BCC southwinds presentation


Published on

Presentation prepared for the Kansas Sierra Club Chapter, Southwinds Group in Wichita, Kansas. Focus on the Beyond Coal Campaign, with some additional information specific to the proposed Holcomb Station coal-fired power plant.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

BCC southwinds presentation

  1. 1. BEYOND COALKansas, Holcomb and What’s Next
  2. 2. One third of US Greenhouse Gas comes from coal Why  coal?   CO2 Emissions from the Electric Power Sector (2011)Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration; Annual Energy Review 2011; Table 11.2e
  3. 3. Why  coal?   Emissions  from  Fossil-­‐Fueled  Power  Plants  as  a  Percent  of  Total  U.S.  Air  Emissions  Source: U.S. EPA, “Reducing Toxic Pollution from Power Plants,” March 16, 2011, p. 6.Note: The figure includes emissions from oil-fired units as well as coal-fired, but oil-fired units account for only 1% of U.S. electric generation. Air emissions arenot necessarily the major source of exposure for each of these pollutants.
  4. 4.           What  types  of  air  pollu?on  are             caused  by  burning  coal?   Primary  Pollutants  from  Coal  Pollu:on   Chemical  Culprits   Health  and  Environmental   Effects  Acid  Rain   Sulfur  dioxides  (SOx)   Harms  aqua?c  life,  forests,   Nitrogen  oxides  (NOx)     crops,  buildings    Smog  and  ozone   Nitrogen  oxides  (NOx)     Respiratory  ailments   Vola?le  organic  compounds  (VOC’s)   (asthma  aGacks,  bronchi?s)  Soot   Par?culate  maGer   Respiratory  ailments  and   Sulfur  dioxides  (SOx)   heart  condi?ons  (asthma   Nitrogen  oxides  (NOx)     aGacks,  bronchi?s,  heart   aGacks  and  strokes)  Hazardous  air   Mercury,  arsenic,  benzene,  heavy   Neurotoxic,  carcinogenic,  pollutants     metals,  etc.   radioac?ve  or  corrosive  Greenhouse  gases   CO2,  methane   Climate  change  
  5. 5. Why  coal?  "Coal  pollutants  affect  all  major  body  organ  systems  and  contribute  to  four  of  the  five  leading  causes  of  mortality  in  the  US:  heart  disease,  cancer,  stroke,  and  chronic  lower  respiratory  diseases."      -­‐  Physicians  for  Social  Responsibility  • More  than  50%  of  Americans  live  within  30  miles  of  a  coal  plant  • Mercury  poisoning  impacts  at  least  one  in  twelve  U.S.  women  and  places  their  children  at  risk  •   $100  billion  in  health  costs  annually  •   13,000  premature  deaths  annually  
  6. 6. Why  coal?  David  and  Charles  Koch  
  7. 7. Three  Steps  to  BeGer,  Cleaner  Electricity  Phase  1:  Stop  the  rush  to  build  new  coal  (2005-­‐2012)  •   Stop  90%  of  all  new  plants  •   Build  an  an?-­‐coal  movement  and  infrastructure  Phase  2:  Re:re  vulnerable,  dirty  exis:ng  coal  plants  (2010-­‐2015)  •   Re?re  1/3  fleet  (2020);  reduce  carbon  and  health  impacts;    •   Replace  as  much  of  that  coal  with  true  clean  energy;  •   End  coal  exports  Phase  3:  Accelerate  deployment  of  clean  energy  (2015-­‐2030)  •  Set  up  re?rement  of  rest  of  fleet  •   Clean  energy  displaces  coal
  8. 8.              Our  team  of  staff,  volunteers,  students,     and  allies  have  built  this  winning  campaign  
  9. 9. What  we  will  do:   2011-­‐2015  outcomes  1.  End coal rush2.  Secure retirement of approximately one-third (105,000 MW) of the existing coal fleet3.  Block new coal export infrastructure in West and Alaska4.  Replace majority of coal with clean energy (wind, solar, geothermal and energy efficiency) and minimize use of natural gas and biomass, and no coal or nukes.
  10. 10. What  we  will  do:   2020  results  1.  Coal’s carbon pollution reduced by at least 28 percent (500Mmt) and reduce coal’s share of electricity from 45 to 30 percent2.  Slash sulfur dioxide and mercury emissions from the electric sector by at least 50 and 90 percent, respectively3.  Install at least [129,000 MW] of clean energy4.  Poised to retire remaining coal fleet no later than 2030
  11. 11. How  we  will  do  it:   our  theory  of  change  Grassroots CommunicationsPressure Strong EPA RulesGrassroots CommunicationsPressure State-based Coal Fights
  12. 12. Coal  is  vulnerable  and  the  ?me  is  right  Age  of  Coal  Power  Plants  in  United  States   167**If  not  for  the  Beyond  Coal  Campaign  167  coal  units  would  have  been  built  genera?ng  over  86,000  MW  
  13. 13. How  we  will  do  it:   Replace  coal  with  clean  energy  Wind Energy efficiencySolar
  14. 14. Wind  and  solar  provide  more,  safe  jobs   U.S.  Job  Market  in  Solar  and  Wind  vs.  Coal  Plants  and  Coal  Mining  Source: AWEA U.S. Wind Industry Annual Market Report 2010; Solar Foundation National Solar Jobs Census 2010; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
  15. 15. Clean  energy:     What  it’s  going  to  take?    Annual  Growth  Needed  To  Meet  2030  No  Coal  Target  (MW)   Goal:     2009     2010     2011     Annual  MW   MW  Installed   MW  Installed   MW  Installed   Installed  by   2030  Solar   600   1,000     1,900   13,500  Wind   10,000   5,000   7,000   10,000  Geothermal   0   15     1.6   1,000  
  16. 16. Our  job:  Show  strong  public  support  for  EPA  rules  
  17. 17. EPA  rules  in  the  Obama  Administra?on   RULE  OR  STANDARD   FINAL  RULE   EPA  ESTIMATE  OF  COSTS/IMPACTS*   Cross-­‐State  Air  Pollu?on  Rule   Finalized  July  6,  2011   $2.4  billion/year**   Mercury  and  Air  Toxics  Rule   Finalized  Feb.  16,  2012   $10-­‐$11  billion/year   $19-­‐$25  billion/year  for  all  sources  but  limited   NAAQS  for  ozone   Delayed  to  2013   impact  on  EGUs*   Not  yet  proposed,  expected  in   NAAQS  for  par?culate  maGer   Unknown   2012   New  Source  Performance   Dran  in  March  2012,  finalized   Unknown   Standards  for  GHGs   Nov  2012   Cooling  Water  Intake  Structure   Dran  released,  finalized   Unknown   Rule   summer  2012   Clean  Water  Effluent  Limita?on   Not  yet  proposed;  expected   Unknown   Guidelines  Rule   January  31,  2014   Coal  Combus?on  Waste  Rule   Delayed  un?l  2012  or  later   $587  million-­‐$1.5  billion/year  Source: Compiled by CRS. *Costs as estimated by EPA. See text for discussion of costs and impacts of specific rules. **Of the $2.4 billion annual cost, $1.6billion is attributed to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), a 2005 rule that the Cross-State Rule is replacing.
  18. 18. Our  job:   Hard-­‐hirng  local  campaigns  CHICAGO  
  19. 19. Since Jan 1 2010… Declining Coal Capacity (Existing Coal Capacity - Retirements and Announcements) 358,000 Duke Energy, Xcel AEP & & First Energy San Antonio GenOn, 338,000 TVA Dominion, LGE & Kentucky Utilities 318,000Megawatts (MW) First Energy 298,000 278,000 258,000 238,000
  20. 20. CO2 Reductions with BCC Projected U.S. Energy-Related CO2 Emissions (million metric tons) with Beyond Coal Campaign Outcomes6,500 AEO 2012 BAU with 168 new coal plants6,000 AEO 2012 BAU BCC 25% replacement5,500 with CE BCC 100% replacement with CE5,0004,500 13% (2020) and 27% (2030) Historical Data Projections below 2005 levels4,000 14% (2020) and 35% (2030) below 2005 levels3,5003,000
  21. 21.  Exis?ng  Coal  Re?red  
  22. 22. Coal  loses  as  playing  field  leveled   Solar  PV   $136-­‐192   Crystalline  Roo6op   Solar  PV  RENEWABLE  ENERGY   Crystalline  Ground  Mount   $80   $109  -­‐  124   $157   Solar  PV   $73   $89  -­‐  179   Thin-­‐Film   Solar  Thermal   $120  -­‐  198   Fuel  Cell   $96-­‐248   Biomass  Direct   $77-­‐150   Geothermal   $73-­‐135   Wind   $30-­‐79   Energy  Efficiency   $0-­‐50   Gas  Peaking   $196-­‐258  CONVENTIONAL   IGCC   $90-­‐134   Nuclear   $76-­‐115   Coal   $63-­‐161   Gas  Combined  Cycle   $58-­‐109   0                  50                  75                  100                  150                  200                  250                  300                  350                  400   Levelized  Cost  ($/MWh)   Source:  Lazard,  June  2011  
  23. 23. 2011  Highlights  • No new coal, coal-to-gas, or coal-to-liquid plants broke ground• Defeated new coal plants: 161 (88,147 MW) since 2002• Announced retirements: 88 plants (37,000 MW) since 2010 – 1/3 2015 goal• EPA issued strong mercury rule, Cross State Air Pollution Rule• Defeated all Congressional attempts to weaken Clean Air Act• Record amounts of clean energy installed (1.8 GW of solar alone)• EPA vetoed largest mountaintop removal permit ever proposed• Blocked Western coal export port expansions• Campus coal plant retirements (19 out of 60 total)• Ran hard-hitting communications campaigns
  24. 24. Making  mountaintop  removal  a  thing  of  the  past    
  25. 25. Stopping  the  expansion  of  coal  exports  Export  image  
  26. 26. Communica?ons  strategy:    Branding  coal  as  the  next  tobacco   •     
  27. 27. 2012 Preview• No new coal, coal-to-gas, coal-to-liquids plants break ground• By the end of 2012, secure an additional 13,000 MW of announced retirements• Successfully defend Mercury and Cross State Air Pollution rules• EPA adopts greenhouse gas standards for new coal plants• Extend federal incentives for clean energy• Record deployment of wind, solar and geothermal (10,000 MW)• No new coal export infrastructure constructed in Northwest and Alaska
  28. 28. Kansas    •     Total  MW  exis?ng  coal  capacity  =  5474  MW   •     5  opera?ng  u?li?es   •     8  primary  genera?ng  sta?ons   •     7  local  communi?es   •     Several  smaller,  less-­‐controlled  units  (Tecumseh,  Riverton,  part  of  Lawrence,   Holcomb  1,  Quindaro,  Nearman)  •     One  new  unit  (Holcomb  2  –  895MW)  proposed  •     Regulatory,  poli?cal,  legal,  economic,  and  advocacy  opportuni?es  at  (and  unique  to)  each  unit   •   CSAPR  future  equivalent  and  MATS  will  impact  all  KS  u?li?es  (legal  ac?on  pending)   •   NSPS  will  impact  Holcomb  (legal  ruling  pending)   •     Sierra  Club  NOI  focused  on  KCBPU   •     Sierra  Club  challenged  LaCygne  retrofit  at  KCC  •     2nd  best  wind  resource  na?onally  >  10x  state  annual  peak  load   •     9th  among  states  in  installed  wind  capacity  •     ACEEE  ranks  KS  45th  out  of  50  na?onally  for  EE  policy  and  outcomes  •     Ranked  10th  na?onally  in  solar  energy  poten?al  (NREL  sun  index,  not  policy)  
  29. 29. Coal-­‐to-­‐Clean  Energy   What’s  figh:ng  new  coal  got  to  do  with  clean  energy?  •  1400  MW  new  coal  plant  proposed  in  KS  in  2007   –  Currently  permiGed  but  not  built,  not  under  construc?on,  and  facing   major  challenges  •  KS  had  364  MW  installed  wind  in  2007.    Currently  1274  MW   wind  installed,  1189  MW  under  construc?on,  13,191  MW  in   the  cue   –  New  coal  in  KS  =  0,  new  wind  in  KS  =  almost  1000MW  •  No  coal  =  clean  energy  =  no  coal  
  30. 30. Holcomb,  Of  Note  •  Originally  would  have  been  the  single  largest  sta?onary  source  of  GHGs  west  of  the   Mississippi.  •  Brembys  denial  the  first  and  only  instance  of  a  US  state  regulator  denying  a  permit   to  construct  a  coal  plant  on  the  grounds  of  harm  to  public  health  from  climate   change.  •  Tri-­‐State  Genera?on  &  Transmission  (a  very  large  Rural  Electric  Coop  based  in   Colorado  and  serving  CO,  NM,  WY  and  NE)  is  the  100%  owner  of  the  project  and  all   of  its  power.  •  Sunflower  Electric  owes  hundreds  of  millions  $  in  unpaid  taxpayer-­‐funded  loans   through  the  Rural  U?lity  Service  for  the  exis?ng  coal  plant  at  the  Holcomb  Sta?on.  •  A  federal  district  court  recently  ruled  (mostly)  in  favor  of  Sierra  Club  that  RUS   violated  NEPA  by  allowing  the  current  project  to  move  forward  without  an  EIS.  •  Sierra  Club  is  challenging  the  permit  before  the  KS  Supreme  Court  –  substan?ve   one-­‐hour  NOx  and  SOx  aGainment  arguments,  a  well  as  process  issues.  •  Holcomb  is  listed  as  "transi?onal  source"  by  EPA  with  regard  to  the  newly   promulgated  New  Source  Performance  Standards  (essen?ally,  GHG  regula?ons).    
  31. 31. Holcomb  Origins  2001  –  VP  Dick  Cheney  chairs  NEPDG  behind  closed   2009  –  Parkinson  seGlement  agreement   doors  –  the  coal  rush  was  (re)born   –  ACES  defeated   –   3rd  IPCC  Assessment  reported   –  Electricity  demand  begins  downward  2002  –  Nascent  Beyond  Coal  Campaign  begins  in   movement   Great  Lakes  region   –  Natural  gas  prices  move  sharply   downward,  shale  reserves  confirmed  2004  –  Sunflower  has  Sand  Sage  coal  plant  permit  in-­‐ 2010  -­‐  Cohesive  federal  climate  policy  abandoned   hand,  w/extension   (Carol  Browner  leaves  WH)   –  Approx.  20  public  comments   –  Bremby  fired   –  Sierra  Club  Beyond  Coal  targets  every   –  KDHE  permits  Holcomb  at  895  MW   single  US  coal  plant   •  Approx.  6000  public  comments  2006  –  An  Inconvenient  Truth   –  Tri-­‐State  G&T  public  IRP  shows  no  demand   –  Holcomb  Project  at  2100  MW   for  Holcomb  2007  –  4th  IPCC  Assessment  reported   2011  –  Sierra  Club  files  suit  against  KDHE  permit   –  Mass.  v.  EPA   –  Bloomberg  gin,  BCC  goes  from  15  states  to   45,  targets  1/3  of  exis?ng  coal   –  Bremby  denies  Holcomb  at  1400  MW   2012  –  MATS,  CSAPR,  NSPS   •  Approx.  750  public  comments   –  BCC  achieves  9.5%  GHG  emissions  2008  –  Sebelius  vetoes  2  coal  plant  bills   reduc?ons,  federal  cap  &  trade  =  5%   –  Barak  Obama  elected  POTUS,  Lisa  Jackson   –  Federal  court  rules  against  RUS  and   to  EPA   Sunflower   –  KS  Supreme  Court  hears  arguments  re:   KDHE  permit  
  32. 32. Discussion  “No one has done what we are doing before. Ever.There is no blueprint to take delivery of and execute on.We are creating it as we act.” “Nothing builds power like winning.” Who is the “we” from this presentation?
  33. 33. Discussion:- Feedback on Plan- Next Steps