McConnell calls for comprehensive energy plan
Sen. Alexander says panel will begin analysis before the week is out and will meet the goal for recommendations before year's end
COLUMBIA — As America's attention shifts to future energy needs, state Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell has called for immediate plans for South Carolina.
McConnell wrote a four-page letter to the State Regulation of Public Utilities Review Committee that outlined the challenges facing South Carolina and the need for a comprehensive analysis.
"While the onset of $4 per gallon gasoline and double-digit increases in wholesale power costs caused by skyrocketing coal prices have moved 'energy' to the front and center in the public's mind, the challenge for our state is truly a long-term one," wrote McConnell, R-Charleston. "Most likely, it will be one of the single greatest factors affecting our state's economy and quality of life."
He said several outside factors must be considered — future congressional standards on carbon emissions, the price of raw materials and commodities and the country's economic slowdown.
"At some point in the very near future, congressional votes will be tallied and a list of winners and losers will emerge," McConnell wrote. "I believe it is crucial that prior to that vote, South Carolinians have the benefit of a focused discussion, not debate, of what policy will put our state among the list of winners — as to energy supply and environmental stewardship."
Walhalla Republican Sen. Thomas Alexander, chairman of the review committee, said the panel will begin work within the week. He said they will meet the goal for recommendations to be ready before the end of the year.
"It's a very vigorous and aggressive time schedule. I am ready to roll up my sleeves, and I know my colleagues on the review committee will be, too," Alexander said.
House Speaker Bobby Harrell, R-Charleston, said McConnell is on target, and Harrell pledged his support for the development of a centralized plan for South Carolina.
"We are sending $700 billion a year overseas to people who hate us and giving them the money they need to do bad things," Harrell said. "That, if for no other reason, should be reason enough for us to figure out how to make our country energy independent."
Harrell highlighted several ongoing research projects into alternative energy sources within the state, including hydrogen and fuel cell research at Clemson University and the University of South Carolina.
Meanwhile, approval is being sought for four nuclear power plants in the state as well as for two new coal plants, said John Clark, director of the state Energy Office. It will take a mixture of both those means, as well as efficiency standards and renewable resources, to meet the state's demand going into the future, he said.
"South Carolina is growing so fast and our energy needs are growing so fast that even if we do more with renewable resources and efficiency we will still need more," Clark said. "We can't just wish the problem away."
In 2008, South Carolina's total energy consumption is projected to be made up of 29 percent petroleum, 10 percent natural gas, 26 percent coal, 28 percent nuclear, 0.8 percent hydro and a combined 5 percent for wood, solar, geothermal and other sources, according to the Energy Office. The other 1.2 percent was not designated.
Reach Yvonne Wenger at 803-799-9051 or ywenger@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier 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 "suggest removal" 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 Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 9 comment(s)
Posted by carolinadude on September 15, 2008 at 5:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DRILL NOW!
Posted by moonpie on September 15, 2008 at 6:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DRILL NOW, and all the other things too. We can see how sporatic and trust worthy the oil & gas industry is with the gouging that took place this past week.
HEY GAS STATION OWNERS IT'S BEEN CONFIRMED NO DAMAGE TO THE OIL RIGS OR REFINERIES SO ITS OK TO DROP YOUR PRICES THIS WEEK.
We need to fax every gas station in Charleston with the news! It's amazing the price difference from what ever side of town your on. On Trolley rd where the gouging started their at $4 per gallon. Over at Hotspot on 17A their at $3.80 per gallon ?
Posted by eatmorecollards on September 15, 2008 at 7:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe we need a new type of motor instead of new types of energy.
Posted by RTC on September 15, 2008 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
One man can't do it alone. McConnell needs the backing of everyone in Columbia. They are too busy fighting among themselves, and Sanford is no help at all.
Posted by eyfigueroa on September 15, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As of 0700 this morning the Hotspot on 17a and Frontage Road was selling Regular Unleaded at $4.99/gal. Across the street Hess was selling at $3.99/gal for Regular Unleaded.
Regardless of anyone's definition of price gouging, having to be COMPLETELY dependent upon petroluem as an automobile fuel source will continue to decimate the workingman's budget.
We will not be free of petroleum dependence as so many of everyday products are petroleum based, but there can be a "Manhattan Project" urgency applied to research to get us in another direction as far as heating/transporation fuel sources are concerned.
I could commend McConnell for his action but too often I've seen him pander to constituents without many real results.
Hopefully this will be an exception.
Posted by PalmettoDP on September 15, 2008 at 12:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Many stations raised their prices so they wouldn't have a run on their station, leaving the pumps dry for several days. I'm sure the owner of the Hotspot at 17A and Frontage Road realizes that his/her competitor across the road is selling gas for a dollar per gallon cheaper - and that most people will buy gas at that station first.
The best alternative fuel someone could come up with is something that uses existing fueling infrastructure (a fuel that is liquid at most outdoor temperatures). This would save us the cost and time of having to build a new fueling and distribution system from the ground up.
Until we come up with a long-term solution, we should open up the areas currently off-limits to drilling. Also, we should build new refineries in geographically diverse places, so that a natural disaster or terrorist attack at one refinery can't cripple an entire region.
Posted by eyfigueroa on September 15, 2008 at 3:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Agreed palmettodp!
Posted by ChrisPia on September 15, 2008 at 4:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
KANEB Reports Excellent Results for 2004
Business Wire, March 10, 2005 E-mail Print Link DALLAS -- KANEB today reported results for the year ended December 31, 2004. The KANEB Companies are Kaneb Services LLC (NYSE:KSL) and Kaneb Pipe Line Partners, L.P. (NYSE:KPP), "the Partnership"). Kaneb Services LLC's wholly owned subsidiary, Kaneb Pipe Line Company LLC, is the Partnership's General Partner.
"KANEB had an excellent year. The Partnership's strong performance once again demonstrated the value we have created and grown through strategic acquisitions and effective management. That value is the foundation of our anticipated transaction with Valero, which brings tremendous advantages to Kaneb investors. The combination of the transaction's favorable exchange ratio and the premium at which Valero L.P. units are trading represents a substantial increase in market value for our KPP unitholders. Our KSL shareholders will receive cash that also represents a substantial premium," said John R. Barnes, chairman and CEO of KANEB. "We are very pleased with the KANEB companies' performance in 2004, which continued to build value and deliver growth for our unitholders and shareholders."
On November 1, 2004, Valero L.P. (NYSE:VLI) and the KANEB companies (NYSE:KPP)(NYSE:KSL) announced that they had executed definitive agreements to merge Valero L.P. and Kaneb Pipe Line Partners, L.P., and that Valero L.P. will purchase all of Kaneb Services' shares for cash. The date for the special meeting of the unitholders of Valero L.P. and Kaneb Pipe Line Partners, L.P. and the shareholders of Kaneb Services LLC has been set for March 11, 2005. .
2004 RESULTS FOR KANEB PIPE LINE PARTNERS, L.P.
Kaneb Pipe Line Partners, L.P. reported revenues of $648.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared with $570.4 million for 2003. Net income for the year was $90.1 million (after merger costs), compared with $82.4 million for the previous year. Net income per unit for the year was $2.84, compared with $2.68 for the previous year. EBITDA increased (see Supplemental Information in the attached table) to $193.4 million for 2004, compared with $181.7 million for 2003.
"The Partnership's 2004 acquisitions were strategic additions to our assets and strengthened our position in the New York Harbor as well as in Scotland, where we are the leading terminal operator in that country," said Edward D. Doherty, chairman and CEO of Kaneb Pipe Line Company LLC, the Partnership's General Partner.
Michael L. Rose, chief operating officer of Kaneb Pipe Line Company LLC, commented on KPP's 2004 performance: "The Partnership had a very strong year, with significant gains in revenues and operating income from our terminaling and product sales operations.
****** Carolina Dude(Ron Turner) saying Drill Now Makes me wonder If John Barnes(The Jail Chief for Ray Nash) and Mike Rose Maybe are the same people above. What are the Odds?
Posted by ChrisPia on September 15, 2008 at 6:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id...