House rejects bill repealing Kansas' RPS energy mandate

A bipartisan coalition in the House refused to accept a controversial Senate bill Wednesday to repeal a state law mandating utility companies acquire 20 percent of electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

Legislation tied to renewable portfolio standards strikes an array of diverse political interests ranging from Gov. Sam Brownback's consistent advocacy for Kansas wind farming, lawmakers intent on expanding employment with alternative energy companies, as well as legislators and lobbying groups opposed to government mandates or regulation of the energy sector.

Critics of Kansas' RPS provisions adopted in 2009 expressed frustration construction of a coal-fired plant in Holcomb has yet to proceed. The Republican-led Legislature and Democratic Gov. Mark Parkinson agreed to include removal of a key regulatory stumbling block to that southwest Kansas plant expansion in the same bill establishing the RPS. The project subsequently encountered legal challenge.

Conflicting statements were offered during House debate about the law's influence on wind farms and the coal industry, pressure on consumer electric rates and impact on management of regulated utility companies.

Rep. Marc Rhoades, R-Newton, said continuation of the RPS in Kansas would eventually lead to a significant increase in the cost of electricity.

"Forty percent increases to the electrical rates to your constituents," said Rhoades, prompting a chorus of representatives to vocalize skepticism at his figure. "Forty percent! Forty percent! You know, I don't interrupt you when you're speaking. I'd like some, you know, respect here."

Rhoades said individuals involved in development of the five-year-old RPS and Holcomb coal compromise legislation had told "lies" because Sunflower Electric Power Corp. and its partner in Colorado hadn’t built the project.

He closed with a warning to House members voting against the bill to spike the RPS.

"Folks, be advised you vote this down people will be hearing about the fact that you allowed their rates to rise," Rhoades said.

The legislation in Kansas to repeal green-energy standards has been advocated by the Kansas Chamber, the Kansas chapter of Americans for Prosperity and the American Legislative Exchange Council.

Rep. Russell Jennings, a Lakin Republican who lives eight miles from the existing Holcomb coal plant, said the state's RPS wasn't a significant contributor to escalation of electric rates in Kansas. Federal regulations requiring expensive new pollution controls at existing plants burning fossil fuels were an impetus for rate hikes, he said.

"That's what has driven utility rate bills," he said. "There is an underlying, suggested promise that if the renewable energy standards portfolio goes away today, tomorrow our utility bills will go down. It is not true."

He said eventual construction of Holcomb II would lead to installation of transmission lines to the west that would carry coal- and wind-created electricity to customers. Export of electricity should be viewed by special-interest organizations and legislators opposed to RPS as an important emerging feature of the Kansas economy, he said.

"This is nothing more than folks who want to exercise political power," Jennings said of the bill to kill the RPS. "This is about wanting to have a win for the sake of having a win without considering the potential benefit all of this has."

The repeal in House Bill 2014 was approved Tuesday by the Senate on a vote of 25-15. However, the House followed lengthy debate by voting 44-77 against acceptance of the Senate's position.

"It certainly got windy in here," said Rep. Randy Garber, the Sabetha Republican who made the motion to concur with the Senate.

Jeff Glendening, state director of Americans for Prosperity, said Kansas should be the first in the nation to abandon cumbersome government mandates on energy production. The law adopted during the Parkinson administration required utility companies to derive 10 percent of power from renewable sources by 2010, 15 percent by 2015 and 20 percent by 2020.

"Mandates like the RPS disable the competition that ultimately leads to lower costs," he said. "It's simply more of government picking winners and losers in the marketplace, and we would argue that is simply not an appropriate role for government."