Coal and electric firms push coal-burning power plants; opposition leads to delays of more than 50

The boom in coal-fired power plants has been tempered by "concerns about climate change, construction costs and transportation problems," reports the Los Angeles Times, and the coal and electric industries are fighting back with campaigns that pay special attention to states with early presidential primaries and caucuses, reports The Washington Post.

A recent post here mentioned Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, a lobby group supported by the coal, electric and allied industries. Steven Mufson of the Post reports that the group spent $17 million last year, has a budget of $35 million this year, and has spent $1.3 million on billboard, newspaper, television and radio ads in Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina — early-voting states where coal-fired power plants are facing opposition.

"One of its television ads shows a power cord being plugged into a lump of coal, which it calls 'an American resource that will help us with vital energy security' and 'the fuel that powers our way of life,'" Mufson writes. "The ads note that half of U.S. electricity comes from coal-fired plants." Another ad says, "Throughout history, new ideas have often been met with skepticism" while showing images of the Wright brothers and other inventors before talking about "clean coal technology."

The group's financial supporters include 28 companies and trade associations such as the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, whose members depend heavily on coal. At this week's Democratic debate in Nevada, the group had about 50 people carrying signs and handing out leaflets. Inside, each of the three candidates spent some time addressing the issue. Former senator John Edwards said, "I believe we need a moratorium on the building of any more coal-fired power plants unless and until we have the ability to capture and sequester the carbon in the ground." Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said, "I have said we should not be siting any more coal-powered plants unless they can have the most modern, clean technology. And I want big demonstration projects to figure out how we would capture and sequester carbon." Sen. Barack Obama did not take a hard line on coal-fired electricity, but he said America must work to be "more efficient" in its energy use. (For a full transcript of the debate from the Las Vegas Sun, go here.)

In North Carolina, the N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network has started running its own newspaper ads and staging protests against Duke Energy and its coal-fired plants, reports John Murawski of The News Observer in Raleigh. (Read more)

Judy Pasternak of the Times has a story today on how the debate over coal has forced companies to cancel or delay construction of new plants. "America's headlong rush to tap its enormous coal reserves for electricity has slowed abruptly, with more than 50 proposed coal-fired power plants in 20 states canceled or delayed in 2007," she writes. Pasternak has another article on the "politics of coal," tracing the debate over carbon-dioxide emissions. (Times graphic, based on data from the Union of Concerned Scientists)