This article is crossposted on the CCAN Blog
This morning the Chesapeake Climate Action Network successfully caught the attention of Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe at a rally he hosted at the 17th Street Farmer’s Market in Richmond, Virginia. Richmond Town Councilman Marty Jewel kicked off the morning, and former President Bill Clinton introduced Mr. McAuliffe. The theme of the rally was “New Energy for New Jobs,” and the candidate’s speech centered repowering the commonwealth and creating new jobs for Virginians. CCAN wanted to ask Mr. McAuliffe about his position on a recently proposed coal fired power plant for Surry County, a Hampton Roads community. Well, we got his attention!
The Surry Plant has been a hot topic during the first part of the campaign. The Old Dominion Electric Cooperative (ODEC) proposed to build a new, $6 billion coal-fired power plant right next to the James River in the town of Dendron, in Surry County. The 1,500 megawatt Hampton Roads plant would emit about 14.6 million tons of CO2 a year– a potential total of 876 million tons over the plant’s 60-year lifespan. ODEC asserts that the plant is necessary to meet its customer’s energy needs. Yet, the cooperative could meet its energy needs for the next 25 years through energy efficiency measures alone!
One of McAuliffe’s opponents in the race for the democratic nomination, Brian Moran, spoke out against the plant a few months ago, but McAuliffe has remined silent on the issue of the plant. With signs asking about the plant and calling for a moratorium on MTR we got great spots for the rally, and it was obvious he was reading our posters as he spoke. We were able to talk with Mr. McAuliffe after the event, and when I asked if he would opposed the construction of the plant he responded “I think we should do a study, and if the study shows its a bad idea to build the plant, I will oppose it.”
Well, all Mr. McAuliffe need to do is read the papers: Today Synapse Enery Economics, Inc. released a report about the plant, which states that when factoring in the almost-certain federal CO2 controls, a mixture of efficiency, offshore wind, biomass, and combined-cycle natural gas generation that provides roughly the same power as the proposed Hampton Roads coal-fired power plant would emit five times less CO2, and cost anywhere between 1.7 cents and 4.5 cents per kWh less than the plant. We all know the devestating costs of MTR on ground water resources, the effects the mining and buring of coal has on health, and the carbon emmissions of coal. More than 80 coal power plants have been cancelled, delayed, or rejected in recent years due in significant part to those issues, and uncertainty over construction costs and future carbon controls.
A bad idea? You betcha’.
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
You gosh darn kids nowadays.
In Virginia, here in Ohio, and to some extent around the nation, I have noticed a significant shift in the way politicians talk about coal recently. It is now seen as a default, a bridge, and it’s becoming a more politically risky issue.
This is critical stuff. Plants are much harder to stop once they get that first shovel in the ground. No Cliffside, No Surry, No Wise, No AMP-Ohio, and No Nukes!
Hilary -
I noticed in your post that you mentioned combined cycle natural gas as an alternative. While certainly natural gas is cleaner, safer, and easier to build than coal, it often gets chosen when gas is cheap (like now) and then the bills go up when gas prices rise (i.e., natural gas prices have high volatility). I recall during the 90s when gas was so cheap that over 200 GW of gas turbines were built and everything else was rejected. Sounds like history may repeat itself?