The American Coal Council: the Pre-eminent Business Voice of the American Coal Industry

Member Login

ACC - Please note this is an archived site and no longer maintained. Go to www.americancoalcouncil.org for the current website

Sunflower Energy challenges KDHE decision

Submitted by admin on Fri, 2007-11-09 12:12.

 

Sunflower Energy has requested that Rod Bremby, secretary of health and environment in Kansas reconsider his ruling against the planned Holcomb expansion.

Media reports indicate that this is the first step in mounting a legal challenge to the decision. Further steps could see the issue move into the district courts and then to the state supreme court.

The department's air quality staff had recommended granting the permit. Agency officials said that advice to Bremby didn't deal with broad environmental or public health issues but technical ones, such as whether Sunflower planned to use the best technology available to control pollutants the state does regulate.

"The project complies with all the state and federal environmental laws and regulations," Earl Watkins Jr., Sunflower's president and chief executive officer, said in a written statement. "In our view, it's fundamentally unfair to attempt to change these rules in the middle of the game."

Utility regulators in Florida and Oklahoma rejected coal-fired plants earlier this year. But environmental groups have said Bremby's decision represented the first time a government agency in the U.S. had rejected an air-quality permit specifically because of carbon dioxide emissions.

Sunflower proposed building two, 700-megawatt plants next to its existing, 360-megawatt plant outside Holcomb, in Finney County, with construction of both finished by 2013. The project included a bioenergy center designed to capture carbon dioxide and use it to grow algae that then could be converted to biofuels, such as ethanol.

I reside in Finney Co.

I reside in Finney Co. Kansas and I would have to say I am proud of Mr. Bremby and Gov. Sebelius for standing up and saying no to the green-eyed monster. We know it causes a problem, now we need to do something about it. I have two small children and so I am very conserned about the situation. I can see the existing plant from my front door and it makes me sick to think that anyone would have the nerve to even propose another plant,being equipped with the same, if not more, information than I have. Why don't they take all that money that they have to build the plant and do something useful with it. It is Kansas after all, the wind blows constantly and the sky is almost always blue so take that money and invest!!! There is no point in going backwards! I would also like to say that anyone who can say any of this is blown out of proportion is choosing to ignore the facts. Globle Warming is a serious problem and we should all do our part in doing something about it. If the people come together and demand change it will happen, but the government must do their part now and not wait. We are smart, intelligent human beings and we have managed to mess things up with our tecnology now it is time to clean up the mess we made.

I'm glad that you are concerened

I'm glad that you are concerened about the well-being of your children. I'm a father of three small children myself and am also concerened that they are given the best opportunities that they can possibly have, as well as the cleanest air, the healthiest food, and the cleanest water. 

I'm sure you will also recognize that the people working for Sunflower Energy are people just like you and me. They are the people that you meet in the grocery store when you do your shopping; they are not the "green-eyed monster" that you refer to in your comment. They are hard-working people who live in Kansas and they, and their families, breathe the same air that you do.

I'm not sure if you recognize that the plant expansion that is being proposed will create plants that are far more efficient and that have far better emissions controls devices than the old plants that you said you can see from your home. They will be cleaner and use less fuel to produce the same amount of energy.

Another thing that you might have not considered is that you are (according to your comment) living by a coal-fueled power plant and breathing very clean air right now. You said that the sky is almost always blue in Kansas (a state that already gets over 70% of its energy from coal). Clearly if you have blue skies most of the time and live in a state that uses a lot of coal, the coal-based utilities have to be doing something right.

Did you know that Sunflower Energy had planned to make things even cleaner? Apart from building a more efficient plant, they were also going to use the newest technologies to reduce nitrogen and sulfur emissions. They had also proposed to build an "algae reactor" that would have turned carbon dioxide emissions from the new plants into biofuel.

One last thing to consider. Not many people deny that our national economy is either in or is very near to a recession. In an economy that is seeing thousands of people lose their homes and jobs, some businesses closing and others tightening their belts and budgets, the construction project and operation of these plants would have put millions of dollars into your community.

Those dollars, from jobs and taxes, would have helped to build better roads, schools, hospitals, etc. The plants that would have been built would have ensured that your electricity bills could have remained low. And, they would have done it in a more clean and efficient manner.

By denying the permits for those plants, KDHE and the governor have actually held your community back.

It seems as though you have

It seems as though you have taken my words and added a few of your own. The green-eyed monster I am refering to is greed not the employees of Sunflower. It's sad to me that you have'nt even considered that green jobs are created by wind fields and solar energy. I also understand that the economy is suffering but our local and state economy is not struggling so badly we are willing to sacriface our very existance. Maybe you have heard of Greensburg Kansas and the tornado that flattened thier town. They are dedicated to rebuilding the entire town green because they know the impact we have on this planet and we should all help and support them. I feel that if there is the slightest shred of evidence that says our planet is in danger and we know what is causing it, then we are selfish for not doing something about it. The recession has nothing to do with Sunflower or Global Warming. Sunflower will not effect my groceries, gas, or electicity considering that most, if not all will go out of state. Global Warming however will effect not only my groceries but everyone around the worlds groceries! Sunflower will also effect not only me but the world will also suffer from the emissions. I wonder if you are aware of the problems that would arise with the water table that the plant will be sitting on top of, after all the only thing that will seperate the plants polution from getting to the water table is sand dunes. If you have ever poured water on sand you know nothing stops it from moving on through. So I don't consern myself with empty promises of things they plan to do to prevent accidents because the fact is accidents happen and we can not afford to take that risk because that, my friend, would be devistating to our local and state economy. Another point that should be made is that if their new and improved plant is so much better, then why is it that they want restictions on the health and environment department's athority? Sounds to me like they got something to hide and to be honest. I'm not buying it. Going back to the blue sky comment and the words that were added. Nowhere in my statement did I say the air was clean and if you believe that a blue sky means clean air you are sadly mistaken. If you have been to this part of the country you would know it is full of airbourne cow poo, dust and sand. That does not mean that the carbon from the plant does not effect anyone. Our skys are blue because we don't have millions of people and factories everywhere so we don't see the smog cloud and not only that it just blows it somewhere else. Can you see the carbon emissions coming out of your car? Does it have an oder? A color? How can you say what clean air truely is, if you possibly have never even breathed it? The truth is that the air has been poluted for a long time and the fact that we continue to destroy the only things capable of cleaning it up right now is a crime in itself. Which leads me to ethanol. Decent idea, poor execution. When we have to cut down trees and grass lands that have been proven in basic biology to be our air filters we are making a a decision to be ignorant and ignore the facts. They clean up our mess and inturn provide us with oxygen that we need to survive. So move on don't spend money and energy on something that is not economically practical. I too want good opportunities for my children, but I would like to also teach my kids that money isn't everything and that somethings souldn't be for sell. I don't however feel that by not allowing the plant that my children have been robbed, so to speak, of anything. My son is 6 and is already aware that people do things they know are wrong just because it's easy or convenient. He picks up trash on the way to the bus and is recycling everything he can find and as a parent and a human-being that shares this planet with an unheard of amount of life, I would be foolish to have any kind of support for anything that does'nt meet the standards that the planet requires, so with that I have to say Sunflower you can truely take it where the sun don't shine cause they won't miss what they don't have. What will all the jobs, money, homes, ect.... mean if the climate change gets out of control to the point where we are struggling to survive. It's a pretty big what if and not one that I want to see so why not do something because if we decide to wait to see if it's really going to happen like they say, there won't be anything we can do to help the situation. Is that a risk that you are willing to take? I have heard people say that they believe in God rather than take the chance that he may not exist. Now before people get offended, that is not to say that it at all reflects the views of christians, I come from a very relgious family so I'm not picking on anyone. It is however the same kind of concept. I havn't been able to respond due to internet being down for repairs, but in that time I watched a documentary called Expodition Alaska on the Discovery Channel. I think it is something everyone should watch and just to note, the sky is blue in Alaska also, but it is one of the most effected by Global Warming and it's only going to get worse if we don't take action and do something about it. How do you plan to buy food for your family if their is none to buy due to the fact that the temperature has risen to the point that places will experience most likely drout while other places will experiance extreme floods, stronger hurricanes, more tornados, more earthquakes, and a much higher risk of massive volcanic eruption. It's not a joke and we shouldn't treat it as such. Give back to the planet and each other, we can accomplish so much if we can just instill the give back quality in our children. Happy Earthday plant a tree.

Actually, it appears that

Actually, it appears that you are the one putting words in people's mouths. I have always supported a broad and diverse energy generation supply -- coal, nuclear, wind and renewables, gas, hydro, fuel cells, etc.

In fact, a great deal of coal is required to produce the steel and cement found in every wind turbine, so please do build more of them, our metallurgical coal producers will thank you for it.

Additionally, wind energy cannot generate baseload electricity (i.e.: the 'always on' electricity that we rely on 24-7). There is always another form of energy required to bridge the gaps when wind isn't blowing or is blowing too hard. Once again, coal is the least expensive, most abundant, and increasingly clean option to fill that gap.

Furthermore, by keeping our power supply diverse, we ensure overall stability and lower prices. Our society runs on cheap, clean, abundant energy and we will damage our (and our children's) future options by arbitrarily refusing to use our most abundant domestic energy resources.

The point is that if we

The point is that if we don't do everything that we can to lessen emissions this planet we not be habitable and none of our children will have a future. Go to GPace.org and read about kansas wind energy potential. I truely feel like by supporting something that is clearly BAD for the enviornment you are in a way saying we are not able to change our ways as a society. If you support our planet then how can you support more polution. You say I put words in your mouth, but I really didn't see where I did. You however turned blue sky into clean air and that is what gets me because if you truely believe that then you need to spend some time doing research on climate change. The wind can provide whatever excess energy we need without building more plants. There are so many economic solutions to the problems that we face that there is no reason for us to go backwards. We have a chance to change the face of the planet and that is something we should take tremendous pride in. The sunflower plants just aren't good enough I don't care how much cleaner it is it is still not good enough. I did not say however that you don't have support for other forms of energy only that it seems like you may not have enough support for renewable resources. If you did you would understand the importance of saying no to more coal plants. Your focus seems to be on recession and it should be on healing the place we all call home because the truth is we only have one and it provides us with everything we have. I would rather sacrifice now then be extinct later.

Very quickly,Are you

Very quickly,

Are you aware that while coal-fueled generation has increased by 181 percent since 1970, U.S. power plants have reduced regulated emissions by 40 percent? A new coal-fueled power plant actually emits 70% fewer emissions than the 60's & 70's-era power plant that it would replace (based on emissions per unit energy produced).

We are producing more energy, more cleanly than we ever have in our past. So your arguments that building more coal plants is "BAD" and that our planet will soon be unihabitable are clearly not supported by the facts.

Additionally, I have a Masters Degree in Environmental Science and have spent the last eight years working in the energy industry and studying issues like climate change. Believe me when I say that I am very familiar with the issue.

Also, you may not know that CO2 -- which is the primary gas associated with climate change -- is colorless and odorless, so trying to link the color of the sky to climate change is problematic for your arguments. Your attempts to link the cow poop and dirt you claimed were in your air with the coal industry was equally problematic in your previous comment.

Since you close your comment with a note about my being concerned with economic issues, I'll leave you with some numbers from the European Commission on the costs of removing our greenhouse gas emissions and replacing fossil fuel-based energy with renewables.

The EC has suggested that it would take every household in the U.S. and Europe paying an extra € 150, £ 110, or $220 per month for their utility bills to cover the costs of stopping CO2 emissions and using renewable energy.

How would an extra $2,600+ per year out of your budget impact on your concerns for economic issues? Are you really willing to make that sacrifice?

The comments posted here

The comments posted here are simply over the top. It is hardly a "crime" to provide clean, affordable, and abundant energy. Presenting a bill in the KS legislature also cannot reasonably be described as a crime. Arguing, without a shred of evidence, that any of our major sources of energy are "destroying" the earth is overblown. Lastly your invocation of Hitler, your use of ad hominem and appeal to emotion fallacies has overtaken whatever might have been reasonable in your argument (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum).

 I also see that the comments link to another energy supplier, so I am not at all surprised that you're doing whatever you can to protect your own fiscal interests by attacking a competitor.

80% of Electricity consumed in KS is generated by coal-plants

Other states are rejoicing that Tri State did not pick on them where having the Sunflower coal-fired power plant translates to: (1) water shortages (2) economic instability (3) deadly disease for children from CO2 (4) black hole of money demand for more money (5) regression in renewable energy development (6) lawless tryanny by state legislature (7) deadly jobs that make people sick (8) refusal to formally consider renewables (9) state legislature defies US Supra Crt (10) KS Ssnate repealed Siting Act in 2000 I would check out Tri-State's financial support to see if they have more foreign investors than American. They obviously do not care about the health, safety or ability of Americans to compete in the global market. What if 80% of Kansas depended upon RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY and when coal companies tried to get 20% renewables in the state we took over the state legislature and denigrated any decision-maker refuting OUR RIGHT TO RULE! KS HB 2711 and SB 515 will be forever seen as a ruthless criminal act against the people of Kansas and the rights of the global populace. If the outlaws leading this fiasco were the only persons to be harmed by their actions, I would not say a word. But, there are too many innocent men, women and children that could suffer greatly from this criminal takeover of Kansas with EXTREME suppression of any consideration of renewable energy. WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO PROTEST THIS CRIME WITH EVERY LEGAL RESOURCE AVAILABLE! Not one person at Sunflower Corporation or the Senate opted to meet and discuss the potential of Solar Chimneys in Western Kansas or the 1,000 MWp BI-PV Solar Program formally proposed for Kansas since January 2005. Coal companies and their cohorts furthering crime in government know that Renewable Energy is not a joke. It does not provide coal revenue for those invested in coal-mines. Don't you think 80% dependency on coal-fired power is enough of an investment in their criminal obsession for ill-conceived wealth. What if it was my wealth and that wealth was from a non-coal source? DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU The crimes of the legislation will not stand and the Sunflower coal plants will never be built. One cannot build upon a viable economy upon such crimes no matter how many are support of it. Hitler had a great following as well -but this did not sanction his crimes. Americans will not stand for it.

Holcomb coal plant

Mr. Bremby made the CORRECT decision---no coal plants in Kansas!!! Coal may be abundant but it is destroying our earth so what is accomplished?

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Images can be added to this post.
  • You may use [acidfree:xx] tags to display acidfree videos or images inline.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

Coalblog

Industry Sponsors

Industry Info








Newsletter

Syndicate

Syndicate content