Daily Memo: Energy:
Rising costs cheer coal plant foes
Economics, not pollution concerns, hamper Ely project, but that’s fine with environmentalists
Steve Marcus
Michael Yackira, right, president and chief executive of Sierra Pacific Resources, chats with Pat Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, during the June grand opening of a plant that manufactures components for solar thermal power systems. The Sierra chief says the future of a coal project near Ely is uncertain.
Tue, Aug 19, 2008 (2 a.m.)
Nevada’s environmental commission gathered in the fall in Carson City to consider a request from environmental groups to stop granting permits for new coal-fired power plants.
Sun Topics
Environmentalists feared what they saw as an unfaltering march toward approval of all three proposed in the state. The enviros mounted a traditional argument: The plants would generate enough power for almost 3 million homes, but would also emit more than 30 million tons of greenhouse gases every year for 50 years.
To date, little evidence exists that those arguments will prevail. But it’s beginning to look as if other realities just might, at least with one plant.
Sierra Pacific Resources, parent company of Nevada Power and Sierra Pacific Power, continues pushing for a 1,500-megawatt, $5 billion coal plant near Ely. The company announced in November that it could meet the surging short-term demands of Southern Nevada by moving up construction of one gas-fired power plant and buying another. Executives referred to delays to the Ely coal plant.
A federal environmental review on the project is 18 months behind schedule. The state’s consumer protection bureau last week asked the Public Utilities Commission, which must authorize funding for the Ely project, to stop the utility from spending more money on the permit process until it produces a solid budget. Cost estimates have risen from $3.8 billion to $5 billion over the past two years, the utility says.
The commission staff suggests the utility analyze other options, such as expanding an existing coal plant in Northern Nevada.
Michael Yackira, president and chief executive of Sierra Pacific Resources, said last week the plant’s future is uncertain, although the company was pushing ahead.
“Construction costs are higher than what we originally expected,” Yackira said. “Coal prices are higher than what we expected for Ely. And there is looming the potential of carbon capture. If it’s not the best alternative we’ll have to ... do something else.”
It’s almost possible to hear environmentalists crossing their fingers.
“There are a lot more uncertainties now about coal plants than when Ely was approved by the Public Utilities Commission two years ago,” said Charles Benjamin of Western Resource Advocates. “That landscape ... has changed so dramatically. The utilities just never saw this.”
Sen. Harry Reid, a friend in high places to the anti-coal movement, will not take credit for slowing the coal train.
Environmentalists won’t either. Instead, they cite factors that include a growing cachet attached to going green, uncertainty over carbon emissions regulation and rising costs of coal and steel.
Coal plant opponents admit their most successful arguments have been economic ones.
“Due to the fact that Ely is so far removed from the population centers in Nevada, I don’t think the environmental arguments have the kind of traction they would if it were going to be built 20 miles from the Strip,” said one anti-coal activist who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“The real impact changing the way folks look at Ely now is that ... (it) would double rates. This appears to be a black hole as far as money goes.”
And do they mind that Nevadans are more persuaded by their pocketbooks than by melting ice caps?
No, says the Sierra Club’s Lydia Ball.
“I’m usually thought of as someone who just speaks for the environment ... but I think that all three of the arguments — economic, health and environmental — are equal reasons why we should not build these coal plants,” she said.
In this case — with costs mounting by the day — postponing a project indefinitely might be just as good as killing it, a strategy that’s worked pretty well at a certain infamous Nevada mountain.
Discussion: 2 comments so far…
Post a comment
Email Edition
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Court filings shed light on Fontainebleau financing
- High-speed train option to Victorville advances
- Tropicana Las Vegas emerges from bankruptcy
- Authorities to mother of five: You’re being deported Monday
- Las Vegas welcomes 102 new citizens in ceremony
- Poker players party Playboy-style
- State investigating surgery at unlicensed Vegas clinic
- DOT action gives boost to DesertXpress
- Boulder Station mourns worker killed in DUI bike collision
- Ethics complaint filed against former mayor, councilman
Blogs
Joe Brown
Kathy Griffin carted off Las Vegas stage (3 Comments)
The Kats Report
On the track, this Kwasniewski is making a name for himself
The Bull's-Eye
Priestley bows to Ruthian effort by 'The Power' (UPDATED)
Elsewhere
Don't look for Vick to wear a Vegas UFL uniform
Business Notebook
News isn't all bad for Las Vegas companies
Now and Then
Let's see those spelling bee kids try this
Punchy Points: UFC 100
No. 8: The Cutman: Blood is Stitch's trade and his bond
Calendar
- MC Hammer and Vanilla Ice at Wet Republic (11 a.m. to 7 p.m.)
- Kaskade headlines Perfecto at Rain Nightclub (10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.)
- Fourth of July festivities at the Henderson Events Plaza (6 p.m. to 9 p.m.)
- HardNox at Pure (10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.)
- Jeff Dunham at The Colosseum (8 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
- Jay-Z with Ciara at The Pearl (8 p.m. to 10 p.m.)
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Technorati
Use American Energy for American jobs and keeping dollars in this country. Until we drop the energy costs our visitors and their dollars will stay home broke from playing no jackpot slots called gas pumps.
The SNWA and Sierra Pacific could easily coordinate efforts to save us rate payers hundreds of millions of dollars.
It is long overdue that the "us" in U.S. be restored to the U.S. tax and rate payer with regard to water and power.
Sierra Pacific Resources wrote the SNWA in March of 2007 that a new fresh water Source for the region was definitely plausible and recommended that SNWA investigate for us. The SNWA ignored Sierra's recommendation....
SNWA could use the fresh water rather than risk damage to the desert environment from the pumping of their proposed wells. Development of the Source would not interfer with any of SNWA's plans. Sierra could use the remainder of the Source and the return flows from SNWA's primary usage to keep Lake Mead reasonably full for all of us.
Lake Mead generates 1800 megawatts of renewable energy and of course, is already on line and functioning for us. Unless something is done, Lake Mead is projected to go dry.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation could easily measure and subtract the slight increase in evaporation losses and utilize excess water to restore the 9 Billion dollar Colorado River Delta ( AZ study) for us, as well as provide a vast water reserve for the rest of the region including the soon to be drought devastated Southern California.
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) supplies water to about 25 million of us and has had its supply cut by more than 30%. The MWD also refuses to consider a new fresh water Source of one million acre feet as a resource to be investigated !
Numerous other us in the SW Region of the U.S. could also benefit by development of the Source. With a win-win for millions of us, a savings of hundreds of millions of dollars for us and a guarantee that neither the environment or the water rights of anyone, anywhere will be damaged....why not fully investigate such a vast available natural resource for us ??
Ray Walker (Retired Water Rights Analyst) waterrdw@yahoo.com