Santee Cooper gets even greener
Utility OKs purchase of additional 1% of power from renewable source
By Kyle Stock
In a bid to replace coal with something more "green," state-owned Santee Cooper approved a plan Monday to buy an additional 1 percent of its power from an outfit that generates electricity by burning wood or landfill fumes.
The Moncks Corner-based utility did not set a deadline for buying the so-called green energy but Mollie Gore, corporate communications, said it already is looking at potential suppliers.
"I think our people are talking to a whole lot of people," Gore said. "This could be anything from the branches you prune off your hedges to what's left after harvesting in the forest industry. It's literally stuff that is not going anywhere else."
Gore would not provide details on potential vendors but said most are in South Carolina.
The plan calls for the utility to purchase 50 megawatts of biomass-derived power. Santee Cooper generates about 5,500 megawatts of power, roughly 15 megawatts of which come from plants that burn landfill fumes.
Though the purchase represents only a fraction of the utility's energy footprint, it would provide enough power to serve 25,000 homes.
Santee Cooper would not say how much the new electricity would cost but noted that energy from renewable sources typically sells for a premium.
"It's not anything that we consider exorbitant," Gore said.
A study commissioned in the fall by the state's 24 electric cooperatives showed that biomass — organic matter that ranges from wood chips to corn husks to chicken excrement — is South Carolina's biggest potential source of renewable energy. The report showed that the state could generate enough green energy to power up to 300,000 homes.
Santee Cooper generates four-fifths of its electricity by burning coal, and it has faced off against residents and environmental groups over plans to build another coal-burning plant in Florence County by 2013. In recent months, the utility has cast itself in a deeper shade of green.
Its 2008 budget earmarks $35 million, or 1.6 percent of all spending, for environmentally friendly initiatives, including a plan to give out $2.7 million worth of ultra- efficient light bulbs to its customers and a program in which the utility will buy power from homes with solar panels that generate excess energy.
Santee Cooper powers about 40 percent of the state directly and through a network of cooperatives.
Reach Kyle Stock at 937-5763 or kstock@postand courier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly versionComments
zoomru (anonymous) says...
What?...
A bold faced LIE!!..
A study commissioned in the fall by the state's 24 electric cooperatives showed that biomass - organic matter that ranges from wood chips to corn husks to chicken excrement - is South Carolina's biggest potential source of renewable energy. The report showed that the state could generate enough green energy to power up to 300,000 homes.
Charles....South Carolina's biggest potential source of renewable ENERGY is your trash. Where did you go to school? Has Babara not got you by the ears YET?
Ivan ... Truth helps in demonstrating Glastnost..COMRAD.
Santee Cooper is a Chameleon.....it may look green on a billboard but if its employees don't wise up to the CEO and Boards shenanigans it will return to BROWN.
Citizens of this STATE...OUR trash is energy. There is no need for landfills. WWW.STARTECH.NET
Santee Cooper thinks our land is CHEAP ......
July 1, 2008 at 2:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Hello! Burning wood and methane is not green. Green power sources are solar, wind, geothermal and such.
July 1, 2008 at 4:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
So it would be better to waste the methane that could be used? Come on Pols101. You people are a joke!
July 1, 2008 at 7:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
No, it is not better to waste it. It is a powerful "greenhouse" gas, stronger than CO2 and it needs to be burned. It will do more damage if it is not burned. It is just not considered a "green" energy source. Burning wood is renewable, but still not "green". Wood will produce methane if allowed to rot and like I stated above it is a stronger "greenhouse" gas. CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 10 times as long, neither are good. Using both of these will produce CO2. Neither are as bad as coal burning. Coal brings massive CO2, mercury, and large methane releases from mining. I support methane for electricity, and most of all, nuclear power. This article is very poorly presented.
These 2 sources listed in these articles produce pollution and therefore are not "green" by definition. However, if the wood is allowed to rot it will produce methane, a gas we do not need in the atmosphere. This is propaganda-terminology put out by the power company and reported by an uninformed newspaper.
Bulldog, you are no better informed than these folks the power company are using. I did a research paper on global warming in a environmental politics class in college. I do not believe you have had the class. Uninformed folks are a joke!
July 1, 2008 at 9:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
I actually have a degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering, so I would be careful who you call out. If you were so informed, you would know that global warming is still a theory and there is not enough data to confirm the effect that man can have on the environment. I do know this much, global warming has been in efect since the end of the last ice age or Kentucky would still be covered by a glacier. I'm sure your environmental politics class didn't mention that to you though. If they had, you might actually be compelled to think for yourself instead of regurgitate the opinions of your liberal professors.
July 1, 2008 at 9:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
Google "Joseph Longo" ....they are selling these machine all over the world.
These Power company executives and County officials are in bed together to offer a business a methane gas lollipop when in fact the landfills could actually be dug up to be plasmafied for energy on top of what is going there already. They think land is CHEAP. Taxpayers are getting it up the backside because the 3.5 MiLLION tons of trash in our state is a lot of megawatts and tax REVENUE!!! Not to mention CLOSING our landfills forever.
July 1, 2008 at 10:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
The only thing GREEN is the MONEY leaving OUR wallets!!!
AND sitting in OUR LANDFILLS..........
July 1, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Dude! These 2 sources are not considered "green" in any intellectual community (even yours). CO2 heats the atmosphere in the infrared. CO2 levels pre-industrial age were 100 ppm. Now it is 386 ppm. That the science and even Bush believes it. Not enough data?! This is the data. The ice in the Artic is melting and will likely be all gone in 10 years. Ain't no theory, tis a fact!
July 1, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
common_sense (anonymous) says...
I also understand there are undersea volcanoes that are melting the arctic ice caps...not the false science called global warming. Yet, no major news outlets are reporting the undersea volcanoes. It also should be noted that despite the loss of ice in the arctic, sea levels are not apreciatively rising. But, when you have an agenda, I guess it makes sense not to report on these little tid bits.
I'm just sayin...
July 1, 2008 at 10:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Oh boy, no common sense here!
July 1, 2008 at 10:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JohnS (anonymous) says...
Use the coal. It's a good source of energy.
July 1, 2008 at 10:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
Pols101.....green or not. All forms should be tapped.
Do we have ONE windfarm and GE is right here in OUR state? I am for green WIND. Both on CEASAR's HEAD in the Upstate and OUR entire coastline using the turbines at www.superturbine.net
We are always going to have trash...plasmafy it. Don't bury it.
We just built a fine new bridge for supertankers...WELL officials where is a REFINERY..is it being planned, and when is the groundbreaking ceremony?? I'm sure our state enegineers will ensure it is the GREENEST in the world.
Lets GO ..people
July 1, 2008 at 12:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pearl (anonymous) says...
Santee Cooper is making a tiny step in becoming
greener, but much much more can be accomplished. One should check out what an island in Demark has been doing and we could do locally if there was a will - see
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/0... There are other places in Scandinavia that are doing much better than us in finding renewable green energy sources and that Santee Cooper should learn from and apply.
See also information about the city of Malmo in Sweden -
http://www.managenergy.net/download/n...
July 1, 2008 at 12:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
harlanh001 (anonymous) says...
pols, you are out of your element on this one. Trying to debate enviromental science with a trained engineer in the field, because you wrote a research paper and would know better. That's rich!
July 1, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Harlan, give me some facts that support your arguments. I do believe you have none. By the way; 4.0 GPA; lifetime member of Alpha Chi, the National Honor Scholarship Society; lifetime member of Pi Sigma Alpha, the National Political Science. First in my college class of 1200. What are your credentials? 99% of environmental scientist know that man-made global warming is the greatest threat man has faced. You guys are in the 1%. I think that the dog is the kind of environmental engineer that works on septic tanks.
Zoom, I never said that I am against anything. I just said that these 2 methods are not accepted as "green" by educated folks. I AM FIRMLY AGAINST THE COAL FIRED PLANT!
July 1, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
And all I said was that these are resources that should not be wasted. And a 4.0 in Poli Sci is not that impressive.... Show me the data that supports MANMADE global warming. Climate variations have existed over the life of the planet. We have had ice ages where the glaciers were as far south as Kentucky. However we have only been industrialized for less than 200 years. The earth is MILLIONS of years old. How can you say that man made global warming even exist? You can't. You have no evidence. Records have not even been kept long enough to support such a THEORY. But then again, the politians tend to like to produce statistics that support their agenda without showing you the sample population. So IF the overall average temperature has risen in the past 100 years. You have nothing to compare that to, because you not have records to compare to the changes the earth undergoes naturally. The earth has survived for millions of years without any help from us. I think it will be just fine. Should we do all we can to help out and reduce our footprint? Absolutely! Should it be detrimental to our way of life? Absolutely not! Good luck on your next paper.
July 1, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Ice cores are the records, septic tank inspector.
July 1, 2008 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
You do know that ice cores exist and are a scientific record, don't you.
July 1, 2008 at 4:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
You have proven my point. You supply data from a very small percentage of the total earth and expect us to believe that that is definitive proof. Why did the ice age end? Was it an unkown civilization that constructed a power plant? I know a lot more than you think... You, however have no idea how much you don't know. Oh, and I wouldn't be so quick to jump to conclusions concerning my occupation. You may be very surprised and very much out of your league.
July 1, 2008 at 4:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Atmospheric conditions are what causes ice ages and warming periods. The last ice age happened only about 10,000 years ago. Ice core records are valid to over 100,000 years. Atmospheric conditions are what we are talking about. And there is nothing out-of-my-league on this subject. All you do is make very vague and non-specific comments that carry no weight. Septic tank man.
July 1, 2008 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
Dito Pols101...I too am firlmy against the coal fired plant in the PEE DEE.
With 34 tons of nuclear fuel, santee is nuts to build a coal plant....unless there is a payoff. We need to see specifics on this rational of thinking.
July 1, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BulldogTLC (anonymous) says...
And what caused the change in atmoshperic conditions 10,000 years ago? Did man cause it? Waiting on an answer..... Think about it real hard before you answer. Now tell me again how global warming is man-made. Why don't you try to find a job in your field. I saw just today that Burger King is accepting applications for Assistant Mangers. That will give you something to work towards.
July 1, 2008 at 5:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Actually, I am a retired state police officer. I am getting ready to go back to work for another state agency as an investigator and continue my work on an advanced degree. I am not a kid, if that is what you are suggesting. The ice ages and global warming are generally caused by low and excessive greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the Earth's orbit around the Sun and volcanic eruptions. The amount of greenhouses gases is the concern and it is a simple science. I have enjoyed the debate, but have grown tired of it. Please reconsider your position and think about how about half of the hydrocarbons that were under the Earth's surface are now floating around in the atmosphere.
July 1, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
harlanh001 (anonymous) says...
Hey Pols, I never said I was an expert in the field of Environmental Science I am merely calling you out for trying to tell a trained engineer how to do his job (Bulldog). If you can't comprehend that, then you sure as hell can't comprehend the science behind this phenomenon... which, to be honest, I will not even pretend to fully appreciate the gravity of. This is in spite of reading several books about it and working in the UK Parliament on a 10 week Global Warming project for DEFRA.
Get off your high horse and admit that no one really knows what is happening, it is all speculation and hypothesis.
July 1, 2008 at 8:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pols101 (anonymous) says...
Harlan, my professor on this finished 1st in his class at Brown. I finished 1st in his class. I EARNED the right to be on this horse. It is just like you admitted; you don't know anything. I think we are the experts. Look at the EVIDENCE! What else is there? I wrote a 36 page research paper on it and got an A in the class and on that paper at a Ivy League College. I know what I am discussing.
July 1, 2008 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
harlanh001 (anonymous) says...
My friend, I never "admitted" to not know anything... but at this point I am beginning to ponder your sanity. I also never questioned the existence of Global Warming, I do however question the human influence thereof.
Like I said... you just don't get it. Your like a busboy trying to run the kitchen... 100% of the time the busboy is in over his head.
July 1, 2008 at 11:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
