Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gasification Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dennis Roth who wrote (1334)	10/18/2008 6:54:10 AM
From: Dennis Roth	Respond to of 1740

Court upholds state OK of coal gasification plant Associated Press 10:17 AM CDT, October 17, 2008 chicagotribune.com INDIANAPOLIS - The Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld regulators' approval of Duke Energy's proposed $2.35 billion coal gasification power plant in southwestern Indiana, dealing a blow to environmental and consumer groups that are fighting the project that's one of the first of its kind anywhere. The Sierra Club, Citizen Action Coalition of Indiana, Valley Watch and Save the Valley appealed the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission's approval last November of the 630-megawatt plant being built along the White River near Edwardsport, about 90 miles southwest of Indianapolis. The groups argued that the commission erred by failing to reopen proceedings to allow new evidence. They also questioned whether state law allowed Duke to recover costs during construction, whether officials adequately considered the plant's future costs, and whether state laws favoring use of Indiana coal violated the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. The court ruled against them on all four issues Thursday. It held that evidence of increased construction costs and other factors did not require reopening proceedings because, in part, those factors were anticipated in the commission's order. The court also said the commission did not err in allowing Duke to recover costs during construction and that Duke and the commission had considered the potential costs that might eventually be imposed by federal greenhouse gas limits. Duke has proposed testing technology to capture and store underground the carbon dioxide produced by the plant. The plant is scheduled to go online in 2012 and use advanced coal-gasification technology to produce power with far fewer emissions than conventional coal-fired plants. The losing groups also asked the court to overturn state laws expressing a preference for Indiana coal in approving utility projects. But the court said that even if the laws were overturned, the groups would not be entitled to relief. It said the commission did not consider the use of Indiana coal as a factor in granting Duke's petition. "We're really disappointed," Jerry Polk, an attorney for the losing side, said Friday. "It is clear with each passing day that the Edwardsport decision is worse than we thought." He said the costs of the project have risen from $1.3 billion to $1.9 billion and now to $2.3 billion, and they are likely to rise further from controls Duke will have to install to reduce the plant's emission of pollutants into the air. Polk said the losing parties were still studying the decision Friday and had not decided yet whether to appeal it to the Indiana Supreme Court. Duke spokeswoman Angeline Protogere said the company was pleased. "This is a plant that will use cutting-edge technology to produce cleaner power," Protogere said. Unlike traditional coal-fired power plants that burn coal to produce electricity, coal gasification converts coal into a synthetic gas that's processed to remove pollutants such as mercury and sulfur. That gas is then burned in a traditional turbine power plant to produce electricity. If built and opened by 2012, the 630-megawatt plant stands to become the first in the nation to use coal gasification technology on a scale so large. Jim Rogers, Duke Energy's president and CEO, has described it as an "Apollo project for energy," comparing it to the U.S. manned lunar program. The new plant would replace an existing 160-megawatt, coal-fired plant that Duke operates near Edwardsport.