TXU Plan Threatens Progress on Climate

Proposal for building 11 dirty coal-fired plants across Texas could wipe out other states' cuts

Posted: 16-Aug-2006; Updated: 27-Dec-2006

Coal rush: Texas's biggest utility, TXU, wants to build 11 new highly polluting, coal-fired plants across the state, and fast.

Many a Texan boasts that everything is bigger and better in the Lone Star state. Even the state's biggest utility, TXU Power, touts on its web site that it is planning "a Texas-sized $10 billion investment" in 11 power plants across the state. But in this case, bigger is definitely not better.

TXU chief executive, C. John Wilder, has unveiled a plan that would double the utility's already sky-high emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂), the main greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming. The proposed power plants are to be conventional (or pulverized) coal-fired, which uses outdated, highly polluting technology.

This bodes ill not just for Texas, but for the rest of the country, too. State leaders and city mayors are taking decisive actions to curb global warming, and the additional emissions from TXU plants would severely undermine their progress. These new plants would emit 78 million tons of CO₂ pollution per year.

This huge amount would more than wipe out the gains to be made under California's recent legislation that will cut CO₂ from automobiles by 30 million tons a year. "TXU might as well give each of its 2.4 million customers four new Cadillac Escalades," says Environmental Defense climate and air expert Jim Marston. "The effect is the same in terms of global warming pollution."

TXU's deeply flawed proposal is also raising concerns about air quality and health effects.

Gov. Rick Perry and CEO John Wilder are headed down the wrong path

Despite the mind-boggling numbers on pollution, Wilder has said he wants to replicate this strategy in other states like Pennsylvania and Virginia. To make matters worse, Texas Governor Rick Perry has signaled his approval of the 11 plants. Last year, after private meetings with TXU executives, Perry fast-tracked the permitting process for TXU's 11-plant expansion through an executive order, slashing the time frame in half, to six months. And in April of this year, Perry joined Wilder at a press conference to unveil the proposal.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has been criticized, too, for skimping on rigorous analyses of air pollution effects and studies of cleaner technologies. With so much at stake, many are wondering why the rushed pace, when such a mammoth expansion should be carefully evaluated.

Perry's forward-thinking Republican peers, such as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and New York's George Pataki, have led strong initiatives in their states to reduce carbon dioxide emissions (see a summary of state actions). Perry is ignoring the global warming threat and taking his state back to the dark age of dirty coal and foul air.

Texas can add power without pumping out so much CO₂. A more enlightened strategy would draw more heavily on a portfolio of energy efficiency measures and renewable energy sources to meet growing demand, combined with use of cleaner coal-burning technology that can significantly reduce CO₂ emissions.

Global warming pollution would mushroom with new TXU plants

Just how big is big in terms of global warming pollution? TXU's 11 proposed plants with a total capacity of 9,079 megawatts, will produce an estimated 78 million tons of CO₂ per year.

To put that in perspective, 78 million tons of CO₂ is:

More than the total 2001 emissions of 21 different states and many countries, including Sweden, Denmark and Portugal;
The annual emissions of 14 million average passenger cars;
2.6 times larger than the benefits of California's groundbreaking greenhouse gas reduction program for cars and trucks (more on this program and other state initiatives);
8 times larger than the 2018 benefits resulting from the Northeastern States Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI — more on this program); or
One-quarter of the 2004 emissions benefits of EPA's entire set of voluntary climate change initiatives.

For another way to grasp the enormity of the additional CO₂ these 11 plants will spew out, consider these facts:

Power plants are the biggest single source of the country's CO₂ pollution, most of which comes from coal-fired plants. (The U.S. leads all other nations in global warming pollution, producing nearly one-fourth of the world's CO₂.)
Among all states, Texas is already the number-one global warming polluter. If it were a country, it would rank in the top 10 globally.
If all 11 plants are built, TXU — now ranked as the 10th largest emitter of CO₂ among American utilities — would have the dubious distinction of vaulting to 3rd place .

Clean coal technologies provide power with fewer emissions

One way to minimize CO₂ emissions from smokestacks is to use advanced coal combustion technologies such as gasification. Twenty-five coal-gasification electric power plants have been proposed around the country and two have been in commercial operation for years, one in Florida and the other in Indiana. Other large electric utilities are on board with the cleaner technology, including American Electric Power, the nation's largest utility, which plans clean coal-fired plants in West Virginia and Ohio.

And Xcel Energy recently announced a proposal for the nation's first coal power plant to use state-of-the art technology that will capture CO₂ before it is released into the atmosphere and store it underground. Xcel's project in Colorado will use advanced Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle coal technology (IGCC) that gasifies coal and then burns the gas to produce electricity.

Yet Wilder refuses to even consider the technology, dismissing it as not sufficiently proven nor affordable, and calling the coal-gasification plants "a gleam in someone's eye."

Wilder seeks rock-bottom costs, at high costs to the rest of us

Wilder's claims that cleaner gasification technology is not affordable rings hollow given that the company just reported a 31 percent increase in quarterly earnings, and the rates they charge their customers — already among the highest in Texas — have increased 24 percent in the last year, even as natural gas prices fell. Further, experts in the power sector say that cleaner-technology power plants can produce electricity cost-effectively.

What TXU really means is that it's not profitable enough for the company. In the deregulated Texas market where natural gas plays a big role, TXU will be able to base the rates of its cheap coal-fired power on the higher price of natural gas power — a kind of bait-and-switch ploy that may rake in profits but is not the most honest way to run a business. "Essentially, the company plans to generate cheap, dirty, coal-fired electricity, and sell it to customers for the price of cleaner, more expensive natural gas-fired electricity," says Marston. "It's like building a Pinto and selling it as a Prius."

Dirty plants would also worsen air quality and pose health risk

The 11 proposed plants would also affect air quality and public health. This is of special concern in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, which suffers some of the worst air in the country and is downwind from many of the proposed plants. (More on smog, soot and health.)

By a number of measures, Texas already has the dubious distinction of being high on the list of polluters among states, and not just for CO₂. Five of the nation's top 10 power plants that emit the most toxic mercury are in Texas, according to a recent report from the Environmental Integrity Project. TXU's Martin Lake plant ranked number one, with more than 1,700 pounds of mercury emissions. Mercury can cause severe nervous system problems in humans and wildlife. Especially vulnerable are developing fetuses, babies and children.

In a public relations gimmick, Wilder has proclaimed that it will make "voluntary" reductions from its existing plants in Texas to offset the additional emissions. But recent new rules under the Clean Air Act mandate significant cuts in these smog- and soot-forming pollutants as well as toxic mercury in existing power plants. Emissions of NOx from TXU’s fleet of existing plants must be reduced by 20%, to a level comparable to the proposed emissions from its so-called voluntary emissions reduction program. And SO₂ and mercury emissions must be reduced to levels much lower than TXU’s voluntary reduction. The company is taking credit for changes the law requires it to make, with or without new plants.

Reasonable voices oppose the 11 new power plants

There is a growing chorus of reasoned voices critical of TXU's plan and the way it is being undertaken. Among them are TXU shareholders who have urged Wilder to come up with a more responsible plan. The press across Texas have voiced opposition (see below), and many scientists and doctors have denounced TXU's refusal to use cleaner technology.

All three of Governor Perry's campaign opponents — Democrat Chris Bell and independents Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman — oppose the plan. And Texas mayors have joined forces to address the plan's Texas-sized global warming and air pollution issues by forming Texas Cities for Climate Protection. Dallas mayor Laura Miller called the new plants "a national issue" and urged further analyses of cleaner technologies. Even a commissioner of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (a Perry appointee) has urged his agency to push for more stringent analyses of new plants.

Their efforts come on the heels of last year's Conference of Mayors' approval of the U.S. Climate Protection Agreement to lower emissions in cities.

Make Texas a leader, not a laggard, in the global warming fight

The bottom line: Only Governor Perry and TXU, which stands to make a lot of money, are championing these plants. If TXU's Wilder, with Perry behind him, succeeds in building these dirty plants, Texas stands to keep its number-one status as a polluter — and go down in history as the number-one laggard in the fight to curb global warming.

Take Action » Send a letter to TXU CEO Wilder, telling him to halt plans to build dirty power plants.