Georgia Power drew fire this week from critics who want the utility to retire its old coal-fired plants and ramp up efforts to add more solar power and other renewable energy.
Every three years, the Atlanta-based electric utility sends updated plans to the Georgia Public Service Commission on how it expects to meet future power demands in the state for the next two decades, and what types of power plants it expects to build or retire.
Over the next few months, the PSC is expected to hold more hearings and decide whether Georgia Power, a regulated monopoly, needs to revise the 1,500-page plan to win approval.
Such decisions will eventually affect customers' power bills for years to come.
Georgia Power has asked to shut down a total of four coal- and oil-fired units at two plants near Albany and Savannah while at the same time adding 525 megawatts of renewable power by 2019.
Those moves would shift Georgia Power’s fuel mix from solar, wind and other renewables to 10 percent by 2020, from 7 percent currently. Hydropower accounts for the bulk of its renewable power.
The utility has also floated the idea of doing preliminary work that could allow it to eventually build a second nuclear power complex in Georgia south of Columbus. Georgia Power is currently years behind schedule and billions over budget on construction of its Vogtle nuclear plant expansion near Augusta.
At the PSC’s ongoing hearings this week, critics questioned Georgia Power’s plans on several fronts.
Noting that a national environmental group earlier this month called the Chattahoochee River basin the nation’s “most endangered” waterway, Chattahoochee Riverkeeper Jason Ulseth said it would be a bad idea for Georgia Power to build a nuclear plant that would rely on the river for cooling water, especially in a drought.
“The river is over-stretched and cannot provide support for new development,” he told the commissioners.
Meanwhile, environmental groups and clean energy advocates said Georgia Power is moving too slow to retire five coal-fired power plants, which produce more carbon dioxide and other pollutants than other types of power plants.
The move to keep the plants going will likely saddle ratepayers with hundreds of millions of dollars in additional costs to comply with tighter pollution rules, one critic said.
Dan Walsh, an attorney representing the PSC staff, noted that Georgia Power wants to run the coal-fired plants for up to 30 more years.
“That’s pretty old in the life of a coal-fired plant, correct?” he asked. Wouldn’t power outages and maintenance costs increase as the plants age, he asked.
“We’ve been able to operate these units well beyond useful life” with proper maintenance, saving money for the company and ratepayers, said Alison Chiock, with Georgia Power.
Other critics told regulators that they want Georgia Power to invest more in solar power generation capacity and other renewable energy, such as biomass power plants and wind energy.
Emory University student Zola Berger-Schmitz asked why Georgia Power can’t aim to generate 3,000 megawatts of electricity from solar and wind power, about triple what’s in operation or on the drawing boards.
Such decisions “will affect our generation more than any other,” she said.
About the Author
