Here are five flawed arguments by the Toquop supporters

thespectrum.com
Article published Jan 16, 2008

Let's examine five arguments used by Toquop coal-fired power supporters.

• "We need the power."
The trouble with this argument is Southern Utah will receive zero power from Toquop. In any case we do not need
coal-fired power. Toquop was initially to be natural gas-fired, which brings us to the second flawed argument.

• "Coal-fired power is cheaper."
Remember the concept of "externalities" from Economics 101? The free market allocates scarce resources well
when their full cost is reflected in their selling price. You produce an item for $10, including fair profit, and I am
willing to buy it for $10. We both benefit. But if that $10 item releases a chemical that increases society's average
health or cleanup costs, for example, there are external costs that neither of us pays directly, resulting in
suboptimal resource allocation. If forced to pay these "hidden" costs, I may have selected a different item, even one
with a higher initial price tag.

Coal-fired power appears to be cheap because the future costs to society are not currently priced into it. In
Toquop's case, Southern Utahns will pay increased health and aesthetic costs so Nevada and Arizona can have
cheaper power. Gee, that's nice of us! Even if the increased pollution only raises the incidents of respiratory and
other diseases a few percentage points, the eventual costs are huge when multiplied by a population of 150,000
residents over the 60-year life of the plant.

• "Coal-fired power has become clean."
According to the BLM's draft environmental impact study, the Toquop plant's yearly contribution to our atmosphere
will be 6,579 tons of a mixture of sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, PM10
particulates, lead, mercury and other substances known to pollute air and water and increase health problems over
time. In addition the plant will release annually 5.4 million tons of global-warming CO2. This is an embarrassingly
small 15 to 20 percent reduction from conventional "dirty" plant emissions.

• "Wind, solar and geothermal plants are impractical."
If so, revert to Plan A, natural gas! Utah's own Rocky Mountain Power has shelved plans for more coal-fired plants
in favor of wind and natural gas. Another company is building wind farms in Millard County to supply power to
California. Breakthroughs in wind, solar and geothermal power are making them competitive with coal. A likely
carbon tax will soon tip the balance against coal, but by then we will be stuck with coal-fired Toquop, which will
simply raise rates to pay the tax.

• "Southern Utah has clean air to spare."
Yes, our area is a perfect candidate for increased pollution. If the plant were closer to a national park, the federal
government would deny permission under clean-air rules. If it were closer to Las Vegas, Nevada authorities would
deny permission because Las Vegas air is already too dirty. So, put the plant on the Nevada border and let

Southern Utahns pay the hidden costs.

Thanks, we needed that!

Art Porter is a resident of Washington City. He is a member of The Spectrum & Daily News Writers Group.