A regulator’s decision to block a proposed coal-fired power plant project involving Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association drew praise from environmentalists but raised concern over how the Westminster-based company will supply adequate power.
Last week’s decision by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment marked the first time a state has denied an air-quality permit for a fossil-fuel power plant because of concerns about carbon dioxide emissions.
“Our senior management and board will be getting together and just exploring various options,” said Jim Van Someren, a spokesman for Tri-State. “They have not made a decision one way or another.”
Tri-State and its partner on the project, Sunflower Electric Power, could challenge the permit rejection.
The $3.6 billion project called for the construction of two, 700-megawatt coal-fired plants near Holcomb, in southwestern Kansas.
Van Someren said Tri-State is in the initial stages of siting a generating facility in southeastern Colorado, “but it remains to be seen whether we put that on a faster track.”
The plant in Holcomb was to be a cornerstone of Tri-State’s plans to handle growth among the 44 power cooperatives that it supplies in Colorado, Nebraska, Wyoming and New Mexico.
The decision could be a positive in forcing Tri-State to more quickly embrace renewable energy and efficiency measures, said Dan McClendon, general manager of the Delta- Montrose Electric Association, one of Tri-State’s members.
But McClendon said the ruling also produces a question over Tri-State’s future ability to serve its customers.
“Certainly there’s a concern,” he said. “Already they were going to have to hit the (wholesale power) market pretty heavily to supply their needs, and generally that means high- cost natural gas generation.”
Tri-State has used coal-fired power for most of its generation, but in the past year the utility has delayed plans for two other coal plants and has said it intends to use more renewable energy and efficiency programs.
“Kansas’ denial of Tri-State’s plant is emblematic of growing disillusionment with coal as an energy source,” said John Nielsen, the energy policy director at Western Resource Advocates. “It’s going to save Tri-State’s ratepayers from having to shoulder the burden for dramatic rate increases that would have been necessary to pay for the Kansas plant.”
Last week, the Colorado Court of Appeals heard arguments on environmentalists’ challenge to an air-quality permit for Xcel Energy’s 750-megawatt coal-fired power plant under construction near Pueblo. The court has not yet ruled on the challenge.
Andy Vuong: 303-954-1209 or avuong@denverpost.com
