NEWS
RELEASE
Contact: Jim Warren
April 23,
2007
919-416-5077
Groups Urge Repeal of Coal-fired Power
Plant Approval
Commission errors, new Supreme Court ruling could leave ratepayers with
“worst-cost option”
Durham, NC – Five advocacy groups filed a legal
motion Friday saying the NC Utilities Commission erred in granting Duke
Energy permission to build a large coal-fired power plant. They also
argue that the Commission must consider a new US Supreme Court ruling
that requires regulation of global warming pollution. Complying with
that ruling would make Duke’s proposed plant far more expensive to
ratepayers, the interveners point out.
Duke Energy had sought to build two 800 megawatt
coal burners at its Cliffside site west of Charlotte. In March, the
Commission granted permission for a single unit, saying Duke did not
prove the need for both. The intervener groups’ joint motion Friday
calls for reconsideration of the single unit – the first step required in
appealing a Commission decision – arguing that disregarded facts and the
Supreme Court ruling both “undermine the Commission’s key finding and
conclusion” in permitting the plant.
The interveners – Southern Alliance for Clean
Energy, Southern Environmental Law Center, Environmental Defense, NC
Sustainable Energy Association, and NC WARN – argue that the Commission
made several key errors:
- It disregarded the fact that Duke never analyzed
how to best meet or offset the need for a single 800 MW unit by
comparing it with energy efficiency, renewable energy, natural gas or
other less-polluting options. The Commission agreed with Duke’s
insistence that such analysis would take too long, although Duke’s own
witness indicated the work could be performed in 2-4 months and at low
cost.
- The Commission disregarded the fact that Duke’s
own analysis did not support the addition of the 800 MW coal-fired
plant when compared to other portfolios of supply-demand options.
- The Commission disregarded the rate impacts of
the project. Far from meeting the “least cost” standard, Duke’s plant
“may be the worst-cost option of those presented by Duke” in
filings to the Commission. Duke indicated a preliminary estimate of
$1.93 billion for the single plant, a number likely to rise before
construction could begin.
The interveners also said, “Mandatory federal
carbon regulations will make pulverized coal at Cliffside much more
expensive than less carbon-intensive resource options … and would expose
ratepayers to the high cost of compliance …” Since the
Commission’s order, the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling confirms that
states and the federal Environmental Protection Agency have a current
obligation to regulate carbon emissions – without waiting several years
for Congressional action.
The interveners told the Commission “… the least
cost of the portfolios presented by Duke continues to include the gradual
phasing in of [smaller natural gas plants] rather than constructing even
one coal unit at Cliffside” … and that “a portfolio including
aggressive energy efficiency measures, which Duke has failed to analyze,
would be an even less costly option with a much lower impact on rates.”
The motion called for denial of the plant
certificate, stating that if Duke proceeds with plans for a coal plant,
it must analyze the best way to meet or offset the need for the 800 MW
plant. The company must also compare the long-term costs of building and
operating the plant with the long-term costs of less polluting
alternatives.
##
See the motion:
http://ncuc.commerce.state.nc.us/cgi-bin/webview/senddoc.pgm?dispfmt=&itype=Q&authorization=&parm2=YCAAAA01170B&parm3=000123542
NC WARN is a grassroots non-profit using
science and activism to tackle climate change and reduce hazards to
public health and the environment from nuclear power and other polluting
electricity production, and
working for a transition to safe, economical energy in North Carolina
