On Dec 11, 2007 4:20 PM, James Kotcon < jkotcon@wvu.edu> wrote:

Evidentiary hearings are underway for AEP's proposed IGCC plant in Mason County. The Chapter has not yet, to my knowledge, filed any comments on this facility. The major issue being debated is the cost of the facility, as it is considerably more expensive than any plant ever built by AEP, and AEP is asking the ratepayers to pay for it.

The issue is difficult because IGCC plants have much lower emissions of SO2 and PM than pulverized coal boilers like Longview or Western Greenbrier. In addition, AEP has argued that the plant is needed to replace plants scheduled for shut-down in the recent settlement with Sierra Club, et al. And an IGCC plant would make Carbon Capture and Sequestration easier than retrofitting an old plant. In the Longview case, I argued that IGCC should be used, so I am hesitant to now say that is not good enough.

At the same time, nothing actually commits AEP to shutting down old plants, so this facility may become an "add-on", rather than a replacement and net reduction of, air pollution emissions.

Just to make matters even more complicated, the Clean Air Task Force recently filed comments to the PSC in support of the plant. These are usually the guys who oppose coal-fired power plants, but here they are in West Virginia.

So what should we do next?

JBK

P.S. I think we may want to take a position commending AEP for their innovation but say "Not Good Enough" We need to do better. In particular, I think that AEP stockholders are assuming that we ratepayers will be paying all the carbon costs, and we should ask the PSC to condition the plant on AEP's stockholders assuming that risk. If they think coal is going to be profitable for the next 50 years, let them pay for it, not us.

_______________________________________________
EC mailing list
EC@osenergy.org
http://osenergy.org/mailman/listinfo/ec