Sponsored by

Local

Note: This story is more than 5 years old.

Corp. Comm. chair: Clean-air plan could threaten state’s power supply

WASHINGTON –  There is “simply no way” Arizona can comply with proposed new clean-air rules without “irreparable disruption” to the state power system’s reliability, said Susan Bitter Smith, chair of the Arizona Corporation Commission.

Susan Bitter Smith’s testimony to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission came Thursday at that agency’s hearing on the Clean Power Plan proposed by another federal office, the Environmental Protection Agency.

Bitter Smith claimed that in order to meet the goals in the EPA proposal, which targets greenhouse-gas emissions, every coal-fired power plant in the state that is not on tribal land would have to shut down by 2020. That would drive up costs to consumers and leave the state’s power system in a precarious position, she testified.

“If we had to meet the EPA’s standards as they’re required right now … we couldn’t keep the lights on in the state,” said Bitter Smith, part of a panel testifying on environmental regulations and electric reliability.

The EPA said in a statement Friday that the agency is listening to all concerns about the Clean Power Plan before issuing a final rule, which is expected this summer.

“EPA has received more than 3.5 million comments on the proposed Clean Power Plan,” the agency’s statement said. “We will take all comments – including issues related to reliability – into careful consideration as we work toward a final rule.”

The proposal, released last summer, aims to cut nationwide carbon emissions 30 percent by 2030, with specific emission-reduction targets set for each state.

The goal for Arizona is a cut of 52 percent in the next 15 years, second-steepest in the country after only Washington state. The bulk of those reductions would have to come in the next five years.

Support TucsonSentinel.com today, because a smarter Tucson is a better Tucson.

Bitter Smith said Arizona appears to have been subjected to “disparate treatment” by the EPA, noting the high reduction goal and pointing out that the state falls roughly in the middle of states in terms of carbon emissions.

She said the plan would require all Arizona coal-fired plants to close, heavily impacting the reliability of the state’s electrical grid, especially in the summer months when demand is high. That would also leave electricity ratepayers with a lost investment of $3 billion in fairly young coal plants.

Replacing those plants with natural gas brings steep financial and environmental costs, Bitter Smith said, for a fuel that fluctuates in price. She said the plan would also create greater reliance on the Palo Verde nuclear power plant makes the state’s electricity more vulnerable to natural disaster and terrorist attacks.

“I think there was a misunderstanding about the impacts on Arizona and a miscalculation in terms of the percentage of the whole that coal services,” she said. “We do have coal dominant supplies but we also have coal plants that are relatively new and coal plants that already have carbon emissions reductions in place.”

It’s not the first time an Arizona official has testified against the Clean Power Plan: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Director Henry Darwin said in January that the proposal would require closing coal-fired plants, and said the state needed more flexibility to meet the goals.

EPA said at the time that it is “not mandating the retirement of any coal plants,” but was leaving those decisions up to state regulators.

Darwin said then that he hoped to be able to work with the EPA to revise the plan. And Bitter Smith said Thursday that she has given up hope that the state can work with the EPA to come up with a plan that will work for both parties.

“As residents watch this plan unfold, it sounds like it’s very complicated,” Bitter Smith said. “But the bottom line is our goal is to make sure we can turn the lights on every day at an affordable rate and not end up with rolling blackouts and rules we can’t comply with.”

- 30 -
have your say   

1 comment on this story

1
343 comments
Feb 23, 2015, 9:17 am
-1 +0

The quality of the air in Arizona’s two largest metro area is TERRIBLE…the corp commission has consistently fought the use of renewable energy sources…it is the GOP corporation commission that is endangering both AZ’s electric supply and HEALTH!

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Read all of TucsonSentinel.com's
coronavirus reporting here »

Click image to enlarge

Darren's Rides/Flickr

The Cholla Power Plant in Joseph City, near Holbrook.

Powering down

The EPA’s Clean Power Plan sets state-by-state goals for carbon-emission reductions by 2030. Arizona faces the second-steepest goal in the country, including:

  • Total carbon dioxide emissions would be cut from 1,453 pounds per megawatt-hour produced in 2012 to 702 pounds/MWh by 2030;
  • 10 percent of the improvements would come from greater use of zero- and low-emitting power sources, such as solar, wind and nuclear power;
  • 77 percent would come from expanding use of low-emitting power sources, such as natural gas;
  • 13 percent would come from energy efficiency efforts and reductions in energy demand;
  • None of the improvement would come from equipment upgrades and process improvements at existing fossil-fuel power plants.