Last Friday there were meetings of the Greenhouse Gas Committee and Electricity Committee of the Kansas Energy Council (KEC). (You can find the materials online at the KEC website.)
These meetings were very significant. Basically, the committees finalized their findings and recommendations for Kansas energy policy in 2008. The full council will vote on the recommendations on Wednesday, August 13, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., at the Eisenhower Building, 700 SW Harrison, Topeka KS, in Auditorium A. The public is welcome to attend.
The last full meeting was packed, and you must sign in with security to enter the building, so leave yourself a little extra time.
GREENHOUSE GAS COMMITTEE
Frankly, even though I really enjoy attending such meetings, most do not leave me bouncing up and down in my seat with excitement.
In the GHG Committee, though, this time that actually happened. They had a great and forward-thinking discussion about carbon offsets via soil sequestration of carbon dioxide, through farming techniques like partial till and no-till agriculture.
In a new low-carbon economy, this direction is really a ray of hope for Kansas. The committee strategized for how Kansas farmers could take advantage of these new carbon offset markets.
Okay. I’ll be more objective now.
Here are the recommendations that the GHG Committee will present to the full KEC on August 13:
(1) In the event that there is federal carbon regulation (and the KEC does not endorse that, this is just an “if”) then that policy needs to include agricultural sequestration as a marketable offset. Also, the KEC needs to encourage education of farmers as to the benefits of no-till, partial-till, etc. – soil sequestration techniques.
(2) Highway speed limits need to be reduced 5 mph to 65 mph. Voluntary or mandatory is up for discussion.
(3) The state can consider officially allowing some employees to telecommute (it does informally now).
(4) The full council will get to discuss whether regulated utilities should offer time of use rates to all customers. This is not yet a formal recommendation.
(5) The full council will also consider energy efficiency standards based on the Summit Blue efficiency study commissioned by the KEC. Preliminary results were presented at the last full KEC meeting. Findings were that Kansas badly lags the rest of the Midwest in saving energy.
(6) Statement that the federal level is the best place for a carbon tax or cap and trade.
What didn’t pass:
A recommendation to establish a state public benefit fund for low-income motorists to switch to higher mileage vehicles.
Enforceable building codes for the state of Kansas.
Tax credits for structures that get energy audits.
ELECTRICITY COMMITTEE
At the beginning of the meeting, a 2007 EPRI study was distributed – “The Power to Reduce CO2 Emissions: The Full Portfolio” (tried to find it online, couldn’t, sorry).
The study explains a “prism” analysis of various wedges that can reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the electrical sector – efficiency, renewables, nuclear, advanced coal, carbon capture and storage, plug-in hybrids and distributed generation.
Technology for energy efficiency, renewables, and distributed generation are widely available now. The other technologies mentioned, such as advanced light water nuclear reactors, advanced coal plants capable of carbon capture and sequestration, and plug-in hybrid vehicles, are not yet fully developed or market-ready on an affordable scale.
The study was passed out to the committee, but not discussed in any detail. The following recommendations were discussed at length.
1) A resolution to provide support for new research and generation technologies. An algae reactor was mentioned.
2) Support for advanced generation in Kansas, and to promote transfer of baseload and intermittent power in the region.
3) “Support policies that promote true regional declines in greenhouse gas emissions, not policies that merely shift emissions within or between regions.”
4) The full KEC will consider the following idea brought up at the meeting, that had not yet been formalized into an official recommendation.
The gist is that the Kansas lawmakers need to figure out some way to remove the regulatory obstacles that prevent affordable purchases of baseload power between utilities within the state. For example, right now if an investor-owned utility (like Westar or KCPL) has extra power, they sell it at retail on the spot market (as is required by their obligation to provide return for their investors). In-state utilities who need the baseload find it difficult to afford at these prices.
This was pretty vague and we will have to wait and see the official language. Rep. Tom Sloan was one of those who was going to be drafting it.
What failed:
An effort to “encourage consideration by the State of Kansas of assuming the role of a developer and/or equity owner, but not an operator, of new nuclear” resources.
An effort to consider “local impacts of policies as well as regional and global implications.”
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
In a new energy economy – especially in wind – there’s all sorts of ways to make the development happen.
Logan County Economic Development Director Dan Hartman has decided to see if county commissioners in northeastern Kansas are interested in teaming together to develop an integrated wind economy and infrastructure for wind-rich northwestern Kansas. The transmission picture in that part of the state is rapidly changing, with new lines coming in and old ones being upgraded.
Logan County is hosting a 13 county summit on August 13 from 10 a.m. to noon in Oakley, KS at the Colonial Steakhouse. There will be almost 40 county commissioners there. The purpose is to discuss various possible models of wind development for that area of the state.
The public is welcome, and no registration is required. Just show on up.
— Maril Hazlett, www.climateandenergy.org
