Kansas Governor Moves to Kill Coal Expansion
By: TheGreenMiles
Published On: 3/21/2008 2:26:08 PM
More strong leadership on climate action from the governor of Kansas:
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius today vetoed legislation to allow a sizeable coal plant expansion in western Kansas.The bill would have eliminated the discretion a state regulator used last year to block Sunflower Electric Power Corp.’s plans to add two coal-burning generators to its existing Holcomb, Kan., power station.
Sebelius said that she couldn’t support an erosion of an environmental regulator’s powers and that the bill didn’t do enough to encourage renewable energy.
“Instead of building two new coal plants, which would produce 11 million new tons of carbon dioxide each year, I support pursuing other, more promising energy and economic development alternatives,” she said in a statement accompanying the veto.
Gov. Sebelius knows we don't have to choose between clean energy and growing the economy. In fact, there's more evidence every day that investing in coal is the risky bet.
Comments
Now its up to Governor Kaine (faithfull - 3/21/2008 3:30:52 PM)
To do the same in VA.
I like Governor Kaine, but it he wants to ever look at higher office again, he has GOT to stand up on stopping the Wise County power plant.
A BIG victory was won yesterday when the Air board agreed to take primacy in the permitting process. Of the 59 coal-plants that have been defeated in the last year, 40 something of those were stopped by the utilities themselves because of the cost. Now that the permitting on this plant will take another year at least, its up to Governor Kaine to help lead us away from this awful dependency on coal and mountaintop removal coal.
Is that true? (Eric - 3/21/2008 4:25:24 PM)
I'm not up on all the details - since the Air Pollution Control Board took over does that mean the decision process has been pushed back for a year? I didn't see a decision date or time frame in the tricities article.
It seems likely (faithfull - 3/21/2008 5:28:52 PM)
I'll be in touch with posts here when we know better, but it seems like thats a very high possibility.
nice picture (joshtulkin - 3/21/2008 4:04:12 PM)
hinting at anything there miles?
And just what are you implying? (TheGreenMiles - 3/21/2008 4:08:33 PM)
I have no idea what you're
talking about.
This is a brilliantly positive way to lobby. (jsrutstein - 3/21/2008 4:20:38 PM)
Instead of attacking candidates for positions they probably take more for political reasons than on principle (in Obama's case Illinois is more pro-coal and more pro-nuclear than most states), we should encourage them to follow the lead of those who go public with positions we want the more reluctant candidates to take. I'm biased for Obama, so I might read more into his positions than is warranted, but his statements in favor of clean coal seem like they might be conditioned on the development of truly clean coal which may never happen. On nuclear, he's more explicit that he's only for nuclear if safety and waste storage issues are also resolved.
best assessment yet I have read (Alter of Freedom - 3/21/2008 6:50:22 PM)
on the Obama position. There is nothing wrong in my book for someone having the guts to wait and see all the data and technology innovation updates before moving in any rash manner politically. I would like for someone to follow up on the question posed by Republicans however, concerning our nuclear fleet in the Navy in terms of the waste/storage of the aircraft carriers. What happens to it? or is there virtually zero because it is renewable in some form or what?
In terms of Kansas, well the State Legislatures in WY and CO are probably smiling ear to ear with that news. Could the black gold continue its gains out West as the East determines to rid itself of coal production in Appalachia? The West has made significant gains over the years with coal production so should states seek to rid themselves of this natural resource I amsure those out West will be sure to continue expanding its production.
Barack and Sebelius. (joshtulkin - 3/22/2008 12:56:43 PM)
She's taking a stand against coal, and it seems to be helping, not hurting, her national profile. Some would be do well to take note.
I'd just like to add/piggyback off this post (Ron1 - 3/22/2008 2:52:57 PM)
She's in as blood red a state as there is -- and her pragmatic progressivism has expanded the Democratic Party from near death in Kansas to being the party of choice for voters when they're voting for executive leadership in that state.
She's pro-choice, anti-death penalty, pro-labor, and is pro-environment -- and has won. Taking principled stands never looks bad to voters.
BTW, that picture of the two of them together ... hope we get a chance to see more of that type of photo. They'd make quite a team.