A New Power Source: Henry Howell Spinning In His Grave

It is fascinating to observe the politics behind Dominion’s effort to a coal-fired power plant in Wise County. Although Dominion loaded it up with all manner of clean-coal technologies — circulating fluidized bed technology, waste coal-burning capabilities, sulfur dioxide pollution controls, water-conservation condensers — some environmentalists have made it a cause celebre. Their problem isn’t so much with Dominion’s proposal per se as with any coal-burning power source, which they contend contributes to Global Warming and lays waste to the Appalachian environment.

One might think that Gov. Timothy M. Kaine would be sympathetic to the environmentalists. He has, after all, launched the state’s first Global Warming commission, which held its first working meeting in Charlottesville last week and heard the direst of warnings. (See the presentations made at the meeting.) If the warnings prove to be true, Virginia could find itself ravaged by higher temperatures, changes in precipitation patterns, and rising sea levels — most of it driven by increasing consumption of fossil fuels… like the Wise County power plant.

But that’s 90 years down the road. In the short term, Kaine surely is cognizant that Southwest Virginia could use the $1.8 billion injection of construction spending, not to mention the 75 permanent power-plant jobs, augmented tax base, and 350 coal-mining jobs. Meanwhile, demand for electricity is rising and energy has to come from somewhere.

So, Kaine finds himself threading the needle. In an article following the State Corporation Comission’s approval yesterday of the Wise County plant, the Washington Post quotes his defense of the plant:

He said he has faith in Virginia’s approval process, which he said relies on science and a thorough assessment of the state’s needs rather than politics.

“We’ve got a need for energy, and we’ve got to do it in a way that’s as clean and as focused on conservation as possible,” he said. However, he added, that must be balanced against “the need for reliable and relatively low-cost energy.”

Virginia relies on coal for too much of its energy to imagine a future without it, Kaine said. Moreover, by approving newer plants that employ the cleanest technology, the state can retire older, more polluting plants, he said.

More zealous elements of the environmental movement are not happy with the governor. Student activists are frosted because the governor won’t meet with them. On a less petulant note, Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Cale Jaffe has criticized the SCC ruling on the grounds that not one dime of the $1.8 billion in expenditures approved by the SCC would go to reducing greenhouse gases.

Absent voices.

A number of voices appear to be absent from the debate. Who is representing the rate payers? Not the SCC, which notes in its press release yesterday that “the General Assembly has already determined by law that a coal-fired plant in Southwest Virginia was in the public interest.” Wow, think about that. No one is representing the rate payers. At least the environmentalists have one more shot at the project when the state Air Pollution Control Board holds hearings. Remarkably, the rate payers are…. hosed. And not a whimper of protest from anyone other than Bacon’s Rebellion. (See “Another Inter-Regional Transfer of Wealth.

Dominion plans to spend $1.8 billion on construction, and the SCC is granting the utility a 12.12 percent return on equity. As I observed last year, the project was far more expensive on a cost-per-KW-hour basis than other clean-coal facilities on the drawing boards around the country. Among the more obvious inefficiencies is the legislative requirement to buy expensive Virginia coal, and the necessity of wheeling the electric power across the entire state, suffering transmission losses along the way.

I estimated last year that Dominion rate payers could wind up paying $650 million more than they would otherwise — and that was based on a $1.6 billion cost figure, which has somehow moved up to $1.8 billion. I am stupefied that not a single public figure in Virginia has raised a fuss. Are there no populists among us anymore? Where is Henry Howell when you need him? Does anyone even remember who Henry Howell was? If only we could harness the power of ol’ Henry spinning in his grave, we could put the whole energy crisis behind us.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Nothing is good enough for some people.

    When we have smart meters, maybe we can prioritze them so those people freeze in the dark first.

    RH

  2. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    Some things just escape the mental capacity of the many. This state is truly energy unconscious, and this is even true among Northern Virginia democrats.

    There just exists no level of concern for the environment in this state, and when related issues arise in this state, they are politicized. Take for example Dominion’s proposal for two transmission lines in Northern Virginia – conservatives were against them, but the liberals were in favor of them, while the exact opposite position is held in regards to Dominion’s proposal for a new coal plant in Wise County. All three proposals will utilize fossil-fuel generation.

    Ratepayers basically represent themselves by who they vote for in this state. Virginia is mostly conservative, and because of the 2000 election, it is considered blasphemy if you agree with anything related to smart or clean energy. Allot of conservatives wear a big energy “badge of loyalty” without realizing why they do, other than the fact that Al Gore and the environmental left are against big energy.

    The financial and environmental costs we will incur from added carbon emissions from this new coal plant in Wise County and from both 500kv lines proposals, will be made up when a more “intelligent” grid, complete with a variety of widely implemented smart switch and smart meter technology, and its distributed power sources, reduces energy waste by making efficient the existing grid and by empowering customers to chose how they will consume electricity.

    By then, those who had been arguing against energy efficiency and conservation, can focus more of their attention towards their beliefs against the benefits of sliced bread, the invention of the automobile, and the internet.

  3. The Green Miles Avatar
    The Green Miles

    Dominion officials told the Washington Post “they cannot yet estimate how much the average bill might go up.” And that’s without factoring in any price on carbon emissions, which Congress is almost certain to pass in the next year.

  4. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    Jim & Miles, as for raising a fuss over construction costs, in the last 12 months, power plant construction has increased 20%. The reason why other utilities and state utility boards are opting against coal as of recent, is the rising costs. There simply isn’t enough construction firms. Also the cost to clean plant emissions is expensive, and DVP claims this plant will be state-of-the art. If the air quality board wants it cleaner, then the cost will increase and DVP can file for those reimbursements thru the SCC. DVP has already approved contracted costs to about 86% of the project. Other than a run on raw materials, a trucking or labor strike, the remaining 14% in projected costs will not increase.

    However, when the EPA implements the recently “improved” ozone standard earlier this month, and when carbon cap-n-trade or GHG taxation is a reality, we can expect all Dominion’s fossil-fuel generation and transmision costs passed down to us.

    If everyone could just realize this, pro-global warming or skeptic, the costs for fossil-fuel generation is going to sting.

    The only people who you should be asking, “why are you fussing?”, are both the conservative and liberal voters of Virginia. Kaine and the GA don’t listen.

    QUESTION: Did Henry Howell cause or influence VEPCO to change its name to Dominion Virginia Power?

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    As long as they don’t look to uranium in Virginia as a fuel source, right? Found a decent report about a Wyoming uranium mining company’s messups at http://uranium2008.blogspot.com (I think after reading it, I am more convinced uranium certainly isn’t the “clean” energy option either.)

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Look at the public filings. Dominion gave $800,000 last year to Virginia legislative candidates and state PACS. 800 grand. Nuff said — they own just about all of them, lock, stock and subcommittee vote…

    Yes, Henry Howell and the “Welcome to Virginia, owned and operated by VEPCO” bumper sticker encouraged the name change. Except the legal entity is still VEPCO — Dominion is a holding company and Dominion Virginia Power a trade name. Too hard to change all those deeds in all those courthouses, I guess…

    Somebody with Henry’s message would be elected Governor in 2009 with 60 percent — a member of either party…but the best interest of the ratepayer (low cost) is going to conflict with the goal of the environmental purists and Chicken Little Brigade.

    Best untold story of the session — HB 1619, the Senate Substitute. Underground power lines. Sitting on the Governor’s desk right now about as welcome as skunk in a Chanel factory….

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    ‘…conservatives were against them, but the liberals were in favor of them, while the exact opposite position ….”

    How do you know that? I never discerned any liberal conservative flavor to that conversation.

    “The financial and environmental costs we will incur from added carbon emissions from this new coal plant in Wise County and from both 500kv lines proposals, will be made up when a more “intelligent” grid, …”

    Huh? How is that exactly?

    Once this thing is built, ratepayers are going to pay for it. If the electricity is sold elsewhere, then other ratepayers will pay for it, but we will still be stuck with the environmental costs.

    If and when we get a more intelligent grid, soon followed by intelligent consumers, we may find that some power usage is avoided, but not all.

    So, whatever use there is will bear the cost burden of this plant. And, just like the water users in Raleigh who conserved, the rates will go up.

    Bottom line is that we are all going to pay more for less electricity. In the process we will emit less carbon, which someone else who speaks Chinese or Hindi will gladly make up for us.

    ——————————–

    There are people opposed to “clean coal”, nukes, wind generators, and solar photovolataics. When the time comes someone will be opposed to wave and tide generators.

    Apparently, anyone who is in favor of anything is completely uncaring about the environment.

    Sliced bread has benefits?

    RH

  8. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    Ron Hovis

    ”How do you know that? I never discerned any liberal conservative flavor to that conversation.”

    If one didn’t have a dog in the fight and didn’t focus squarely on land rights, one would have paid closer attention to such details.

    …will be made up when a more “intelligent” grid, …”Huh? How is that exactly? “

    I’ll start a collection fund so you can attend the next townhall meeting on DR. Its not too far from where you live.

    “Once this thing is built, ratepayers are going to pay for it. If the electricity is sold elsewhere, then other ratepayers will pay for it, but we will still be stuck with the environmental costs.”

    You sound like an environmentalist. Good for you.

    ”If and when we get a more intelligent grid, soon followed by intelligent consumers, we may find that some power usage is avoided, but not all.”

    And with it the grid will maximize more of its capacity, meet the needs of more without expansion, and consumers will decrease their consumption and lower their energy bills.

    ”So, whatever use there is will bear the cost burden of this plant.”

    All of Dominions five current grid expansion projects involve fossil-fuel generation – and belated pilot projects don’t count. Could this be in part a hurried business strategy before a new era in energy policy rises above the horizon which replaces it? Who knows, my point is, while on one hand policy aims to reduce carbon footprint, the other hand increases it. Does that make sense to you? It may, but it to me. There does come a point when grid expansion is unavoidable and reliability trumps all other issues, but it is surprising that as late as 2005, the National Electricity Reliability Council thought differently about Virginia. Had it not been for a certain piece of legislation, Virginia may not have had to bear the burden of grid expansion she is now experiencing. More questions? As per our previous discussion, please research those links and keywords I politely offered you.

    “Bottom line is that we are all going to pay more for less electricity. In the process we will emit less carbon, which someone else who speaks Chinese or Hindi will gladly make up for us.”

    As with most all your postings regarding energy on BR, you have the knack to contradict nearly every viewpoint, offer few solutions, stray toward the vague and the fringe rather than focus on the topic, and attempt to make points by asking a lot of questions.

    ”There are people opposed to “clean coal”, nukes, wind generators, and solar photovolataics. When the time comes someone will be opposed to wave and tide generators. Apparently, anyone who is in favor of anything is completely uncaring about the environment.”

    RH, there is certainly a priority to the load order recognized by utility boards when it comes to expanding the grid. Some states make it their law. Some states expect other states to do the same. Why don’t you research that, then let us know all about it.

    ”Sliced bread has benefits?”

    More questions?

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “If one didn’t have a dog in the fight and didn’t focus squarely on land rights, one would have paid closer attention to such details. “

    All I know is the people I talked to and meetings I went to. There were a variety of flavors there, with a variety of takes on the issue, mainly all opposed.

    My question to you is whether you have some data such as polls, or whether this is simply your opinion. What details do you have to offer?

    RH

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    This thing is going to paid for by someone, but we will be stuck with whatever are the reamining the environmental costs. We have insisted for years that power companies clean up their act, and they have added significant equipment to do that. This adds to the cost. Now we complain about the cost, and the remaining pollution. At what point do we agree that the other side has done the best that can economically be done? Or do we just continually raise the bar, incrementally asking for the thermodynamically impossible?

    Suppose we had our smart grid tomorrow, and everybody cut back by 20%. Prices go up by 20% to compensate. We add 20% more people. Then what? We will come right back to the same property rights issues that are being ignored today.

    Good environmentalism is all about good property rights.

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Here are some estimates for the cost of carbo pollution:

    “a World Bank employee came to the mic and said that the Bank would likely soon adopt a social cost of carbon (SCC) to use when evaluating its projects, and what SCC would Weitzman recommend?

    Weitzman hemmed and hawed and noted that the whole point of his paper was that there are these big uncertainties, and that previous attempts to calculate the socially optimal price on carbon haven’t accounted for these and thus are wrong, and that you couldn’t even really do the calculation with the current tools we have. But he finally acknowledged that if you made him philosopher-king and demanded an answer he would say that the price on emissions (i.e. a carbon tax or the price of a cap-and-trade permit) should be $50 per ton of CO2, rising at rate of a few percent over inflation.

    A few thoughts:

    1. Muse about uncertainty all you want, but ultimately you have to name your price.

    2. This is higher than a lot of mainstream economists who work on this issue. Bill Nordhaus thinks the right value today is around $10 per ton of CO2 (see Table 5-4 of this publication); Billy Pizer at RFF thinks it is close to double this (ungated version here, see Table 5 (3 in gated version) suggesting the correct valuation is 82% higher). On the other hand Nic Stern estimates it should be $80 per ton of CO2.

    3. Carbon prices in Europe are currently about 70% of this level (thanks partially to the weak dollar).

    4. Carbon prices in the U.S. are short of this mark by about… oh, that’s right, $50.”

    So, muse about uncertainty all you want, but name your price. Then calculate the environmental costs of this plant at that price. then show me how your plan is cheaper, including all of its external costs.

    Then we can have a conversation that gets somewhere.

    Maybe.

    ———————————–

    “Mobile phones could kill far more people than smoking or asbestos, a study by an award-winning cancer expert has concluded. He says people should avoid using them wherever possible and that governments and the mobile phone industry must take “immediate steps” to reduce exposure to their radiation.

    The study, by Dr Vini Khurana, is the most devastating indictment yet published of the health risks.

    …Professor Khurana – a top neurosurgeon who has received 14 awards over the past 16 years, has published more than three dozen scientific papers – reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phones. He has put the results on a brain surgery website, and a paper based on the research is currently being peer-reviewed for publication in a scientific journal. “

    If it turns out that mobile phones are more deadly than smoking or asbestos (and probably the new Dominion plant) then how much should we divert from cell phone use reduction to promote electricity use reduction, and at what cost?

    RH

  12. D. Radmacher Avatar
    D. Radmacher

    Jim,

    Interesting that you complain about the location of the plant. The location – very near two other major polluting power plants – is the main reason for our opposition to the plant.

    But what do you think would happen if Dominion proposed plopping those big, belching smokestacks in NoVa – or near enough to pollute Richmond, for that matter?

    Something tells me the plant would face somewhat higher regulatory hurdles.

  13. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Dan, If Dominion proposed building a coal-fired power plant in NoVa, it undoubtedly would encounter even greater opposition than it does in SW Virginia. The NIMBYs are more powerful and better funded there. But, NIMBYs aside, it makes more sense to build power plants close to people who consume the electricity.

    First, if there’s a negative environmental impact, the people who feel should be the ones who are generating demand for the electricity in the first place. (The same logic would apply if it were a power plant being built to supply electricity to the Richmond region where I live.)

    Second, building power plants close to their electric consumers eliminates the need to wheel the electricity long distances, which leaks electricity the entire way. That’s just plain inefficient.

    As it happens, no one in Virginia seems to want power plants near them, and the result will be Dominion importing electricity from the Midwest… Not only do we lose the economic activity and billion-dollar boost to the local tax base, we’ll have to build more transmission lines that nobody wants… And we’ll waste even more electricity through leakage over even longer distances!

Leave a Reply