Charlotte Observer

2.28.07

N.C.'S Energy Future

Utilities and state should make conservation top priority

Editorial

By 2030, North Carolina's population is predicted to grow from 8 million to 12 million. The economy is growing, too, and with it the public demand for home appliances, plasma TVs, computers and other electronic devices.

To meet anticipated demand, Duke Energy proposes to build two coal-fired power plants at its Cliffside Steam Station 55 miles west of Charlotte. The N.C. Utilities Commission is expected to rule on the proposal today.

It's the wrong time for such a project.

Both scientific consensus and public sentiment favor decisive action to curb emission of greenhouse gases such as CO{-2}. Congress will soon consider several proposals to do so. Many of them would cap the nation's carbon emissions and impose specific limits on emitters such as power companies. A company that produces less than its limit could sell its unused capacity to a company that exceeds its allowance.

Cliffside's proposed units wouldn't use emerging technology to make it easier to remove CO{-2} from emissions, so carbon emissions would nearly triple. That could be costly if a carbon cap or tax is imposed. But Duke says the new units would enable it to shut down dirtier units, resulting in an overall reduction in CO{-2} emissions.

The new units would provide environmental benefits. At peak production they would emit less CO{-2} per megawatt of power produced. Improved technology would sharply reduce pollutants such as mercury and sulfur dioxide.

But Duke's proposal is a $3 billion (or more) project that ratepayers will finance. The technology may not meet anticipated federal standards. Who knows what Congress may do to affect the use of coal? Until the regulatory climate settles, the state should focus instead on curbing electricity use through approaches such as insulation and energy-efficient lights and appliances.

Conservation is a cheap alternative to new plants. But in North Carolina, where electricity costs about 20 percent less than the U.S. average, the economic incentive is weak. So is the state effort: The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy in 2006 found North Carolina ranks 46th in spending on efficiency programs.

What should North Carolina do? Regardless of how the Utilities Commission rules on Duke's Cliffside proposal, here are three places to start:

Make conservation a top priority. In states that are models for efficient use, it is not the power companies alone that are responsible, it is a combination of state action (through grants, tax credits, regulations and public information campaigns), strong efforts by the utilities to promote conservation, and public involvement through informed choices about energy use.

Change the regulatory system so utilities profit from achieving conservation and efficient use of electricity as well as selling more of it.

Promote development of solar, wind and other non-polluting energy sources. A recent legislative report concluded North Carolina could produce 5 percent of its electricity from renewable resources within a decade at minimal cost to consumers. That's almost 3,400 megawatts - double the proposed Cliffside units' capacity.