CO2 debate viewed anew

Topeka Capital-Journal, The, Apr 10, 2008 by Tim Carpenter

By Tim Carpenter

THE CAPITAL-JOURNAL

Members of the Kansas Energy Council stepped into an economic and political minefield Wednesday with talk of a cap-and-trade system for limiting greenhouse gas pollution.

Co-chairmen of the council said vigorous debate in Kansas and other regions of the country would likely serve as a precursor to the establishment of a national system imposing a cost on companies that pump carbon dioxide and other climate-changing compounds into the atmosphere.

"It is a dress rehearsal, and it's a darn important one," said Ken Frahm, who serves as co-chairman with Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson.

The council, which is responsible for advising the Legislature on energy policy, doesn't have an official position on CO2 emissions or global warming. Special-interest groups represented on the council succeeded last year in tabling discussion of the topic. Some people don't believe human conduct resulting in greenhouse gas emissions is responsible for degradation of the environment, but there is scientific consensus of a linkage between burning carbon and climate change.

A committee of the energy council met in Topeka to discuss general outlines of a possible cap-and-trade program that would set limits on greenhouse gas emissions, issue permits equaling that quantity and establish a market for trading permits among companies that emit greenhouse gases.

Parkinson said the debate would position the state for the moment Congress and the president embraced a national program to regulate carbon.

"Kansas needs to figure out how these issues play for Kansas," he said.

The issue is significant for the Kansas Energy Council given intense debate in the Statehouse about the proposed $3.5 billion expansion of the coal-fired electric plant in Holcomb. The expansion would add an estimated 11 million tons of carbon annually to the atmosphere.

Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a bill allowing for the 1,400- megawatt power plant project. The House and Senate return April 30 to Topeka to resolve the stalemate.

Liz Brosius, executive director of the Kansas Energy Council, said all options for reducing the state's carbon footprint would be costly.

"Tackling global warming will be expensive," she said. "There's going to be a lot of resistance as we begin to make things more expensive. Political considerations loom large."

Nancy Jackson, executive director of the Climate and Energy Project at the Land Institute in Salina, said the type of face-to- face discussion about greenhouse emissions that occurred Wednesday among energy council members representing environmental groups; state government; and the refinery, trucking, housing and utility industries would help set the foundation for implementation of a national system.

"If you're not at the table for the discussion," she said, "you're on the menu later."

Jackson said Kansas was positioned to be a big winner in a rapidly changing energy economy. The state has massive underground formations where carbon could be stored rather than released to the air, she said. Greenhouse gases pumped below the surface could improve oil recovery in some areas, she said.

In addition, the state has solid potential for power production from wind and solar facilities and through burning biomass from crop residue or prairie grasses.

"We're stuck in the 'we're going to lose' mentality," Jackson said. "Kansas should be a net winner."

Tim Carpenter can be reached

at (785) 296-3005 or

timothy.carpenter@cjonline.com.