Wyoming’s carbon capture mandate withstands legislative repeal effort – Oil City News

Legislative Stalemate on Wyoming’s Carbon Capture Mandate: An Analysis of Economic and Sustainable Development Implications

Executive Summary of Legislative Action

A legislative proposal to repeal Wyoming’s mandate for carbon capture technology on coal-fired power plants failed to advance from the Joint Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee. The vote was sharply divided between the two chambers of the legislature, indicating a significant policy rift.

• House of Representatives Members: Seven of eight members voted in favor of sponsoring the repeal bill.
• Senate Members: Four of five members voted against the measure, effectively halting its progress.

This division highlights a fundamental disagreement on the state’s strategy for energy and economic development, impacting its ability to form a coherent policy framework as envisioned in Sustainable Development Goal 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Financial Implications and Impact on SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy)

The state’s carbon capture mandate has resulted in direct costs to consumers, raising concerns about energy affordability, a key target of SDG 7. The mandate requires utilities to pass the costs of feasibility studies on to their customers through a surcharge.

Ratepayer Contributions to Date:

1. Rocky Mountain Power: Approximately $3.9 million has been collected from Wyoming customers for technical and economic analysis.
2. Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power: Approximately $883,000 has been collected from its customer base.

These surcharges, imposed on top of other recent double-digit rate increases, challenge the objective of ensuring access to affordable, reliable, and modern energy for all. The financial strain on households directly conflicts with targets under SDG 7 and affects the economic sustainability of communities, a concern related to SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Technological Viability and Challenges to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure)

Despite several years of mandated analysis, utility companies report that retrofitting existing coal plants with carbon capture technology is not yet commercially or economically viable. This presents a significant barrier to achieving the goals of building resilient infrastructure and fostering innovation, as outlined in SDG 9.

Key Findings from Black Hills Energy (Parent of Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power):

• Prohibitive Cost: The most viable technology identified carries an estimated cost of $500 million for a single plant retrofit (Wygen II).
• Reduced Efficiency: The retrofit would decrease the power plant’s electricity generation capacity by over 30%.
• Energy Replacement Needed: The loss in capacity would require the utility to source an additional 30 megawatts of power from other sources.

These findings suggest that current technology does not yet offer a sustainable pathway for upgrading critical energy infrastructure in a manner that supports both environmental and economic objectives, a core tenet of SDG 9.4.

Policy Context: Balancing SDG 8 (Decent Work) and SDG 13 (Climate Action)

The 2020 “Low-Carbon Energy Standards” mandate was established with dual objectives that align with the SDGs. The primary goals were to:

1. Preserve the viability of the Wyoming coal industry and associated jobs, supporting SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
2. Position Wyoming as a leader in low-carbon fossil fuel technology to help utilities comply with emission standards, thereby contributing to SDG 13 (Climate Action).

Proponents argue that developing this technology could provide a climate solution for the 11 states with renewable portfolio standards that currently purchase Wyoming coal. However, the lack of a cost-effective solution demonstrates the profound difficulty in reconciling the economic imperatives of SDG 8 with the environmental targets of SDG 13. The ongoing political debate, influenced by shifting federal environmental policies, further complicates the state’s ability to implement effective, long-term climate action strategies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy: The article centers on the cost of electricity for consumers and the development of technology (carbon capture) to make a traditional energy source (coal) cleaner. The debate over the “carbon capture compliance” surcharge directly relates to energy affordability.
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: The discussion revolves around retrofitting existing industrial infrastructure (coal power plants) with innovative technology (carbon capture). It explores the economic and technical feasibility of this upgrade, which is a core theme of SDG 9.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The primary motivation for the carbon capture mandate is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. The article discusses state-level policies aimed at mitigating climate change impacts, contrasting them with shifts in federal environmental regulations.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article implicitly touches on SDG 8 by discussing policies aimed at sustaining the coal industry. The effort to make coal viable through carbon capture is a strategy to preserve an economic sector significant to Wyoming, thereby supporting jobs and economic activity associated with it.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 7.1: By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services. The article highlights the conflict between implementing cleaner energy technology and maintaining affordability, noting that utilities have tapped customers to cover costs and that lawmakers are under pressure to “stem double-digit cost increases.”
2. Target 7.a: By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy research and technology… and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology. The state’s mandate requires utilities to invest in and evaluate carbon capture technology. The article states that the goal is to “get the technology and the cost of that technology to come down.”
3. Target 9.4: By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make them sustainable… The entire premise of the legislation discussed (“House Bill 200”) is to evaluate the retrofitting of coal-burning power plants with carbon capture technology to reduce their carbon footprint.
4. Target 9.5: Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities of industrial sectors… encouraging innovation and… public and private research and development spending. The article explicitly mentions the funds spent on “technical and economic feasibility analysis” by power companies, which constitutes R&D spending to upgrade technological capabilities.
5. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning. Wyoming’s “Low-Carbon Energy Standards” mandate is a clear example of a state-level policy integrating climate change measures (carbon reduction) into its energy strategy.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Financial Investment in R&D: The article provides specific figures that serve as direct indicators of investment in clean energy technology research.
  • Rocky Mountain Power has spent “about $3.9 million.”
  • Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power has spent “about $883,000.”
• Cost to Consumers: The “carbon capture compliance’ surcharge” on electricity bills is a direct indicator of the financial impact on consumers, relevant to measuring energy affordability (Target 7.1). The mention of “double-digit cost increases” also serves as a qualitative indicator.
• Economic Feasibility of Technology: The estimated cost of retrofitting a single plant (“about $500 million” for Wygen II) is a key indicator for assessing the viability of upgrading infrastructure (Target 9.4).
• Impact on Energy Production: The projected reduction in a plant’s output (“knock down the coal plant’s electric generation capacity by more than 30%”) is an indicator of the trade-offs involved in retrofitting infrastructure.
• Policy Implementation: The existence of the state law, “House Bill 200, ‘Reliable and dispatchable low-carbon energy standards’,” serves as a qualitative indicator for the integration of climate policies (Target 13.2).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: capcity.news