Analysis Shows that Efficiency and Other Demand Reduction Measures Offer Cleanest Short Term Energy Option for Texas

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Colin Rowan, Environmental Defense, (512) 691-3416

(Austin – November 15, 2006) An analysis released today by Environmental Defense shows that Texas can meet future power needs through 2011 — without TXU’s 11 proposed coal-fired power plants — and remain safely above the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) target reserve margin.

The analysis can be downloaded at www.stopTXU.com.

Through a mixture of efficiency and untapped load reduction techniques, the scenario presented in the analysis could cut in half annual growth in power demand that ERCOT uses to predict whether Texas will have enough power to keep the lights on. The reserve margin represents Texas’ available power capacity above and beyond the highest projected peak demand. ERCOT’s “safe” margin is 12.5%. ERCOT’s status quo scenario — much touted by TXU as proof that its dirty coal-fired plants are necessary — suggests that the reserve margin will drop to 11.4% in 2008, 8.5% in 2009 and 6.8% in 2010.

TXU’s proposed coal plants would not be online fast enough to address the 2008 and 2009 reserve margin problem. The Environmental Defense scenario improves those numbers to 14.5% in 2008 and 12.5% in 2009. With the addition of just 700 megawatts (MW) of new clean capacity in 2010 and 2011 – a fraction of TXU’s massive proposal – Texas would be able to stay above the 12.5% mark.

“This simple analysis shows that our state leaders shouldn’t rely on TXU’s word when it comes to making energy decisions for Texas,” said Environmental Defense regional director Jim Marston. “If our leaders thought they had some time to address this calmly, I don’t think they would support 11 dirty coal plants. Our alternative is quicker, cheaper and cleaner than what TXU has proposed.”

The energy scenario in the analysis was vetted by industry experts and was judged to be affordable and achievable. It relies on a combination of aggressive but realistic efficiency measures and implementing commercial and industrial demand response strategies.

“It might be time to ask someone other than TXU what Texas needs,” Marston said. “If you ask a power company if you need more power, it’s going to say yes. If you ask a company that owns coal mines what kind of power you need, it will say coal-fired power. Texas should be asking ‘How can we use power more wisely?’ but our governor has been too busy fast-tracking TXU’s permits, attending TXU’s press conferences and writing TXU’s propaganda.”

Last October, Gov. Perry issued an executive order fast-tracking the permits for coal-fired power plants. In April, he stood beside TXU CEO John Wilder when the company held a press conference to announce the 11 proposed coal plants. This summer, he penned an opinion column in the Dallas Morning News that touted the dire need for more power and hailed TXU’s proposal. Unfortunately, few at the Capitol have questioned Perry’s zeal for 1950s-style coal plants that will threaten our children’s health and exacerbate the global warming crisis.

“Instead of taking TXU’s word for it that we need all these plants, our elected officials should demand a careful examination of how Texas can meet our future power needs more cleanly, cheaply and quickly,” Marston said. “In one month, our organization identified a scenario that took the most prevalent rationale for TXU’s coal plants — the need for more power — and blew it out of the water. Imagine what the great state of Texas could come up with if it put resources behind finding better alternatives to dirty coal.”