Environmental group blasts coal plant proposal Wednesday, Jun 27, 2007 By John LyonArkansas News Bureau
LITTLE ROCK - A new coal-burning power plant in Arkansas would be a bad investment for the state, members of the Sierra Club of Arkansas said at a news conference Tuesday on the steps of the state Capitol.
The environmental group declared its opposition to a proposal by Southwestern Electric Power Co. to build a coal-fired plant near Fulton in Hempstead County. The plant would be the fourth coal-burning plant in the state, joining plants at Gentry in Northwest Arkansas, Newark in Northeast Arkansas and Redfield in Southeast Arkansas.
"From the time coal is mined to when it's burned in the power plants, like the new plant proposed at Fulton, Ark., coal leaves a path of pollution and destruction, damaging public health, tearing up the land, polluting our waters, devastating communities and making global warming so much worse," said Dina Nash, vice chairman of the club's Central Arkansas chapter.
Nash said the plant would emit 5.38 metric tons of carbon dioxide and 366 pounds of mercury per year.
"One in every six women of child-bearing age is way over the mercury level that she should be at," according to the Environmental Protection Agency, Nash said. "This of course impacts the babies' brains and spinal cords and produces all kinds of deformities and a lot of brain damage."
Endangered species in the area also would be at risk, Nash said.
Scott McCloud, communications director for Shreveport, La.-based SWEPCO, said the plant would not be like other coal plants.
"We'll have some of the most technologically advanced coal technology that has been used ever at that plant," he said.
Support for the plant is overwhelming, according to McCloud.
"We have petitions with thousands of signatures in support of the plant. The opposition is very minimal," he said.
Wesley Woodard, president of the Hempstead County Economic Development Corp., said SWEPCO has been a good corporate citizen.
"The people with SWEPCO, they also live here," Woodard said. "From my understanding, they're installing pollution-capturing devices. They're going to look out for our best interest."
Woodard said construction of the facility would take four years and would create 1,400 temporary jobs. The completed plant would employ 110 people.
Annual property tax revenue for local schools would increase by $4 million, sales tax revenue for the county would increase by $8 million and sales tax revenue for the state would increase by $30 million, Woodard said.
"It's the largest thing that's ever actually happened down here," he said.
Bill Kopsky, executive director of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel, said the economic benefits are questionable. With Congress likely to impose new regulations aimed at reducing global warming, the plant "could be an economic dinosaur in five years, easily," he said.
The state Public Service Commission, which is considering SWEPCO's proposal, has raised similar concerns. In a March 2 order the commission directed the company to answer several questions, including:
"In light of new congressional activity and momentum that indicates a strong likelihood that Congress will pass federal climate change legislation mandating a reduction in carbon emission levels ... or otherwise restricting further greenhouse gas emissions from electric generating plants, why is applicant proposing to construct a coal-fired electric generation plant that will produce more greenhouse gases and potentially be in violation of anticipated federal legislation?"
Larry Sparks, director of economic development for the Texarkana Chamber of Commerce, said SWEPCO is trying to meet anticipated demands for energy in the region.
"If everyone keeps growing, and we have continued demand, we're going to have to increase our capacity, if I understand the basics of economics," he said
In addition to generating new wages and tax revenue, the plant would help attract new businesses to the region, according to Sparks.
"One of the factors that everybody looks at when they are examining a possible site is affordable power," he said. The Apollo Alliance, a group that promotes environmentally-friendly economic development, has estimated that investing in alternative energy sources could create an additional $1.6 billion worth of economic activity and nearly 27,000 new jobs in Arkansas.
"If we can move towards clean, renewable sources of energy, it doesn't just create a clean environment. It does create a healthy economy," said Sierra Club of Arkansas spokesman Glen Hooks
Sparks said it is easy to sit in an "ivory tower" and talk about what solutions may be possible, but "this is the best one we have right now, in my opinion."