Xcel paying that needed revenue — and a flashy ultimatum that it build a nuclear plant in its stead — the two government bodies supported the agreement. Xcel does not provide electricity to Pueblo; residents have complained about having to bear the brunt of the plant’s pollution.
Labor groups.
Several unions have joined the agreement, including the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the Rocky Mountain Environmental Labor Coalition and the Colorado Building and Construction Trade Council. The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers had supported Xcel’s earlier plan to close Comanche by 2040, saying it would be less abrupt for the plant’s employees. It had told state regulators that jobs installing wind and solar power projects were low-paying and temporary and was one of the few groups that supported Pueblo County’s proposal for a nuclear plant.
State agencies.
The Colorado Office of the Utility Consumer Advocate, Colorado Energy Office and the Colorado Public Utilities Commission’s own staff joined the settlement. “We think that it meets our major goals,” said Keith Hay, director of policy for the Colorado Energy Office. “It achieves earlier greenhouse gas emissions reductions, it achieves more greenhouse gas emissions reductions by 2030, but just as importantly, it provides security to the city and county of Pueblo.”
Trade groups.
Trade groups are divided on their support of the settlement, even within the renewable energy industry. The Colorado Solar and Storage Association and Solar Energy Industries Association joined the agreement; the Colorado Renewable Energy Society did not. Several energy organizations also did not join, including the CORE Electric Cooperative and Interwest Energy Alliance. The Colorado Oil and Gas Association, which represents oil and gas operators, signed on to the agreement.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3973787/posts
Colorado Ping ( Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)
re: “and emerging technology such as hydrogen power.”
NPR, where are they going to mine that?
I wish more than anything that one of these CEO’s Grows up and pulls a John Galt and SHUTS down the Plant and Permanently Disables it and WALKS AWAY leaving just a Sign to call the Sierra Club for Electricity
Many left wing climate activists oppose hydro power as well.
Everything I've seen about hydrogen says its a net-negative. You need to put in a large amount of energy to create and store the hydrogen.
I think the central-planners' notion is - you have solar and wind which have strong peaks and troughs of energy production. What do you do with the extra energy produced on warm, sunny days by wind and solar? you send that power to make hydrogen, where it can be (in theory) stored for use later, when the sun isn't shining, and the wind isn't blowing.
Or you just use coal, which is cheap, and can mined anytime, and be stored anywhere, in any conditions.
I left the state in 2020....was invaded by Californians in the early 1990s and took over..an example of a semi red state turning deep blue...
Yes the political correct group vs the political need taxes group. Bring more popcorn!
Coal is making a comeback this year as high natural gas prices incentivize more coal use in electricity generation..
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/US-Coal-Is-Making-A-Transitory-Comeback.html
BUT, the solar and wind power is REQUIRED to be backed up by RELIABLE energy.
Buy a generator for your home before the rush.
Pay more, and we’ll be told the move didn’t accomplish nearly enough after it’s done, and we’ll have to guess what, pay more.
EXCEL is owned by the public.
I mean - all of this thinking is starting to wear me out...
They’re planning on switching us to the smart meters too (XEL in the TX panhandle). Imagine what the envitro’s can get them to do with that.
We live in an outlying area that loses power frequently sometimes for days at a time. We and all of our neighbors have backup generators. Many of us have backup generators for our backup generators. Fortunately our neighborhood has natural gas which currently costs less than a third of what it costs to power a generator with gasoline or propane and much less than diesel as well. But even with natural gas when the power goes out depending on your load and the efficiency of your generator it still costs two to three times as much as when we are billed for electricity.
Minneapolis-based monopoly - Excel - recently got permission for a massive $2.5 billion fuel-switching scam to move its Colorado rate payers away from base-load, reliable .. in favor of not reliable , ugly , bird killing wind mills.
Xcel is seeking a 10.5% return ..
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3979295/posts
Silly. They probably plan to capture all the hydrogen by boiling water. The fidiots in Nevaduh have done the requisite 2 votes to allow the Nevada Revsed Statutes addition to put in place all power in the state be provided by “renewables”. 50% by 2035 and all in by 2050. Uh, yeah. Sounds like NVNRG will be buying some out of state power. People are so stoopid. Sounds nice? Vote yes.
At last count approximately 95% of the Hydrogen produced in the USA came from converting a Kilo of Natural Gas into 1/3 Kilo of Hydrogen.
Not really green.
Hydrogen power. Great. Why didn’t I think of that. Use technology that requires more energy to produce the hydrogen than it will ever produce by burning it. OH WAIT... MASSIVE government subsidies. Carry on.
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.