A burning issue Print E-mail

Economic consequences
Across the state, the economy would suffer, McCall said, if Santee Cooper could not deliver safe and reliable power, as it is mandated to do by state law.

But the environmental activists have painted their opposition with an economic brush as well.

The problem, said Holman, is that the new plant would eat into the region’s “increment,” or the clean-air budget for the area as measured by pollutants.

That budget is meant to prevent an area from moving into the so-called “nonattainment” status under the Clean Air Act that would threaten federal transportation dollars and future permitting applications for businesses. 

“We’re dealing with a limited shared resource, which means we need to think carefully about how to dole it out,” he said. “Which would the region rather have, a tax-exempt coal plant staffed by 100 people, or several tax-paying Vought facilities employing thousands?”

Of particular concern is the plant’s proximity to Cape Romain, a refuge owned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which in 1997 identified that spot along with seven other national refugees as having the “highest air pollution threat.”

The air quality standards are stricter for the refuge, as with other congressionally designated areas, said Gudrun Thompson, also an attorney with the law center.

Environmental questions
Santee Cooper vice president for corporate communications Laura Varn challenged the claim that the utility’s presence in Florence County will thwart other businesses. The plant will emit fewer pollutants than the permit would allow, she said, pointing to results from the new mercury monitoring system the utility installed a year ago to accurately test the tonnage it spits out.

Preliminary results found that the two units tested emit roughly 30 to 40 pounds per year, which would equate to about 160 pounds for all four units, well under the 187.2 pounds the plant is permitted to emit in total.

Critics argue even trace amounts of mercury can do significant damage because it can seep into the water and contaminate the fish population. DHEC already recommends eating no more than one serving per month of fish caught in certain areas where high levels of mercury have been detected. 

Holman’s organization and the neighbors closest to the plant would like Santee Cooper to turn away from coal altogether.

“There’s no such thing as clean coal,” he said. “That’s like a healthy cigarette.”

They contend that Santee Cooper has yet to look at a comprehensive conservation package such as the one Charlotte-based Duke Energy has filed with the Public Service Commission of South Carolina.

Duke, which is also awaiting approval in North Carolina and Indiana, claims it can retire nearly 800 megawatts of energy that coal plants would otherwise produce by passing on the costs for efficiency upgrades to customers in the same way new plant construction can be passed on through rate increases. 

McCall said it’s easy to point fingers when you are not the one legally charged with keeping the lights on.

“I hope you know we don’t want to build one,” he said once back on the ground. “We build a plant only because we need it. I think some people believe we are out here trying to build a plant and we don’t want to build a plant. This is a lot of work.” 

Molly Parker is a staff writer for SC BIZ magazine. E-mail her directly at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .


 
SCBIZ Book of Lists
SC Launch!
CRBJ Cross Promo
SCBIZ Daily
Who's Who
SCEDA
DeptofCommerce
Orangeburg County Economic Development
Santee Cooper