Wednesday, February 9, 2011

EPA isn't too fond of Holcomb 2 plan; everybody feigns surprise

Posted by Ben Palosaari on Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:00 AM

click to enlarge Coal is a source of plenty of electricity and melodrama in Kansas.
  • Coal is a source of plenty of electricity and melodrama in Kansas.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced Friday that it isn't

thrilled with Kansas' proposed plan to allow Sunflower Electric Power

Corp. to build a second coal-burning power plant in Holcomb. We know,

you're all stunned at this shocking and unforeseen development, so take a

deep breath before reading further.

HA! Total JK! Nobody is surprised by this. The latest episode in the Holcomb 2 soap opera was

practically assured months ago, as the Kansas Department of Health and

Environment hurriedly approved the plant's required air-quality permit

before the end of the year, when stricter air-quality rules went into effect.



KDHE didn't include particularly stringent standards, which

caught the feds' eye. Of course, KDHE bureaucrats publicly trash-talking

the EPA probably didn't help their case. Drama! Drama! Drama!

The EPA says the plant would use outdated standards for the amount of the pollutants sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide that it would release. The Associated Press

reports that, in short, the EPA wants the plant to cap hourly

emissions, which the permit doesn't call for. The EPA sent Sunflower a

letter seeking a "dialogue" with the state over that plant. This should

be fun, because the last time KDHE employees interacted with the EPA,

they bragged about using "a few words we can't repeat."

The agency says its concerns are not great enough to try to stop the plant from being built. The Sierra Club is, however suing to stop it.

In related news, the former secretary of KDHE, Rod Bremby, whose

opposition to building more coal plants earned him a pink slip from

former Gov. Mark Parkinson, will finally talk about his firing this

week. He's scheduled to give a talk Thursday at 11 a.m. at Kansas City,

Kansas, Community College. Details here.

Tags: , , ,

Comments (1)

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

The discussion is on wether to use an hourly rate or a monthly rate on nitrous and sulfur emissions. It isn't going to stop the plant from being built. It may affect it's design and operation. I don't see any of the 'green' readers to this story building their own wind turbines. So, suck it!

report   
Posted by Mark on 02/09/2011 at 11:57 AM
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

More by Author

Most Popular Stories

Slideshows

All contents ©2012 Kansas City Pitch LLC
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Kansas City Pitch LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.

All contents © 2012 SouthComm, Inc. 210 12th Ave S. Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of SouthComm, Inc.
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Website powered by Foundation