Am Electric Power AEP

=screwing customers, bailout subsidies , hurt poor ppl= <div><div>no lnx</div><div>
</div><div>Trump was elected on promises to boost the coal industry and halt the transition to electric cars. It’s not working</div><div>
</div><div>Written by Carl Pope / Salon August 15, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>For two years the cabal of fossil fools surrounding Donald Trump have  leveraged an impulsive president’s loathing of his predecessor, tapped their reactionary right-wing networks, mobilized coal and oil lobbies and political donations, and thrown themselves vigorously into two missions:</div><div>
</div><div> Bring back the coal industry and stop the “Stalinist” threat of wind and solar power.</div><div>
</div><div>Freeze the transition from oil-powered cars and trucks to electricity by reversing Obama-era plans to encourage cleaner, more efficient vehicle fleets.</div><div>In the last several weeks, the futility of both these efforts to strangle the future have become clear.</div><div> </div><div>The latest blow to the Trump clean energy rollback was an announcement by California and four major automakers — including Volkswagen, the world’s largest — that even if the president can persuade the courts to allow him to roll back the Obama administration’s improved regulations on pollution and efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, these companies would guarantee that their U.S. fleets meet a set of slightly modified standards devised by California for the model years 2022-25.</div><div>
</div><div>While Ford was the only U.S. automaker to sign, it’s still a huge step. (And Ford is hardly a bit player.) General Motors appears to be seeking more credit for its significant investment in electrification, and Fiat Chrysler, having turned itself into a niche brand that proudly produced the world’s best 20th-century cars — Jeep SUVs and Ram Trucks — simply whined. (Chrysler still doesn’t know how it will comply with the much laxer 2020-21 rules.) Toyota may be watching to see what GM does.</div><div>
</div><div>The agreement made clear that the Trump administration’s refusal to negotiate with California was rooted in its own stubbornness, not California’s unwillingness to make a reasonable offer. It further made clear that the auto industry feels deeply threatened both by the prospect of a US auto market split into two segments — one following strong California innovation rules, the other locked into yesterday’s auto technology. It also highlighted the degree to which clear mandates in other markets — particularly Europe and China — are maintaining the pace of progress toward clean, electric vehicles, and a recognition that U.S. automakers must keep up regardless of whether federal standards require that.</div><div>
</div><div>As Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., often seen as the D.C. voice of the American auto industry, pointed out, “This industry is more fragile than many realize. If the United States is to be competitive, we have to stay at the forefront of innovation and technology, which will help us transition to the next generation of more fuel-efficient vehicles.”</div><div>
</div><div>And what of the other flank of the Trump assault on climate progress: His promise to bring back “beautiful” coal? The last month has seen a slew of announcements making utterly clear that the coal industry is on the way out as a source of electric energy. The Energy Department has conceded that coal’s share of U.S. electricity generation will continue to plummet – from more than 50% a few years ago, to 30% in 2017 and a forecast of only 24% this year. The largest coal power plant to fall thus far —  American Electric Power’s behemoth Rockport, Indiana, facility — has announced it will shut down. An all-Republican body of utility regulators in Georgia required Georgia Power not only to shut down much of its coal facilities, but also to embrace renewables, rather than natural gas, as the replacement. One analyst called this “the worst month for coal power in decades.”</div><div>
</div><div>Coal’s bleak future didn’t just hit utility operators. Yet another set of coal mining operators headed for bankruptcy courts, with Blackhawk Mining unable to sustain its Appalachian operations. This followed four other bankruptcies in the previous four months: Blackjewel on July 1, Cambrian Holding on June 16, Cloud Peak Energy on May 10 and Trinity Coal on March 4.</div><div>
</div><div>Many of the bankruptcies came because mining companies wanted to shed their commitments to provide pensions and health care for retirees, as well as to clean up the environmental disaster left behind by many of their operations. And since Republicans in Congress had allowed the tax that provides funding for health care for coal miners suffering from black lung disease to expire, just as poorly regulated working conditions have triggered a major black lung epidemic, miners were forced to mobilize to try to make their alleged pal in the Oval Office, not to mention Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, make good on at least some of their boasts about making life wonderful for coal again. When the miners arrived in Washington, McConnell gave them the brush-off in a perfunctory meeting after which they said he had treated them rudely.</div><div>
</div><div>None of this has stopped the coal industry’s barons from cozying up to Trump. Bob Murray, for whom a pledged bail-out was one of Trump’s undelivered promises, still came through with a major campaign fundraiser in Wheeling, West Virginia. But as the 2020 election season heats up, it appears that while coal mine owners might still  love the president, his efforts to rescue coal-fired power and oil-fired transportation from history’s verdict had collapsed — making clear once again that it’s time to move beyond carbon.</div></div><div></div><div>=</div><div>
</div><div><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28092018/aep-solar-energy-appalachia-ohio-coal-just-transition-utility-regulatory-battle">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28092018/aep-solar-energy-appalachia-ohio-coal-just-transition-utility-regulatory-battle</a></div><div>
</div><div>Appalachian Ohio, a region hurt by the decline of coal, may become home to one of the largest solar projects east of the Rockies.</div><div class="content" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded" style="box-sizing: inherit;">American Electric Power submitted a plan Thursday evening to work with two developers to build 400 megawatts of solar in Highland County, Ohio. It would more than triple the state's <a href="https://www.seia.org/state-solar-policy/ohio-solar" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">current solar capacity</a> and be a big step forward for solar energy in a part of the country where renewable energy has been slow to develop.AEP says <a href="http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/CaseRecord.aspx?CaseNo=18-1392&x=0&y=0" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">the plan</a> would save consumers $218 million over 20 years because solar power from the project would be less expensive than conventional energy sources. "This is something that Appalachia needs," said Dan Sawmiller, Ohio energy policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "The jobs of this renewable energy economy are going to go somewhere and I think it's important that they go where they're needed."But the project's structure would break the established regulatory mold in Ohio, a state where utilities don't own power plants and generators compete with each other to supply the cheapest power to the grid. The savings and the jobs promised are a turnaround from the <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/29102017/renewable-energy-ohio-rps-law-fossil-fuel-political-donations-coal" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">arguments state officials</a> listened to when they rejected clean energy proposals in recent years. If the new plan is approved by Ohio regulators, it could serve as a template for other new projects in Ohio and in other states. <h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.333;">'Just Transition' in Appalachia</h3>The decision to put the project in Appalachian Ohio, which covers the southern and eastern parts of the state, is part of an attempt to bring economic development to an economically depressed region."It's a really hopeful move," said John Quigley, director of the Center for Environment, Energy and Economy at Harrisburg University, who has written about so-called "just transition" for poor communities affected by the shift from fossil fuels to the new green economy."It's an eye-opener for policymakers that there's a huge economic development opportunity for solar, especially in communities negatively affected by the energy transition," he said.Another recent example is Xcel Energy's plan to <a href="https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/xcel-retire-coal-renewable-energy-storage" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">close its coal-fired power plant in Pueblo, Colorado</a>, and build renewable energy projects there.Highland County, Ohio, where AEP and its solar developers chose to build, has an <a href="http://ohiolmi.com/laus/ColorRateMap.pdf" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">unemployment rate higher than the state average</a>, and nearby counties have some of the highest unemployment rates in the state. AEP says its plan would bring 3,900 new jobs, most of them in construction, plus 113 full-time jobs in solar manufacturing. Details on the manufacturing jobs were not immediately disclosed.The plan is part of a boom in solar development that is happening across the country. Some other big solar projects have also been announced in the region but not yet built, including a <a href="https://www.opsb.ohio.gov/media-room/media-releases/opsb-approves-construction-of-two-utility-scale-solar-farms/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">150 megawatt solar farm</a> being developed by Invenergy in Hardin County, Ohio. The AEP project would go into service in 2021 if approved.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.333;">Challenging Ohio's Regulatory System</h3>This project is unusual for Ohio because a utility, AEP Ohio, would benefit financially from an electricity generation project. That would be normal in much of the country, but Ohio has a separation between utility companies and the owners of power plants.AEP's proposal is seeking to make an exception to this rule by having solar developers operate the solar farms on behalf of AEP Ohio. The costs would be passed on to the utility's consumers, which AEP says is justified because of benefits to the environment and the local economy.Opponents likely will argue that this violates Ohio's open market for electricity generation. In the market, owners of power plants compete to offer the lowest prices and utility companies do not own power plants. More than a dozen states similarly have open markets for electricity generation, including much of New England and the Great Lakes region, and Texas, among others.Ned Hill, an economist at Ohio State University, says that having a utility pay for certain power plants could stifle investment in competing projects—including other renewable energy projects. He has opposed previous proposals by energy companies and utilities to subsidize coal and nuclear plants, and says this plan is bad for some of the same reasons.The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio will decide whether to approve the plan in a process that will unfold over the next few months and that likely will focus on the types of questions Hill is raising.Sawmiller, from NRDC, said he can understand why there are concerns about what this project means for the competitive market, but he thinks the market is structured in a way that has held back renewable energy development."If you rely exclusively on the market you lose some of the innovative economic development that's laid out in this filing," he said.</div></div></div></div><div class="tagged-with" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-transform: uppercase; margin-bottom: 1em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><label style="box-sizing: inherit; display: block; line-height: 1.2;">PUBLISHED UNDER:</label><div class="field field-name-field-topics field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-item even" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: inline-block; padding-right: 0.5em;"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/topics/clean-energy" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">CLEAN ENERGY</a></div> <div class="field-item odd" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: inline-block; padding-right: 0.5em;"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/topics/coal" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">COAL</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-item even" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: inline-block; padding-right: 0.5em;"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/tags/national-environment-reporting-network-midwest" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none;">NERN - MIDWEST</a></div></div><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;">
</div></div></div><div>=</div><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/14082018/coal-energy-prices-appalachia-mining-electric-bill-kentucky-economy-aep-rates">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/14082018/coal-energy-prices-appalachia-mining-electric-bill-kentucky-economy-aep-rates</a>WHITESBURG, Kentucky — Buddy Sexton opened a community meeting about the financial troubles of local volunteer fire departments with his head bowed: "Let people understand what a need we have in this county, in the mighty name of Jesus, we pray."<div class="content" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded" style="box-sizing: inherit;">Sexton then delivered some grim news to the gathering of about two dozen eastern Kentucky residents sitting in folding chairs set up in the engine bays of the Mayking Fire Department.Just like the townspeople, his tiny department is facing crushing electric bills. They have gone up by several hundred dollars a month during the winter. That's a lot in a local budget that is already strained as revenues from taxes on mining go steadily down."I've got financial reports here that I am afraid to look at anymore," said Sexton, the department's treasurer. "We're in danger of shutting down."  As coal mining has collapsed across Appalachia, residents in eastern Kentucky and West Virginia have been socked with a double whammy—crippling electric bills to go along with a declining economy.The pain in a region once known for cheap power has been felt in homes, businesses, schools and even at volunteer fire departments.The problem of rising power bills has many causes.<ul style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em 3em; padding: 0px; list-style-position: initial; list-style-image: initial;"><li style="box-sizing: inherit;">Mines and other businesses have shut down and people have moved away—mining jobs are off 70 percent since 2010—so utilities are selling less power and spreading their fixed costs across fewer customers.  </li><li style="box-sizing: inherit;">Electricity customers are shouldering the costs of shuttering old coal-burning power plants and cleaning up the toxic messes they leave behind.  </li><li style="box-sizing: inherit;">And experts say it hasn't helped that utilities in eastern Kentucky and West Virginia have continued to invest in burning coal.</li></ul>"They're doubling down on coal at a time when coal is not competitive," said <a href="https://www.law.wvu.edu/faculty-staff/full-time-faculty/james-van-nostrand" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">James M. Van Nostrand</a>, a professor at the West Virginia University College of Law with decades of experience in the energy field. "It's really tragic."<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.333;">AEP's Rising Rates and Surcharges</h3>The common denominator is American Electric Power, one of the nation's largest utilities. It owns Kentucky Power, along with two subsidiaries in neighboring West Virginia, Wheeling Power and Appalachian Power.In May, Wheeling Power and Appalachian Power <a href="https://www.appalachianpower.com/info/news/viewRelease.aspx?releaseID=2599" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">requested</a> permission from the Public Service Commission of West Virginia to boost their monthly residential bill 11 percent because of declining sales. That was on top of a <a href="http://www.cad.state.wv.us/2018_Annual_Report.pdf" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">29 percent</a> increase between 2014 and 2018.Customers in both states are furious that the regulators are going along."Our jobs available in this state are not a living wage, and many are working two, three jobs just to make it," wrote Elizabeth Bland of Beckley, West Virginia, in her protest letter to the commission. "Please turn down this request from Appalachian Power for the sake of all West Virginians."Rising rates are just part of the problem.Kentucky Power's monthly bill also includes surcharges, and a line for each customer's share of the utility's fixed costs. These add up in precious dollars.<div class="media media-element-container media-image_centered_medium" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 648px; margin: 0.25em auto;"><figure id="file-271136" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-png" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/colorbox_full/public/KentuckyPowerRatesChart529px.png?itok=QgWayNuh" class="colorbox init-colorbox-processed cboxElement" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;"><img alt="Chart: Electricity Costs (Rates and Fees) Skyrocket in Eastern Kentucky" title="Chart: Electricity Costs (Rates and Fees) Skyrocket in Eastern Kentucky" height="550" width="529" class="media-element file-image-centered-medium" typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/icn_centered_medium/public/KentuckyPowerRatesChart529px.png?itok=SRFW3C6C" style="box-sizing: inherit; border: 0px; height: auto; max-width: 100%; display: block; float: none; margin: 0px auto;" /></a></figure></div><div class="media media-element-container media-image_centered_medium" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 648px; margin: 0.25em auto;"><figure id="file-271137" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-png" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;">
</figure></div>Kentucky Power's customers received a bit of a break in January after vigorous protests. State regulators rejected most of the utility's proposed rate increases and they reduced some surcharges. That will save an average residential customer about $7 a month. Even so, that bill has nearly doubled in the past decade and is now about $151 plus local government fees and taxes, state regulators said.The average bill per customer at Kentucky Power has been among the highest in the nation for an investor-owned utility, according to 2016 numbers from the U.S. Energy Information Agency, the most recent comparisons available."We're hit hard," Alice Craft, a Whitesburg-area resident, told InsideClimate News. "The power companies, they are just greedy, greedy, greedy."Surcharges that pay for retiring a coal plant are especially irritating, said state <a href="http://www.lrc.ky.gov/legislator/h094.htm" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Rep. Angie Hatton,</a> a lawyer and Democrat from Whitesburg."They are charging us for shutting down our coal-fired plants that were keeping us all employed," she said.Hatton, who is the daughter of one coal miner and wife of another, also sees the value of solar power as an option for businesses and residents with high power bills. She helped defeat legislation in Kentucky his spring that would have devalued rooftop solar power. Utilities backed it, but it was rejected by lawmakers driven by constituents' rage about power bills.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.333;">With Poverty High, Something Has to Give</h3>Allison Barker, a spokeswoman for Kentucky Power, blamed last winter's unusually cold weather for part of the high electric bills and suggested customers could turn their thermostats down."Keeping the thermostat the same during extreme weather can significantly increase usage and bills," she said.But the underlying problem, she acknowledged, was the loss of hundreds of industrial and commercial customers and thousands of residential customers since 2014. During that time, she said, energy use has dropped 15 percent, and the company has faced new costs to comply with environmental protections.AEP's West Virginia utility, Appalachian Power, said in May that its electricity demand had dropped 14 percent since 2013 and it had lost 11,000 customers.Poverty also comes into play.<div class="media media-element-container media-image_centered_medium" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 648px; margin: 0.25em auto;"><figure id="file-271142" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-png" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;">[comments]</figure></div>Kentucky Power's service area includes 10 of the 100 poorest counties in the United States, with poverty rates as high as three times the national average. The region has a lot of substandard housing with poor insulation, adding to the expense of electric heat.Something has to give when people on small, fixed incomes are hit with higher power bills, said Roger McCann, executive director of Community Action Kentucky, an umbrella group for poverty-fighting agencies with services including home-energy assistance."Seniors will cut their medicine in half, or they will go without food," he said. "If you don't pay the bill, the lights go out."McCann said he knew of one woman in a mobile home who had a $600 monthly electric bill while living on a Social Security benefit of just $660 a month."Some mobile homes are not insulated and the heat just goes through them," he said.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.333;">Shifting Coal Costs to Consumers</h3>Kentucky State Rep. Rocky Adkins, the Democratic minority floor leader and a <a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/opinion/columnists/cross/2018/08/10/al-cross-rocky-adkins-potential-kentucky-governor-contender/958267002/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">potential candidate</a> for governor, says high bills and the region's economic woes both stem from a 2012 decision by Kentucky Power as Adkins and others were trying to salvage the utility industry.Together, AEP and the Kentucky Public Service Commission reached a decision to pull the plug on nearly $1 billion in environmental upgrades at the utility's Big Sandy power plant. It stopped burning coal three years later. One unit was converted to natural gas.Meanwhile the Kentucky regulators steered the company to invest more than $500 million in the nearby coal-fired Mitchell plant, which had already been upgraded. That solution, the commission argued, would save customers money. At the time, Adkins railed that this was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/business/energy-environment/even-in-kentucky-coal-industry-is-under-siege.html" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">waving the "white flag"</a> of surrender to natural gas, environmentalists and regulators.But the rout was already under way.In the years that followed, the Mitchell plant's coal boilers have been undercut on the regional grid by cheaper natural gas. Kentucky Power found itself with an unneeded mountain of 400,000 tons of coal there. In June, Kentucky regulators gave the utility <a href="https://www.kentucky.com/news/state/article215994320.html" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">permission</a> to sell the surplus, raising $17.6 million."We lost the power plant and the rates have gone through the roof," Adkins told ICN. "It has happened in a region of Kentucky that is more challenged than any other region of the country because of the downturn in the coal economy."But there's another way of looking at the outcome, said <a href="http://ieefa.org/author/cathy/" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Cathy Kunkel</a>, a West Virginia-based analyst for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.She explained how the maneuver supported coal-fired power while shifting its costs from shareholders to consumers.There are two main business models for selling electricity. In deregulated wholesale markets, merchant vendors compete to sell power to the grid, and high-cost generators lose out. In regulated markets, the rates are set by the state and utilities are guaranteed a profit.Before 2012, the Mitchell plant had been owned by a deregulated AEP company which sold its power in the open marketplace. The 2012 deal put half of Mitchell under a regulated AEP subsidiary, and that gave it economic protection, at least for a time. Two years later, West Virginia regulators allowed Wheeling Power, also regulated, to buy the other half.Acting together, Kunkel said, AEP and its regulators had shielded the struggling coal fired plant from the pressures of the marketplace and shifted the costs onto customers. "The problem when the plant is uncompetitive is that it ends up not running very much, and not producing much revenue for customers, who end up losing out because they're still stuck paying for all of the fixed costs and operating costs of the plant," she said.It's a method the company has used elsewhere."Those plants are not competitive in the wholesale market," said Van Nostrand, the law professor. "We are buying them and sticking them on the backs of the ratepayers," he said.A spokesman for the Kentucky regulatory agency defended its 2012 actions, saying that exhaustive analysis showed that it diversified AEP's fuel mix and avoided an even more costly debacle at the Big Sandy plant.A spokesman for West Virginia's regulators provided ICN a recent staff report to lawmakers. The state's electric prices are still competitive compared to elsewhere, it asserted, but they are rising, "because of our nearly 100 percent reliance on coal."<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.333;">'These People Have Been Sold a Bill of Goods'</h3><div>...</div></div></div></div></div>EP Cancels Nation's Largest Wind Farm: 3 Challenges Wind Catcher FacedWind Catcher, a 2,000 megawatt farm planned in Oklahoma, needed clearance from four states. Oil and gas industry-connected groups were campaigning against it.BY DAN GEARINO, INSIDECLIMATE NEWSJUL 30, 2018Wind Catcher was designed to be a 2,000 megawatt wind farm in the Oklahoma Panhandle. With AEP pulling out it, its future is now unclear. Credit: Invenergy image of another of the company's wind farms.Wind Catcher was designed to be a 2,000 megawatt wind farm in the Oklahoma Panhandle. With AEP pulling out it, its future is now unclear. Credit: Invenergy image of one of the company's wind farms.
American Electric Power last week abandoned its plan to build the largest wind farm in the United States, a victim of a complex mix of political, regulatory and market challenges.
The giant utility company gave up after the Texas Public Utility Commission rejected the 2,000 megawatt, $4.5 billion project known as Wind Catcher.
The project faced stiff opposition from interest groups whose formidable regional influence is bolstered with fossil fuel money. And it faced a shifting financial landscape, with cheap natural gas and shifting tax policies casting doubts on its economic merits. It also needed 350 miles of controversial new transmission lines, often a daunting obstacle to large-scale grid modernization.
Its demise, while a big deal in the world of wind energy, probably doesn't signal trouble ahead for the wind industry at large, which is thriving, analysts said.
Sign up for CLEAN ECONOMY WEEKLYInside the future of energy.

EMAILI agree to InsideClimate News' Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
"Just in general, it's very difficult to get multiple regulatory jurisdictions to come to a conclusion and continue to have the economics make sense," said Andrew Bischof, an analyst who covers utilities for Morningstar. Wind Catcher needed regulatory approval required from Texas and three other states: Arkansas and Louisiana, which gave it the green light, and Oklahoma, which had not yet decided.
Texas Gets Cold FeetTexas is the country's wind energy leader, but it seems to be increasingly skeptical of renewable energy, said David Spence, a professor of law, politics and regulation at the University of Texas at Austin.
"Up until recently, the general zeitgeist here has been we've been really proud that we're a big hub for wind," he said. "That's how (former Gov.) Rick Perry was until he got involved in national GOP politics."
Most of the state is on its own grid and has deregulated its electricity market, meaning regulators would not have a say in this type of decision. However, the AEP project serves two small parts of Texas that are in the much larger Southwest Power Pool grid, which runs from the South up through parts of the Midwest, and those parts of the state have traditional utility regulation, giving officials the power to accept or reject the plan.
Before voting it down, Texas commission members devoted much of their debate on questions about whether Wind Catcher would deliver the promised cost savings to consumers.
Much of this argument came down to a review of recent forecasts that low natural gas prices are here to stay. Wind Catcher's opponents seized on this, and regulators seemed to agree.
Spence questions this reasoning, saying that gas prices are volatile and wind prices are competitive. He cites a report from Lazard, an investment bank, showing that the levelized cost of wind energy, a key measure of its competitiveness, is continuing to go down, dropping 6 percent last year.
How Energy Costs Compare: Levelized Cost of ElectricityFossil Fuel OppositionEven if Texas had supported the plan, AEP still needed approval in Oklahoma, where a decision was still pending. And there was strong pushback there, including from the state's attorney general and fossil-fuel-connected groups.
Wind Catcher faced opposition from Americans for Prosperity, which was founded by the Koch Brothers, and the Windfall Coalition, whose co-founders include energy executive Harold Hamm. They were making their cases in states where the oil and gas industry has substantial influence.
"In its current form, the Wind Catcher Energy Connection Project is a risky scheme that is simply not a good deal for Oklahomans," John Tidwell, Americans for Prosperity's Oklahoma director, said in a statement earlier this month.
Some of the opposition in Oklahoma was also from people who live near the proposed transmission line. This underscores a familiar point: Transmission lines almost always run into local objections, but they're needed to get electricity from wind-rich areas to population centers.
Tax and Regulatory UncertaintyA shifting landscape for federal taxes and regulations also undermined the project.
Despite the long odds, AEP initially projected that there would be a carbon tax affecting fossil fuels at some point in the wind farm's life, which would make the project more cost effective compared to natural gas.
The company changed this assumption under scrutiny from other parties, so the cost analysis now assumes that there will be no carbon tax for decades.
The Trump administration's corporate tax cut also reduced the project's federal tax rate in a way that diminishes the effects of the production tax credit for tax-equity investors in big wind projects. The tax credit, meanwhile, is set to be phased out. This reduces the projected tax savings the project, making its electricity more expensive, which further hurt AEP's case.
Adding to the uncertainty is the Trump administration's challenges to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, which would have driven up demand for alternative energy sources to replace coal power plants.
What's Next?Wind Catcher's challenges were specific enough to its circumstances that the failure is not likely to affect how developers approach other projects, said Jay Orfield, senior energy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
He noted that the industry's capacity has been growing year to year and that there are other projects in various stages of development that would be nearly as large or larger.
In the first fast half of this year, $17.5 billion was invested in wind energy projects, up 121 percent from the same period last year, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Some of the increase is because companies are rushing to begin projects in time to take advantage of the federal production tax credit, which will phase out by 2020.
AEP was developing Wind Catcher with Invenergy, a Chicago-based company. There is still a chance that Invenergy could come back with a new version of the project, or have several smaller projects, with or without AEP. Invenergy did not respond to a request for comment.
Local leaders in the Oklahoma Panhandle are pinning their lingering hopes on the idea that some version can be salvaged. The mostly rural region has struggled to attract employers, and this would have been by far the largest investment in its history, with a projected 4,000 construction jobs and a dramatic increase in tax revenue for local governments.
Its demise is still sinking in for Michael Shannon, director of the region's economic development office. "I'm stunned," he said, adding, "There has to be a Plan B."
PUBLISHED UNDER:no lnxCLEAN ENERGYWIND ENERGY<a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30072018/aep-cancels-wind-catcher-largest-wind-farm-oklahoma-oil-gas-opposition-clean-power-plan">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30072018/aep-cancels-wind-catcher-largest-wind-farm-oklahoma-oil-gas-opposition-clean-power-plan</a>A==

gang of 8: American Electric Power (AEP), based in Columbus, Ohio, spent $22 million on lobbying. In the first quarter of this year, it reported hiring five other firms to help it with its lobbying efforts. Its political action committee so far this election cycle has distributed more than $924,000 to candidates, including Inhofe, House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland; Republicans Ed Whitfield of Kentucky, Jo Barton of Texas, and Fred Upton of Michigan, all members of the Energy and Commerce Committee. It also has donated to several other PACs, including the Nuclear Energy Institute Federal PAC and the Powerpac of the Edison Electric Institute.

===

Even while dodging most of their state and federal taxes between 2008 and 2010, Verizon (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=VZ">VZ</a>) laid off more than 21,000 U.S. employees, while Boeing, Wells Fargo, General Electric, American Electric Power, and FedEx also let go of thousands of workers. big lobbyist?

<a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/264481/20111209/30-major-u-s-corporations-paid-lobby.htm">http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/264481/20111209/30-major-u-s-corporations-paid-lobby.htm</a>

--

<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power">http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power</a>

American Electric Power (AEP) is a major investor-owner electric utility operating in various parts of the United States. It is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. It serves parts of 11 states, and is currently the largest electricity generating utility in the United States.

<h2>Contents</h2>

[<a href="javascript:toggleToc()" class="internal" id="togglelink">hide</a>]</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Ties_to_the_American_Legislative_Exchange_Council">1 Ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Overview">2 Overview</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Negative_tax_rate">3 Negative tax rate</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#CEO_compensation">4 CEO compensation</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Workforce_cuts">5 Workforce cuts</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#AEP_Cuts_10_Plants_to_Part-time">6 AEP Cuts 10 Plants to Part-time</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#EPA_releases_list_of_44_.22high_hazard.22_coal_ash_dumps">7 EPA releases list of 44 "high hazard" coal ash dumps</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Issues_at_AEP_surface_impoundments_in_West_Virginia">7.1 Issues at AEP surface impoundments in West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Flint_Creek_ranked_96th_on_list_of_most_polluting_power_plants_in_terms_of_coal_waste">7.2 Flint Creek ranked 96th on list of most polluting power plants in terms of coal waste</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Coal_Ash_Waste_and_Water_Contamination">7.3 Coal Ash Waste and Water Contamination</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Study_finds_dangerous_level_of_hexavalent_chromium_at_Flint_Creek_and_Conesville_waste_sites">7.4 Study finds dangerous level of hexavalent chromium at Flint Creek and Conesville waste sites</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Death_and_disease_attributable_to_fine_particle_pollution_from_AEP_coal_plants">8 Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from AEP coal plants</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Table_1:_Death_and_disease_attributable_to_fine_particle_pollution_from_American_Electric_Power_coal_plants">8.1 Table 1: Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from American Electric Power coal plants</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#AEP_raises_rates_in_Ohio">9 AEP raises rates in Ohio</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Ohio_Supreme_Court_rules_rate_hikes_unlawful">9.1 Ohio Supreme Court rules rate hikes unlawful</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Power_portfolio">10 Power portfolio</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Congressional_campaign_contributions">11 Congressional campaign contributions</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Coal_lobbying">12 Coal lobbying</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Environmental_record">13 Environmental record</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Citizen_action_and_protest">14 Citizen action and protest</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#July_10.2C_2006:_Earth_First.21.2FRising_Tide_blockade_of_Clinch_River_Power_Plant">14.1 July 10, 2006: Earth First!/Rising Tide blockade of Clinch River Power Plant</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Pike_County_residents_sue_AEP_for_illegal_mining_that_aggravated_flooding">14.2 Pike County residents sue AEP for illegal mining that aggravated flooding</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Justice_Department_lawsuit">15 Justice Department lawsuit</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Public_nuisance_lawsuit:Connecticut_v.AEP_et_al.">16 Public nuisance lawsuit: Connecticut v. AEP et al.</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Proposed_coal_plants">17 Proposed coal plants</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Active">17.1 Active</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Cancelled">17.2 Cancelled</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Existing_coal-fired_power_plants">18 Existing coal-fired power plants</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#May_2010:_AEP_to_run_10_coal_units_part-time">18.1 May 2010: AEP to run 10 coal units part-time</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Mountaineer_carbon_capture_and_storage_project_cancelled">18.2 Mountaineer carbon capture and storage project cancelled</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#American_Electric_Power_Service_Corporation_Settlement">18.3 American Electric Power Service Corporation Settlement</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Proposed_coal_plant_closures">19 Proposed coal plant closures</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Ohio_Power_seeks_2010_retirement_of_Sporn_Unit_5">19.1 Ohio Power seeks 2010 retirement of Sporn Unit 5</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#June_2011:_AEP_to_retire_nearly_60.2C000_MW">19.2 June 2011: AEP to retire nearly 60,000 MW</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Controversy_over_cause_of_plant_shutdowns">19.2.1 Controversy over cause of plant shutdowns</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Financing">20 Financing</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Articles_and_resources">21 Articles and resources</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#Related_SourceWatch_articles">21.1 Related SourceWatch articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#References">21.2 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#External_resources">21.3 External resources</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#External_articles">21.4 External articles</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council</h2>

American Electric Power was a "Chairman" level sponsor of 2011 <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Legislative_Exchange_Council" title="American Legislative Exchange Council">American Legislative Exchange Council</a> Annual Conference, which in 2010, equated to $50,000.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-1" title="">[2]</a> AEP President, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nicholas_K.Akins" title="Nicholas K. Akins">Nicholas K. Akins</a>, spoke on "A Smarter Approach to Improving our Environment: Addressing the Costs of Proposed EPA Regulations on Energy Affordability," sponsored by the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy,Environment_and_Agriculture_Task_Force" title="Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force">Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force</a>, at the 2011 ALEC Annual Meeting.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-EEAMeetingMaterials-2" title="">[3]</a>

<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ALEC" title="ALEC" class="mw-redirect">ALEC</a> is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, behind closed doors, corporations hand state legislators the changes to the law they desire that directly benefit their bottom line. Along with legislators, corporations have membership in ALEC. Corporations sit on all nine ALEC task forces and vote with legislators to approve “model” bills. They have their own corporate governing board which meets jointly with the legislative board. (ALEC says that corporations do not vote on the board.) They fund almost all of ALEC's operations. Participating legislators, overwhelmingly conservative Republicans, then bring those proposals home and introduce them in statehouses across the land as their own brilliant ideas and important public policy innovations—without disclosing that corporations crafted and voted on the bills. ALEC boasts that it has over 1,000 of these bills introduced by legislative members every year, with one in every five of them enacted into law. ALEC describes itself as a “unique,” “unparalleled” and “unmatched” organization. It might be right. It is as if a state legislature had been reconstituted, yet corporations had pushed the people out the door. Learn more at <a href="http://alecexposed.org/" class="external text" title="http://alecexposed.org/" rel="nofollow">ALECexposed.org</a>.

<h2>Overview</h2>

The company is divided into seven major geographic local operating companies:<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American-3" title="">[4]</a>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=AEP_Ohio" title="AEP Ohio">AEP Ohio</a>, made up of the former Ohio Power and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Columbus_Southern_Power_Company" title="Columbus Southern Power Company" class="mw-redirect">Columbus Southern Power Company</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachian_Power_Company" title="Appalachian Power Company">Appalachian Power Company</a>, serving West Virginia and Virginia</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Indiana_Michigan_Power" title="Indiana Michigan Power">Indiana Michigan Power</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kentucky_Power" title="Kentucky Power">Kentucky Power</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Public_Service_Company_of_Oklahoma" title="Public Service Company of Oklahoma">Public Service Company of Oklahoma</a> (PSO), and</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Southwestern_Electric_Power" title="Southwestern Electric Power">Southwestern Electric Power</a> Company, often called SWEPCO, serving Arkansas, Louisiana, and eastern Texas</li>

<li>AEP Texas Central Company (TCC), formerly Central Power and Light Company, and AEP Texas North Company (TNC), formerly West Texas Utilities Company</li>

</ul>

In addition, two smaller divisions, Wheeling Power Company (serving Wheeling, West Virginia) and Kingsport Electric Power (serving Kingsport, Tennessee), are operated as de facto parts of AEP Ohio and Appalachian Power, respectively.

AEP owns and operates the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Donald_C._Cook_Nuclear_Generating_Station&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Donald C. Cook Nuclear Generating Station (page does not exist)">Donald C. Cook</a> nuclear power plant.

AEP also bought much of the town of Cheshire, Ohio, after it had become contaminated.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-4" title="">[5]</a>

The company also operates its own inland barge line, AEP River Operations (fomerly MEMCO Barge Line), and owns major tracts of land throughout its service areas.

<h2>Negative tax rate</h2>

A 2011 analysis by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, <a href="http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers: 2008-10"</a> found dozens of companies, including fossil fuels, used tax breaks and various tax dodging methods to have a negative tax balance between 2008 and 2010, while making billions in profits. The study found 32 companies in the fossil-fuel industry -- such as <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peabody_Energy" title="Peabody Energy">Peabody Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ConEd&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="ConEd (page does not exist)">ConEd</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PG%26E" title="PG&E">PG&E</a> -- transformed a tax responsibility of $17.3 billion on $49.4 billion in pretax profits into a tax benefit of $6.5 billion, for a net gain of $24 billion.

The companies that paid no tax for at least one year between 2008 and 2010 are the utilities <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ameren" title="Ameren">Ameren</a>, American Electric Power, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CenterPoint_Energy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="CenterPoint Energy (page does not exist)">CenterPoint Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=CMS_Energy" title="CMS Energy">CMS Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Consolidated_Edison&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Consolidated Edison (page does not exist)">Consolidated Edison</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=DTE_Energy" title="DTE Energy">DTE Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Duke_Energy" title="Duke Energy">Duke Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Entergy" title="Entergy">Entergy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FirstEnergy" title="FirstEnergy">FirstEnergy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Integrys" title="Integrys">Integrys</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=NextEra_Energy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="NextEra Energy (page does not exist)">NextEra Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=NiSource" title="NiSource">NiSource</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pepco" title="Pepco" class="mw-redirect">Pepco</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PG%26E" title="PG&E">PG&E</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=PPL" title="PPL">PPL</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Progress_Energy" title="Progress Energy">Progress Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sempra_Energy" title="Sempra Energy">Sempra Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wisconsin_Energy" title="Wisconsin Energy">Wisconsin Energy</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Xcel_Energy" title="Xcel Energy">Xcel Energy</a>.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-5" title="">[6]</a>

Between 2008 and 2010, American Electric Power received a tax rebate of $545 million and made $5.899 billion in US profits, meaning it paid a tax rate of -9%. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-Public_Campaign_Report-6" title="">[7]</a>

<h2>CEO compensation</h2>

In May 2007, Forbes listed AEP CEO <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_G._Morris" title="Michael G. Morris">Michael G. Morris</a> as receiving $13.05 million in total compensation for the latest fiscal year, with a three-year total compensation of $22.03 million. He ranked 3rd on the list of CEOs in the Utilities industry, and 137th among all CEOs in the United States.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-7" title="">[8]</a>

Executive compensation jumped 30% between 2008 and 2010, from "$18,259,623 to $23,721,031. During the same period, American Electric Power has laid of 2,600 workers.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-Public_Campaign_Report-6" title="">[7]</a>

<h2>Workforce cuts</h2>

On April 14, 2010, AEP sent letters to all of the company's employees offering to buyout between 1,000 and 2,000 workers.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-gooap-8" title="">[9]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-dgear-9" title="">[10]</a> The cuts would reduce the company's workforce, which now stands near 22,000 in eleven states, by up to 10 percent.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-gooap-8" title="">[9]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-dgear-9" title="">[10]</a> Employees were given until the end of April to decide, with jobs terminating by the end of May.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-gooap-8" title="">[9]</a> The buyout includes "a lump-sum payment of two-weeks of pay for each year of service, with a minimum of eight weeks' pay" and "up to 18 months of reduced-cost medical and dental coverage."<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-dgear-9" title="">[10]</a>

The company may turn to layoffs if too few workers accept the buyout.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-gooap-8" title="">[9]</a> The cuts follow a time of expansion for AEP; between 2005 and 2008, the company added about 2,300 new jobs.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-dgear-9" title="">[10]</a> Utility companies <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dominion" title="Dominion">Dominion Resources</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Duke_Energy" title="Duke Energy">Duke Energy</a> also announced cuts at the same time.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-dgear-9" title="">[10]</a>

<h2>AEP Cuts 10 Plants to Part-time</h2>

On May 27, 2010 AEP announced that they would move ten of their coal-fired operating units to part-time operating status due to a reduction in energy demand, as well as low natural gas prices. The plants primarily include older facilities based in Ohio, Virginia and West Virginia.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-10" title="">[11]</a>

<h2>EPA releases list of 44 "high hazard" coal ash dumps</h2>

In response to demands from environmentalists as well as Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California), chair of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, the EPA made public a list of 44 "high hazard potential" coal waste dumps. The rating applies to sites at which a dam failure would most likely cause loss of human life, but does not include an assessment of the likelihood of such an event. AEP owns 11 of the sites.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-11" title="">[12]</a>

The following table is derived from EPA's official list of Coal Combustion Residue (CCR) Surface Impoundments with High Hazard Potential Ratings.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-12" title="">[13]</a> To see the full list of sites, see <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_waste" title="Coal waste">Coal waste</a>.

<table class="wikitable"><tbody><tr><th width="200">Facility Name</th><th width="300">Unit Name</th><th width="200">Location</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Big_Sandy_Plant" title="Big Sandy Plant">Big Sandy Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash</th><th align="center">Louisa, KY</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cardinal_Plant" title="Cardinal Plant">Cardinal Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Reservoir 2</th><th align="center">Brilliant, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gavin_Plant" title="Gavin Plant" class="mw-redirect">Gavin Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Cheshire, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gavin_Plant" title="Gavin Plant" class="mw-redirect">Gavin Plant</a></th><th align="center">Bottom Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Cheshire, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amos_Plant" title="Amos Plant">Amos Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">St. Albans, WV</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mitchell_Plant" title="Mitchell Plant">Mitchell Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Moundsville, WV</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum River Plant</a></th><th align="center">Unit 5 Bottom Ash Pond (Lower Fly Ash Pond)</th><th align="center">Waterford, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum River Plant</a></th><th align="center">Upper Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Waterford, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum River Plant</a></th><th align="center">Middle Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Waterford, OH</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn Power Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">New Haven, WV</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tanners_Creek_Plant" title="Tanners Creek Plant">Tanners Creek Plant</a></th><th align="center">Fly Ash Pond</th><th align="center">Lawrenceburg, IN</th></tr></tbody></table>

<h3>Issues at AEP surface impoundments in West Virginia</h3>

An engineering report submitted to EPA in November 2009 recommended upgrading the rating of two surface impoundments at the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn Power Plant</a> in West Virginia from "poor" to "fair." Engineers from Dewberry, an EPA contractor, said the dams were likely to hold in the event of an earthquake, but that repairs and additional tests were still necessary. EPA said it would consider the recommendations, and AEP said it would conduct further tests at the site. In addition to these investigations, the Department of Environmental Protection also discovered two nearby coal ash dams that officials were not aware existed, and that did not meet state safety regulations.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-13" title="">[14]</a>

<h3>Flint Creek ranked 96th on list of most polluting power plants in terms of coal waste</h3>

In January 2009, Sue Sturgis of the Institute of Southern Studies compiled a list of the 100 most polluting coal plants in the United States in terms of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_waste" title="Coal waste">coal combustion waste</a> (CCW) stored in surface impoundments like the one involved in the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=TVA_Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_ash_spill" title="TVA Kingston Fossil Plant coal ash spill">TVA Kingston Fossil Plant coal ash spill</a>.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-iss-14" title="">[15]</a> The data came from the EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) for 2006, the most recent year available.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-15" title="">[16]</a>

Flint Creek Power Plant ranked number 96 on the list, with 221,456 pounds of coal combustion waste released to surface impoundments in 2006.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-iss-14" title="">[15]</a>

<h3>Coal Ash Waste and Water Contamination</h3>

In August 2010 a study released by the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Integrity_Project" title="Environmental Integrity Project">Environmental Integrity Project</a>, the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sierra_Club" title="Sierra Club">Sierra Club</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Earthjustice" title="Earthjustice">Earthjustice</a> reported that Arkansas, along with 34 states, had significant groundwater contamination from coal ash that is not currently regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The report, in an attempt to pressure the EPA to regulate coal ash, noted that most states do not monitor drinking water contamination levels near waste disposal sites.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-16" title="">[17]</a> The report mentioned Arkansas based <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Flint_Creek_Power_Plant" title="Flint Creek Power Plant">Flint Creek Power Plant</a> and the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Independence_Steam_Station" title="Independence Steam Station">Independence Steam Station</a> were two sites that have groundwater contamination due to coal ash waste.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-17" title="">[18]</a>

<h3>Study finds dangerous level of hexavalent chromium at Flint Creek and Conesville waste sites</h3>

A report released by EarthJustice and the Sierra Club in early February 2011 stated that there are many health threats associated with a toxic cancer-causing chemical found in <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_waste" title="Coal waste">coal waste</a> called <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hexavalent_chromium" title="Hexavalent chromium" class="mw-redirect">hexavalent chromium</a>. The report specifically cited 29 sites in 17 states where the contamination was found. The information was gathered from existing EPA data on coal ash and included locations in Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Massachusetts, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virgina and Wisconsin. AEP'sthe <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Flint_Creek_Power_Plant" title="Flint Creek Power Plant">Flint Creek Power Plant</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conesville_Power_Plant" title="Conesville Power Plant">Conesville Power Plant</a> were noted as having a high level of chromium at their coal waste landfills.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-blind_spot-18" title="">[19]</a>

According to the report, the Flint Creek coal ash site is a landfill. Hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) was reported at the site above 128 ppb (parts per billion) - 6,400 times the proposed California drinking water goals and 1.28 times the federal drinking water standard. AEP's <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conesville_Power_Plant" title="Conesville Power Plant">Conesville Power Plant</a> coal ash site is also a landfill. Hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) was reported at the site at 100 ppb (parts per billion) - 5,000 times the proposed California drinking water goals and above the federal drinking water standard.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-blind_spot-18" title="">[19]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-19" title="">[20]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-20" title="">[21]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-21" title="">[22]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-22" title="">[23]</a>

As a press release about the report read:

<dl>

<dd>

<dl>

<dd>Hexavalent chromium first made headlines after Erin Brockovich sued Pacific Gas & Electric because of poisoned drinking water from hexavalent chromium. Now new information indicates that the chemical has readily leaked from coal ash sites across the U.S. This is likely the tip of the iceberg because most coal ash dump sites are not adequately monitored.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-23" title="">[24]</a></dd>

</dl>

</dd>

</dl>

According to the report, the electric power industry is the leading source of chromium and chromium compounds released into the environment, representing 24 percent of releases by all industries in 2009.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-blind_spot-18" title="">[19]</a>

<h2>Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from AEP coal plants</h2>

In 2010, Abt Associates issued a study commissioned by the Clean Air Task Force, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization, quantifying the deaths and other health effects attributable to <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Particulates_and_coal" title="Particulates and coal">fine particle pollution</a> from coal-fired power plants.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-24" title="">[25]</a> Fine particle pollution consists of a complex mixture of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Soot" title="Soot" class="mw-redirect">soot</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heavy_metals_and_coal" title="Heavy metals and coal">heavy metals</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sulfur_dioxide_and_coal" title="Sulfur dioxide and coal">sulfur dioxide</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nitrogen_oxide" title="Nitrogen oxide">nitrogen oxides</a>. Among these particles, the most dangerous are those less than 2.5 microns in diameter, which are so tiny that they can evade the lung's natural defenses, enter the bloodstream, and be transported to vital organs. Impacts are especially severe among the elderly, children, and those with respiratory disease. The study found that over 13,000 deaths and tens of thousands of cases of chronic bronchitis, acute bronchitis, asthma, congestive heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, dysrhythmia, ischemic heart disease, chronic lung disease, and pneumonia each year are attributable to fine particle pollution from U.S. coal plant emissions. These deaths and illnesses are major examples of coal's <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=External_costs_of_coal" title="External costs of coal">external costs</a>, i.e. uncompensated harms inflicted upon the public at large. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_plants_near_residential_areas" title="Coal plants near residential areas">Low-income and minority populations</a> are disproportionately impacted as well, due to the tendency of companies to avoid locating power plants upwind of affluent communities. To monetize the health impact of fine particle pollution from each coal plant, Abt assigned a value of $7,300,000 to each 2010 mortality, based on a range of government and private studies. Valuations of illnesses ranged from $52 for an asthma episode to $440,000 for a case of chronic bronchitis.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-25" title="">[26]</a>

<h4>Table 1: Death and disease attributable to fine particle pollution from American Electric Power coal plants</h4>

<table class="wikitable"><tbody><tr><th width="120">Type of Impact</th><th width="120">Annual Incidence</th><th width="120">Valuation</th></tr><tr><td>Deaths</td><td align="right">1,127</td><td align="right">$8.23 billion</td></tr><tr><td>Heart attacks</td><td align="right">1,758</td><td align="right">$192.0 million</td></tr><tr><td>Asthma attacks</td><td align="right">17,989</td><td align="right">$0.9 million</td></tr><tr><td>Hospital admissions</td><td align="right">209</td><td align="right">$19.37 million</td></tr><tr><td>Chronic bronchitis</td><td align="right">674</td><td align="right">$299.18 million</td></tr><tr><td>Asthma ER visits</td><td align="right">996</td><td align="right">$0.4 million</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: <a href="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/Health_Impacts-annual-of_Existing_Plants.xls" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/Health_Impacts-annual-of_Existing_Plants.xls" rel="nofollow">"Health Impacts - annual - of Existing Plants,"</a> Clean Air Task Force Excel worksheet, available under "Data Annex" at <a href="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/" rel="nofollow">"Death and Disease from Power Plants,"</a> Clean Air Task Force. Note: This data includes the following plants owned by AEP and subsidiaries Appalachian Power, Cardinal Operating Company, Central Operating Company, Columbus Southern Power Company, Indiana Michigan Power, Kentucky Power Company, Ohio Power, Southwestern Electric , and Public Service Company of Oklahoma: <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clinch_River_Plant" title="Clinch River Plant">Clinch River</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Glen_Lyn_Plant" title="Glen Lyn Plant">Glen Lyn</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amos_Plant" title="Amos Plant">Amos Plant</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kanawha_River_Plant" title="Kanawha River Plant">Kanawha</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaineer_Plant" title="Mountaineer Plant">Mountaineer Plant</a> (Appalachian Power Co); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cardinal_Plant" title="Cardinal Plant">Cardinal</a>, (Cardinal Operating Co.); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn</a>, (Central Operating Co); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conesville_Power_Plant" title="Conesville Power Plant">Conesville</a>, (Columbus Southern Co); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tanners_Creek_Plant" title="Tanners Creek Plant">Tanners Creek</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rockport_Plant" title="Rockport Plant">Rockport Plant</a>, (Indiana Michigan Power Co); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Big_Sandy_Plant" title="Big Sandy Plant">Big Sandy Plant</a> (Kentucky Power Co.); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gavin_Power_Plant" title="Gavin Power Plant">Gavin Power Plant</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kammer_Plant" title="Kammer Plant">Kammer Plant</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mitchell_Plant" title="Mitchell Plant">Mitchell Plant</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum</a>, (Ohio Power Co); <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Northeastern_Station" title="Northeastern Station">Northeastern Station</a>, Riverside Power Plant, (Public Service Company of Oklahoma), <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Flint_Creek_Power_Plant" title="Flint Creek Power Plant">Flint Creek</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pirkey_Power_Plant" title="Pirkey Power Plant">Pirkey</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Welsh_Power_Plant" title="Welsh Power Plant">Welsh</a>, (Southwestern Electric Power Co).

<h2>AEP raises rates in Ohio</h2>

On March 18, 2009, the Ohio PUC approved rate increases for two AEP companies, but the hikes are only about half of of what the utility had requested. Columbus Southern Power customers will face a maximum increase of 7 percent in 2009 and 6 percent in both 2010 and 2011. Ohio Power customers will face a maximum increase of 8 percent in 2009, 7 percent in 2010, and 8 percent in 2011.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-26" title="">[27]</a>

<h3>Ohio Supreme Court rules rate hikes unlawful</h3>

On April 26, 2011, the Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel (OCC) and additional customer groups filed a request with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to stop the collection of $175 million in electric rates, in response to an April 19, 2011 Supreme Court of Ohio unanimous decision that AEP was unlawfully allowed to increase several rates. The Court ruled in favor of the OCC in agreeing that AEP's 2009-2011 rate plan was unlawful by including $63 million in retroactive rates, $456 million in costs to potentially provide default service for customers who shop for an alternative supplier and $330 million in carrying charges for environmental investments. The groups joining the OCC in the suit include the Ohio Energy Group, Ohio Partners for Affordable Energy, Ohio Manufacturers' Association and the Ohio Hospital Association. The charges ruled unlawful included compensation for AEP's perceived risk as a back-up provider of electricity for shopping customers and carrying charges on environmental investments made prior to Jan. 1, 2009. Both charges continue to be collected from customers, at an estimated rate of $22 million per month, according to PUCO. The Court remanded the two issues to the PUCO for further consideration.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-27" title="">[28]</a>

<h2>Power portfolio</h2>

Out of its total 35,843 MW of electric generating capacity in 2005 (3.36% of the U.S. total), AEP gets 69.0% from coal, 22.2% from natural gas, 6.4% from nuclear, and 2.3% from hydroelectricity. AEP owns power plants in Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-EIA-28" title="">[29]</a>

AEP announced in October 2010 that it was going to seek to reduce 5,000 megawatts of coal power from its operating units. The utility stated that it receives 5,000 megawatts of generation from smaller, older and less-efficient coal fired units and that there is not economic justification to retrofit them with environmental upgrades. AEP also stated that it was evaluating whether to retire and replace another 10,000 megawatts of power generation.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-29" title="">[30]</a>

<h2>Congressional campaign contributions</h2>

American Electric Power is the single largest energy contributor to both Republican and Democratic candidates for Congress. These contributions total $597,881 to the 110th US Congress (as of the third quarter of 2008), the largest of which has been to <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Boehner" title="John Boehner">John Boehner</a> (R-OH) for $25,050. Rep. Boehner, for his part, has consistently voted with the coal industry on energy bills.

Contributions like this from from fossil fuel companies to members of Congress are often seen as a political barrier to pursuing clean energy. <a href="http://www.followtheoilmoney.org" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.followtheoilmoney.org" rel="nofollow">[1]</a>

More information on coal industry contributions to Congress can be found at <a href="http://www.followthecoalmoney.org" class="external text" title="http://www.followthecoalmoney.org" rel="nofollow">FollowtheCoalMoney.org</a>, a project sponsored by the nonpartisan, nonprofit <a href="http://www.priceofoil.org" class="external text" title="http://www.priceofoil.org" rel="nofollow">Oil Change International</a> and <a href="http://www.appalachianvoices.org" class="external text" title="http://www.appalachianvoices.org" rel="nofollow">Appalachian Voices</a>.

Between 2009 and 2011, American Electric power spent $579,000 on federal campaign contributions. In addition, it spent $28.85 million on lobbying between 2008 and 2010.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-Public_Campaign_Report-6" title="">[7]</a>

<h2>Coal lobbying</h2>

American Electric Power also spent $80,000 on <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Compass_Consulting_Group" title="Compass Consulting Group">Compass Consulting Group</a> in 2008 and a further $20,000 to date in 2009.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American_Electric_Power-30" title="">[31]</a> The registered lobbyists were <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ted_Hollingsworth" title="Ted Hollingsworth">Ted Hollingsworth</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Thomas_F.Needles" title="Thomas F. Needles">Thomas F. Needles</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_A.Smith" title="Patrick A. Smith">Patrick A. Smith</a>.

American Electric Power also spent $580,000 on <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sidley_Austin" title="Sidley Austin">Sidley Austin</a> LLP in 2008 and a further $10,000 to date in 2009.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American_Electric_Power-30" title="">[31]</a> The registered lobbyist was <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Andrew_Shoyer" title="Andrew Shoyer">Andrew Shoyer</a>.

American Electric Power also spent $350,000 on <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Van_Ness_Feldman" title="Van Ness Feldman">Van Ness Feldman</a> in 2008 and a further $50,000 to date in 2009. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American_Electric_Power-30" title="">[31]</a> The registered lobbyists for the first three-quarters of 2008 were <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stephen_Fotis" title="Stephen Fotis">Stephen Fotis</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Todd_Wooten" title="Todd Wooten">Todd Wooten</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tracy_Nagelbush" title="Tracy Nagelbush">Tracy Nagelbush</a>. The registered lobbyists for last quarter of 2008 were Fotis, Wooten, Nagelbush and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Nordhaus" title="Robert Nordhaus">Robert Nordhaus</a>. The registered lobbyists for 2009 were Fotis and Nagelbush.

<ul>

<li>Total Lobbying expenditures for 2008: $12,248,938

</li>

<li>Total Lobbying expenditures to date for 2009: $1,796,913

</li>

</ul>

American Electric Power is a member of the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Coal_Ash_Association" title="American Coal Ash Association">American Coal Ash Association</a> (ACAA), an umbrella lobbying group for all coal ash interests that includes major coal burners <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Duke_Energy" title="Duke Energy">Duke Energy</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Southern_Company" title="Southern Company">Southern Company</a> as well as dozens of other companies. The group argues that the so-called "beneficial-use industry" would be eliminated if a "hazardous" designation was given for coal ash waste.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-desmog-31" title="">[32]</a>

ACAA set up a front group called <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizens_for_Recycling_First" title="Citizens for Recycling First">Citizens for Recycling First</a>, which argues that using toxic coal ash as fill in other products is safe, despite evidence to the contrary.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-desmog-31" title="">[32]</a>

<h2>Environmental record</h2>

Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst have identified American Electric as the 35th-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States, with roughly 88 million pounds of toxic chemicals released annually into the air.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-32" title="">[33]</a> Major pollutants indicated by the study include sulfuric acid, chromium and nickel compounds, hydrochloric acid, and manganese compounds.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-33" title="">[34]</a> Overall, electric power plants, such as those operated by AEP, account for almost "70 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions each year and 30 percent of nitrogen oxides emissions." Individually, these pollutants cause serious respiratory damage and other illnesses; when combined, they create what's known as acid rain, which causes long term damage to the environment and deterioration of natural and man-made structures.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-34" title="">[35]</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="U.S. Environmental Protection Agency">U.S. Environmental Protection Agency</a> has named American Electric a potentially responsible party at the Green River Disposal Inc. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Superfund" title="Superfund">Superfund</a> toxic waste site.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-35" title="">[36]</a>

<h2>Citizen action and protest</h2>

<a href="http://www.earthfirst.org/" class="external text" title="http://www.earthfirst.org/" rel="nofollow">Earth First!</a> and <a href="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/category/front-page/" class="external text" title="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/category/front-page/" rel="nofollow">Rising Tide</a> activists blockade a bridge leading to the Clinch River power plant on July 10, 2006.</div>

</div>

<h3>July 10, 2006: Earth First!/Rising Tide blockade of Clinch River Power Plant</h3>

On July 10, 2006, 75 <a href="http://www.earthfirst.org/" class="external text" title="http://www.earthfirst.org/" rel="nofollow">Earth First!</a> and <a href="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/category/front-page/" class="external text" title="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/category/front-page/" rel="nofollow">Rising Tide North America</a> activists blockaded an access bridge leading to American Electric Power's coal-fired Clinch River Power Plant near Carbo, Virginia. Several people stretched a rope across the bridge and suspended themselves off the bridge's edge; others waved a coal truck onto the bridge, blockaded it, deflated its tires, and locked themselves to the truck. The protestors demanded that Clinch River and other outdated coal plants be shut down, and that mountaintop removal coal mining be ended. After several hours in which coal trucks were unable to get into the plant, police agreed to make no arrests if the activists would dismantle their blockades.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-36" title="">[37]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-37" title="">[38]</a>

<h3>Pike County residents sue AEP for illegal mining that aggravated flooding</h3>

In August 2010, 126 people at mine sites near Harless Creek in Pike County filed a lawsuit against AEP Kentucky and Cambrian Coal after inspectors cited the coal companies for violations in the area, which residents say flattened and eroded the landscape and contributed to the flooding and damage of their property. The companies were mining on the nearby mountains. State inspectors cited Cambrian Coal the week after the flood for having too much sediment in one pond and allegedly mining more acres than a runoff pond could handle, causing excessive runoff that damaged a home. The families are seeking compensation for what they lost, and are asking for a jury trial.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-38" title="">[39]</a>

<h2>Justice Department lawsuit</h2>

The United States Justice Department filed a lawsuit in November 3, 1999, against AEP and six other companies for violating the Clean Air Act. On October 8, 2007, AEP agreed to install US$4.6 billion in equipment to reduce emission, as well as pay a US$15 million civil fine.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-39" title="">[40]</a>

The company will cut 813,000 tons of air pollutants annually once all of the controls are installed.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-40" title="">[41]</a> According to the press release, the agreement imposes caps on emissions of pollutants from 16 plants located in five states. The facilities are located in Moundsville, West Virginia (2 facilities), St. Albans, West Virginia, Glasgow, West Virginia, and New Haven, West Virginia (2 facilities), West Virginia; Louisa, Kentucky; Glen Lyn, Virginia and Carbo, Virginia; Brilliant, Ohio, Conesville, Ohio, Cheshire, Ohio, Lockbourne, Ohio, and Beverly, Ohio; and Rockport, Indiana and Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

<h2>Public nuisance lawsuit: Connecticut v. AEP et al.</h2>

<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Connecticut_v._AEP_et_al." title="Connecticut v. AEP et al." class="mw-redirect">Connecticut v. AEP et al.</a> involves a federal public nuisance claim filed by state attorney generals and conservation groups against utilities for their large contributions to <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Climate_change" title="Climate change">climate change</a> and resistance to lowering greenhouse gas emissions. The case was dismissed by the district court in 2005 and then reversed by the Second Circuit court in 2009. In 2010, the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Obama_Administration" title="Obama Administration" class="mw-redirect">Obama Administration</a> submitted a brief urging the Second Circuit to reconsider its reversal, arguing that the issue should be addressed by the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=EPA" title="EPA" class="mw-redirect">EPA</a>, and courts should stay out.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-jz-41" title="">[42]</a>

On December 6, 2010, the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Supreme_Court" title="Supreme Court">Supreme Court</a> said it will hear an appeal from defendant electric utilities, agreeing to consider ending the federal lawsuit by eight states, which asks a federal judge to order reductions in the emissions in plants in 20 states. The American Electric Power Co. and the other utilities do not want courts getting involved in the issue. The companies argue that only the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="Environmental Protection Agency" class="mw-redirect">Environmental Protection Agency</a> can set emissions standards. The Obama administration, representing the TVA, want to avoid a full hearing at the high court, saying EPA regulation is a more efficient process than a federal lawsuit. The case will be argued in spring 2011. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was on the 2nd Circuit panel that heard the case, is not taking part in the Supreme Court's consideration of the issue.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-42" title="">[43]</a>

<h2>Proposed coal plants</h2>

<h3>Active</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hempstead" title="Hempstead">Hempstead</a> (sponsored by Southwestern Electric Power Co, SWEPCO, a subsidiary of American Electric Power)</li>

</ul>

<h3>Cancelled</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaineer" title="Mountaineer" class="mw-redirect">Mountaineer</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>Existing coal-fired power plants</h2>

AEP had 52 coal-fired generating stations in 2005, with 26,595 MW of capacity. Here is a list of AEP's coal power plants with capacity over 100 MW:<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-EIA-28" title="">[29]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-43" title="">[44]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-44" title="">[45]</a> In 2006 and 2007 coal accounted for 85% of AEP's energy source, and 86% in 2008.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American-3" title="">[4]</a>

<table id="sortable_table_id_0" class="wikitable sortable"><tbody><tr><th>Plant Name  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/08076f6f-c0ac-5e6f-84f7-e4a6fb2a7d8f.gif"/></a></th><th>State  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/9f27c9be-d1bb-5c4d-a6a3-a102b4bbea3d.gif"/></a></th><th>County  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/ee0c2aba-400c-51fc-9b55-7a13a219894c.gif"/></a></th><th width="175">Year(s) Built  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/615221e4-52e2-54af-83d2-17677bc9533f.gif"/></a></th><th width="85">Capacity  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/b0f01c59-e570-5830-a274-fd897802c3ba.gif"/></a></th><th width="110">2007 CO2 Emissions  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/dce3107a-21c8-5ec1-8e2f-6990db8ddcf1.gif"/></a></th><th width="100">2006 SO2 Emissions  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/da179ef3-eaa8-5b42-85a4-612485068d89.gif"/></a></th><th width="100">Annual Deaths<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-45" title="">[46]</a>  <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#" class="sortheader" onclick="ts_resortTable(this);return false;"><img src="/4957325b-73ea-515d-b591-fb808b664fc3.gif"/></a></th></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amos_Plant" title="Amos Plant">John E. Amos</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Putnam</td><td align="center">1971-73</td><td align="right">2933 MW</td><td align="right">15,300,000 tons</td><td align="right">117,299 tons</td><td align="center">87</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rockport_Plant" title="Rockport Plant">Rockport</a></th><td align="center">IN</td><td align="center">Spencer</td><td align="center">1984, 1989</td><td align="right">2600 MW</td><td align="right">16,600,000 tons</td><td align="right">83,543 tons</td><td align="center">138</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gavin_Plant" title="Gavin Plant" class="mw-redirect">Gavin</a></th><td align="center">OH</td><td align="center">Gallia</td><td align="center">1974, 1975</td><td align="right">2600 MW</td><td align="right">18,700,000 tons</td><td align="right">24,787 tons</td><td align="center">45</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conesville_Power_Plant" title="Conesville Power Plant">Conesville</a></th><td align="center">OH</td><td align="center">Coshocton</td><td align="center">1962, 1973, 1976, 1978</td><td align="right">1891 MW</td><td align="right">9,060,000 tons</td><td align="right">90,540 tons</td><td align="center">44</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cardinal_Plant" title="Cardinal Plant">Cardinal</a></th><td align="center">OH</td><td align="center">Jefferson</td><td align="center">1967, 1977</td><td align="right">1880 MW</td><td align="right">10,100,000 tons</td><td align="right">86,880 tons</td><td align="center">55</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Welsh_Power_Plant" title="Welsh Power Plant">Welsh</a></th><td align="center">TX</td><td align="center">Titus</td><td align="center">1977, 1980, 1982</td><td align="right">1674 MW</td><td align="right">11,900,000 tons</td><td align="right">37,154 tons</td><td align="center">37</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mitchell_Plant" title="Mitchell Plant">Mitchell</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Marshall</td><td align="center">1971</td><td align="right">1633 MW</td><td align="right">8,478,000 tons</td><td align="right">53,152 tons</td><td align="center">51</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum River</a></th><td align="center">OH</td><td align="center">Washington</td><td align="center">1953, 1954, 1957, 1958, 1968</td><td align="right">1529 MW</td><td align="right">7,299,000 tons</td><td align="right">122,984 tons</td><td align="center">28</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaineer_Plant" title="Mountaineer Plant">Mountaineer</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Mason</td><td align="center">1980</td><td align="right">1300 MW</td><td align="right">7,727,000 tons</td><td align="right">31,052 tons</td><td align="center">38</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Mason</td><td align="center">1950-52, 1960</td><td align="right">1106 MW</td><td align="right">5,407,000 tons</td><td align="right">39,741 tons</td><td align="center">110</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tanners_Creek_Plant" title="Tanners Creek Plant">Tanners Creek</a></th><td align="center">IN</td><td align="center">Dearborn</td><td align="center">1951, 1952, 1954, 1964</td><td align="right">1100 MW</td><td align="right">5,963,000 tons</td><td align="right">35,494 tons</td><td align="center">120</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Big_Sandy_Plant" title="Big Sandy Plant">Big Sandy</a></th><td align="center">KY</td><td align="center">Lawrence</td><td align="center">1963, 1969</td><td align="right">1097 MW</td><td align="right">5,807,000 tons</td><td align="right">46,476 tons</td><td align="center">55</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Northeastern_Station" title="Northeastern Station">Northeastern</a></th><td align="center">OK</td><td align="center">Rogers</td><td align="center">1979, 1980</td><td align="right">946 MW</td><td align="right">7,511,000 tons</td><td align="right">34,645 tons</td><td align="center">62</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pirkey_Power_Plant" title="Pirkey Power Plant">Pirkey</a></th><td align="center">TX</td><td align="center">Harrison</td><td align="center">1985</td><td align="right">721 MW</td><td align="right">6,037,000 tons</td><td align="right">32,391 tons</td><td align="center">20</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oklaunion_Power_Station" title="Oklaunion Power Station">Oklaunion</a></th><td align="center">TX</td><td align="center">Wilbarger</td><td align="center">1986</td><td align="right">720 MW</td><td align="right">5,016,000 tons</td><td align="right">3,794 tons</td><td align="center">7</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clinch_River_Plant" title="Clinch River Plant">Clinch River</a></th><td align="center">VA</td><td align="center">Russell</td><td align="center">1958, 1961</td><td align="right">713 MW</td><td align="right">3,680,000 tons</td><td align="right">27,134 tons</td><td align="center">69</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kammer_Plant" title="Kammer Plant">Kammer</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Marshall</td><td align="center">1958-59</td><td align="right">713 MW</td><td align="right">3,244,000 tons</td><td align="right">119,369 tons</td><td align="center">70</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Flint_Creek_Power_Plant" title="Flint Creek Power Plant">Flint Creek</a></th><td align="center">AR</td><td align="center">Benton</td><td align="center">1978</td><td align="right">558 MW</td><td align="right">3,977,000 tons</td><td align="right">8,526 tons</td><td align="center">20</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kanawha_River_Plant" title="Kanawha River Plant">Kanawha River</a></th><td align="center">WV</td><td align="center">Kanawha</td><td align="center">1953</td><td align="right">439 MW</td><td align="right">1,820,000 tons</td><td align="right">13,543 tons</td><td align="center">40</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Glen_Lyn_Plant" title="Glen Lyn Plant">Glen Lyn</a></th><td align="center">VA</td><td align="center">Giles</td><td align="center">1944, 1957</td><td align="right">338 MW</td><td align="right">1,356,000 tons</td><td align="right">13,632 tons</td><td align="center">31</td></tr><tr><th align="left"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Picway_Power_Plant" title="Picway Power Plant">Picway</a></th><td align="center">OH</td><td align="center">Pickaway</td><td align="center">1955</td><td align="right">106 MW</td><td align="right">366,000 tons</td><td align="right">15,071 tons</td><td align="center">not available</td></tr><tr><th align="left">Total</th><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td align="right">26,597 MW</td><td align="right">155,348,000 tons</td><td align="right">1,037,000 tons</td><td align="center">1,127</td></tr></tbody></table>

In 2005, AEP's 21 major coal-fired power plants emitted 155.3 million tons of CO2 (2.6% of all U.S. CO2 emissions) and 1,037,000 tons of SO2 (6.9% of all U.S. SO2 emissions).

Through subsidiaries, AEP owns, leases, or controls more than 9,000 railcars, 726 barges, 18 towboats, and a coal handling terminal with 18 million tons of annual capacity to move and store coal for use in its generating facilities.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-American-3" title="">[4]</a>

<h3>May 2010: AEP to run 10 coal units part-time</h3>

In May 2010, American Electric Power announced it planned to run 10 small coal-fired power units on a part-time basis starting in June as "the weak economy reduced demand and low <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_gas" title="Natural gas" class="mw-redirect">natural gas</a> prices have made the use of some coal units less profitable," according to the company.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-46" title="">[47]</a>

The units include:

<ul>

<li>Picway 5</li>

<li>Muskingum River 4</li>

<li>Clinch River 3</li>

<li>Tanners Creek 1</li>

<li>Tanners Creek 2</li>

<li>Philip Sporn 3</li>

<li>Philip Sporn 4</li>

<li>Philip Sporn 5</li>

</ul>

<h3>Mountaineer carbon capture and storage project cancelled</h3>

One of the nation's largest <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Carbon_Capture_and_Storage" title="Carbon Capture and Storage">Carbon Capture and Storage</a> projects was to have been created as an add-on unit at AEP's <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mountaineer_Plant" title="Mountaineer Plant">Mountaineer Plant</a> near New Haven, West Virginia.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-47" title="">[48]</a>

<div class="thumbcaption">Mountaineer Plant Deploys Carbon Capture and Sequestration.</div>

</div>

In August 2009, AEP applied for funding from the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Coal Power Initiative. The company asked for a $334 million grant to cover about half of the estimated costs of installing carbon capture and storage system. According to the grant application, the system would attempt to capture at least 90 percent of the carbon dioxide from 235 MW of the plant's 1,300 MW total capacity. The captured carbon dioxide, which was expected to be about 1.5 million metric tons per year, would have been injected into geologic formations about 1.5 miles under ground. The company could have had the system operational in 2015.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-48" title="">[49]</a>

In December 2009, AEP was awarded the $334 million grant from the Department of Energy for the CCS project at its Mountaineer plant.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-49" title="">[50]</a> The company noted that the "Mountaineer Plant CCS projects employ Alstom’s patented chilled ammonia process for post-combustion CO2 capture. The process uses ammonium carbonate to absorb CO2. The resulting ammonium bicarbonate is converted back to ammonium carbonate in a regenerator and is reused to repeat the process. The flue gas, cleaned of CO2, flows back to the stack and the captured CO2 is sent for storage."<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-50" title="">[51]</a>

On July 14, 2011, American Electric Power said it had decided to table plans to build the full-scale carbon-capture plant at Mountaineer, saying they did not believe state regulators would let the company recover its costs by charging customers, thus leaving it no "compelling regulatory or business reason to continue the program." The federal Department of Energy had pledged to cover half the cost, but AEP said it was unwilling to spend the remainder in a political climate that had changed strikingly since it began the project. A senior Obama administration official said that the A.E.P. decision was a result of the political stalemate on climate change legislation, which failed to pass the Senate. Public service commissions of both West Virginia and Virginia turned down the company’s request for full reimbursement for the pilot plant, operating since 2009. West Virginia said earlier in 2011 that the cost should have been shared among all the states where AEP does business; Virginia hinted in July 2010 that it should have been paid for by all utilities around the United States, since a successful project would benefit all of them.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-51" title="">[52]</a><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-52" title="">[53]</a>

Concerning AEP's statement that costs could not be passed along, West Virginia journalist Ken Ward noted: "It's not exactly true that utility commissions aren’t allowing companies to pass costs of projects like this on to consumers... The West Virginia PSC allowed AEP rate hikes to cover our state’s share of the costs. Virginia regulators seemed willing to do the same. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-53" title="">[54]</a> James Fallows of The Atlantic wrote: "This is the kind of project that (was) the best and urgently necessary hope to allow the US, China, and other countries to keep using coal ... while reducing carbon emissions. <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-54" title="">[55]</a>

<h3>American Electric Power Service Corporation Settlement</h3>

On October 9, 2007 the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. EPA announced that American Electric Power (AEP) agreed to pay a $15 million fine and spend $60 million on projects to mitigate the adverse effects of its past emissions. Of that $60 million, the EPA announced that it would be split 60%/40% between the United States and the various settling states. The company agreed to cut 813,000 tons of air pollutants each year at an cost of more than $4.6 billion.

It was the largest environmental enforcement settlement in U.S. history. AEP will install pollution control equipment to reduce and capture sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx). The settlement resolved a lawsuit filed against AEP in 1999 for violating the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=New_Source_Review" title="New Source Review">New Source Review</a> of the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Air_Act" title="Clean Air Act">Clean Air Act</a>. A coalition of eight states and 13 citizen and environmental groups joined the U.S. government in the settlement. A total of 16 plants located in five states were impacted.

“The AEP settlement will have an unprecedented impact on air quality in the eastern United States,” said Ronald J. Tenpas, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division. “This settlement is a major victory for the environment and public health, and it demonstrates our continued commitment to vigorous enforcement of the Clean Air Act.”<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-55" title="">[56]</a>

American Electric installed three "scrubbers" at its largest power-generating unit at its <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Amos_Plant" title="John Amos Plant" class="mw-redirect">John Amos Plant</a> in West Virginia. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $1.04 billion.

"[The scrubbers are] going to provide a different look to the skyline. The plume will look different," said Phil Moye, spokesman for American Electric Power subsidiary Appalachian Power. "I describe it as a rolling, billowy, cloud-like plume. It's white. It will come from the new stack that was constructed as a part of the project."<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-56" title="">[57]</a>

<h2>Proposed coal plant closures</h2>

<h3>Ohio Power seeks 2010 retirement of Sporn Unit 5</h3>

In October 2010, Ohio Power Co. filed an application with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio for the approval of a December 2010 closure of the coal-fired <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn Power Plant</a> unit 5, Ohio Power parent American Electric Power said in a Nov. 1 Form 10-Q filing. Sporn has five coal units, with unit 5 having 450 MW of operating capacity and an in-service year of 1960. The plant's coal suppliers in 2010 included <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Keystone_Development" title="Keystone Development">Keystone Development</a>, the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mammoth_Coal&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Mammoth Coal (page does not exist)">Mammoth Coal</a> unit of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Massey_Energy" title="Massey Energy">Massey Energy</a>, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mine_Rite_Coal&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Mine Rite Coal (page does not exist)">Mine Rite Coal</a>, and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Newtown_Energy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Newtown Energy (page does not exist)">Newtown Energy</a>. In September 2009, <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Appalachian_Power" title="Appalachian Power" class="mw-redirect">Appalachian Power</a> filed an integrated resource plan (IRP) in Virginia that projected a 2010 shutdown for Sporn unit 5. The same IRP projected that Sporn units 1-4, with 580 MW of total capacity, would be retired in 2018.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-bc-57" title="">[58]</a>

As part of a 2007 <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=New_Source_Review" title="New Source Review">New Source Review</a> (NSR) consent decree, Sporn unit 5 is required to be retired, repowered or retrofitted by Dec. 31, 2013. AEP's plan to comply with the consent decree included retirement of Sporn unit 5 at the end of 2013. But based on present and projected economic conditions, Ohio Power said Sporn unit 5 is no longer economic to operate, with the unit forecast to produce negative operating income for the next two years, bringing the company to seek 2010 retirement.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-bc-57" title="">[58]</a>

<h3>June 2011: AEP to retire nearly 60,000 MW</h3>

On June 9, 2011, AEP announced that, based on impending EPA regulations as proposed, AEP’s compliance plan would retire nearly 6,000 megawatts (MW) of coal-fueled power generation; upgrade or install new advanced emissions reduction equipment on another 10,100 MW; refuel 1,070 MW of coal generation as 932 MW of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_gas" title="Natural gas" class="mw-redirect">natural gas</a> capacity; and build 1,220 MW of natural gas-fueled generation. The cost of AEP’s compliance plan could range from $6 billion to $8 billion in capital investment through the end of the decade.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-kwj-58" title="">[59]</a>

AEP’s current plan for compliance with the rules as proposed includes permanently retiring the following coal-fueled power plants:<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-kwj-58" title="">[59]</a>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Glen_Lyn_Plant" title="Glen Lyn Plant">Glen Lyn Plant</a>, Glen Lyn, Va. – 335 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kammer_Plant" title="Kammer Plant">Kammer Plant</a>, Moundsville, W.Va. – 630 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kanawha_River_Plant" title="Kanawha River Plant">Kanawha River Plant</a>, Glasgow, W.Va. – 400 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014);</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Sporn_Power_Plant" title="Philip Sporn Power Plant">Philip Sporn Power Plant</a>, New Haven, W.Va. – 1,050 MW (450 MW expected to retire in 2011, 600 MW retired by Dec. 31, 2014); and</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Picway_Power_Plant" title="Picway Power Plant">Picway Power Plant</a>, Lockbourne, Ohio – 100 MW (retired by Dec. 31, 2014).</li>

</ul>

In addition, six other plants which will reduce their power output:<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-59" title="">[60]</a>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Big_Sandy_Plant" title="Big Sandy Plant">Big Sandy Plant</a>, Louisa, Ky. - Units 1 and 2 (1,078 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Big Sandy Unit 1 would be rebuilt as a 640-MW natural gas plant by Dec. 31, 2015;</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clinch_River_Plant" title="Clinch River Plant">Clinch River Plant</a>, Cleveland, Va. - Unit 3 (235 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Units 1 and 2 (470 MW total) would be refueled with natural gas with a capacity of 422 MW by Dec. 31, 2014;</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conesville_Power_Plant" title="Conesville Power Plant">Conesville Power Plant</a>, Conesville, Ohio - Unit 3 (165 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2012; Units 5 and 6 (800 MW total) would continue operating with retrofits;</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Muskingum_River_Plant" title="Muskingum River Plant">Muskingum River Plant</a>, Beverly, Ohio - Units 1-4 (840 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Muskingum River Unit 5 (600 MW) may be refueled with natural gas with a capacity of 510 MW by Dec. 31, 2014, depending on regulatory treatment in Ohio;</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tanners_Creek_Plant" title="Tanners Creek Plant">Tanners Creek Plant</a>, Lawrenceburg, Indiana - Units 1, 2 and 3 (495 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Unit 4 (500 MW) would continue to operate with retrofits; and</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Welsh_Power_Plant" title="Welsh Power Plant">Welsh Power Plant</a>, Pittsburg, Texas - Unit 2 (528 MW) retired by Dec. 31, 2014; Units 1 and 3 (1,056 MW) would continue to operate with retrofits.</li>

</ul>

AEP also said it purchases about 24 million tons of coal from the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Powder_River_Basin" title="Powder River Basin">Powder River Basin</a> each year, or more than a third of the coal used by the company, and that it was unclear how the potential closures would affect the utility’s purchase of coal from the Powder River Basin. At least one of the power plants due to be partially closed, the <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Welsh_Power_Plant" title="Welsh Power Plant">Welsh Power Plant</a> in Pittsburg, Texas, is entirely fueled by the basin’s coal, according to AEP. The <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kammer_Plant" title="Kammer Plant">Kammer Plant</a> that is in Moundsville, W.V., another AEP power plant slated for closure, blends the basin’s coal into the mix it burns.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-60" title="">[61]</a>

<h4>Controversy over cause of plant shutdowns</h4>

The proposed plant shutdowns were announced in a June 9, 2011 press release in which AEP blamed the Environmental Protection Agency for the plant closures and said layoffs of 600 workers would result.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-61" title="">[62]</a>

The announcement set off a storm of controversy. The Wall Street Journal called it a result of "EPA's War on Jobs" and said: "The real goal of the EPA's rule is to shut down fossil fuel electric power in the name of climate change. The consensus estimate in the private sector is that the utility rule and eight others on the EPA docket will force the retirement of 60 out of the country's current 340 gigawatts of coal-fired capacity." <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-62" title="">[63]</a>

The New York Times took a different view: "This is a deceptive and particularly cynical claim... These units are, on average, 55 years old. Some are running at only 5 percent of capacity. Many had long been slated for retirement, in part to comply with a 2007 settlement with the George W. Bush administration in which the company agreed to settle violations of the Clean Air Act by spending $4.7 billion to retire or retrofit aging units." <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-63" title="">[64]</a>

Shortly after, on June 27, 2011, the AP reported that AEP spent $2 million lobbying on clean air and clean water rules in the 1st quarter of 2011, according to a disclosure report.<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-64" title="">[65]</a>

<h2>Financing</h2>

From June 2009 to July 2011, several banks have provided large sums of money in the form of bond underwriting to AEP, including:<a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_note-65" title="">[66]</a>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barclays_Bank" title="Barclays Bank">Barclays Bank</a> provided $300 million</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=UBS&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="UBS (page does not exist)">UBS</a> provided $190 million</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Morgan_Stanley" title="Morgan Stanley">Morgan Stanley</a> provided $175 million</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citigroup" title="Citigroup">Citigroup</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=JP_Morgan_Chase" title="JP Morgan Chase" class="mw-redirect">JP Morgan Chase</a> each provided $87.5 million</li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Wells_Fargo" title="Wells Fargo">Wells Fargo</a> and <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Credit_Suisse" title="Credit Suisse" class="mw-redirect">Credit Suisse</a> each provided $75 million</li>

</ul>

<h2>Articles and resources</h2>

<h3>Related SourceWatch articles</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Arkansas_and_coal" title="Arkansas and coal">Arkansas and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Indiana_and_coal" title="Indiana and coal">Indiana and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kentucky_and_coal" title="Kentucky and coal">Kentucky and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oklahoma_and_coal" title="Oklahoma and coal">Oklahoma and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Texas_and_coal" title="Texas and coal">Texas and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Virginia_and_coal" title="Virginia and coal">Virginia and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=West_Virginia_and_coal" title="West Virginia and coal">West Virginia and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_States_and_coal" title="United States and coal">United States and coal</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Connecticut_v._AEP" title="Connecticut v. AEP">Connecticut v. AEP</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_G._Morris" title="Michael G. Morris">Michael G. Morris</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_warming" title="Global warming">Global warming</a></li>

<li><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=EPA_Coal_Plant_Settlements" title="EPA Coal Plant Settlements">EPA Coal Plant Settlements</a></li>

</ul>

<h3>References</h3>

<li id="cite_note-businessweek-0">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-businessweek_0-0" title="">1.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-businessweek_0-1" title="">1.1</a> <a href="http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?symbol=AEP" class="external text" title="http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/financials.asp?symbol=AEP" rel="nofollow">American Electric Power Co. Inc.</a>, BusinessWeek Company Insight Center, accessed July 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-1"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-1" title="">↑</a> [American Legislative Exchange Council, 2011 Conference Sponsors, conference brochure on file with CMD, August 11, 2011]</li>

<li id="cite_note-EEAMeetingMaterials-2"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-EEAMeetingMaterials_2-0" title="">↑</a> American Legislative Exchange Council, "Energy, Environment, and Agriculture 2011 Annual Meeting Task Force Meeting," speaker biographies and materials, August 4, 2011, on file with CMD</li>

<li id="cite_note-American-3">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_3-0" title="">4.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_3-1" title="">4.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_3-2" title="">4.2</a> Indiana Michigan Power, <a href="http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6446798-978-383165&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=4371&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcompanyid%253d4371%2526amp%253bformtypeId%253d7" class="external text" title="http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=6446798-978-383165&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=4371&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcompanyid%253d4371%2526amp%253bformtypeId%253d7" rel="nofollow">"Annual Report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the year to December 31, 2008"</a>, Filed March 2, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-4"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-4" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2002/2002-04-19-06.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/apr2002/2002-04-19-06.asp" rel="nofollow">"Utility Buys Out Contaminated Ohio Town"</a>, Environmental News Service, April 19, 2002.</li>

<li id="cite_note-5"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-5" title="">↑</a> Robert S. McIntyre, Matthew Gardner, Rebecca J. Wilkins, Richard Phillips, <a href="http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers: 2008-10"</a> Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, November 2011 Report.</li>

<li id="cite_note-Public_Campaign_Report-6">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-Public_Campaign_Report_6-0" title="">7.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-Public_Campaign_Report_6-1" title="">7.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-Public_Campaign_Report_6-2" title="">7.2</a> <a href="http://publicampaign.org/sites/default/files/ReportTaxDodgerLobbyingDec6.pdf" class="external text" title="http://publicampaign.org/sites/default/files/ReportTaxDodgerLobbyingDec6.pdf" rel="nofollow">For Hire: Lobbyists or the 99%? How Corporations Pay More for Lobbyists Than in Taxes</a> Public Campaign, December 2011</li>

<li id="cite_note-7"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-7" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/12/lead_07ceos_Michael-G-Morris_D3ID.html" class="external text" title="http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/12/lead_07ceos_Michael-G-Morris_D3ID.html" rel="nofollow">CEO Compensation: #137 Michael G Morris,</a> Forbes.com, May 3, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-gooap-8">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-gooap_8-0" title="">9.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-gooap_8-1" title="">9.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-gooap_8-2" title="">9.2</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-gooap_8-3" title="">9.3</a> <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ild5KdN6RiXu-nBwkdeYDB7GlRGQD9F3M7UO0" class="external text" title="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ild5KdN6RiXu-nBwkdeYDB7GlRGQD9F3M7UO0" rel="nofollow">"AEP to cut up to 10 percent of its workers",</a> "Associated Press", April 15, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-dgear-9">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-dgear_9-0" title="">10.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-dgear_9-1" title="">10.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-dgear_9-2" title="">10.2</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-dgear_9-3" title="">10.3</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-dgear_9-4" title="">10.4</a> Dan Gearino, <a href="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2010/04/15/aep-to-cut-up-to-10-of-workers.html?sid=101" class="external text" title="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2010/04/15/aep-to-cut-up-to-10-of-workers.html?sid=101" rel="nofollow">"AEP to cut up to 10% of workers",</a> "Columbus Dispatch", April 15, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-10"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-10" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2710347720100527?type=marketsNews" class="external text" title="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2710347720100527?type=marketsNews" rel="nofollow">"AEP to run 10 old coal units part-time due economy"</a> Reuters, May 27, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-11"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-11" title="">↑</a> Shaila Dewan, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/science/earth/01ash.html?ref=us" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/science/earth/01ash.html?ref=us" rel="nofollow">"E.P.A. Lists ‘High Hazard’ Coal Ash Dumps,"</a> New York Times, June 30, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-12"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-12" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccrs-fs/index.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccrs-fs/index.htm" rel="nofollow">Fact Sheet: Coal Combustion Residues (CCR) - Surface Impoundments with High Hazard Potential Ratings,</a> Environmental Protection Agency, June 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-13"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-13" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward Jr., <a href="http://wvgazette.com/News/200911160795" class="external text" title="http://wvgazette.com/News/200911160795" rel="nofollow">"EPA considers upgrading ratings of Mason coal-ash dams,"</a> Charleston Gazette, November 16, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-iss-14">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-iss_14-0" title="">15.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-iss_14-1" title="">15.1</a> Sue Sturgis, <a href="http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/01/coals-ticking-timebomb-could-disaster-strike-a-coal-ash-dump-near-you.html" class="external text" title="http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/01/coals-ticking-timebomb-could-disaster-strike-a-coal-ash-dump-near-you.html" rel="nofollow">"Coal's ticking timebomb: Could disaster strike a coal ash dump near you?,"</a> Institute for Southern Studies, January 4, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-15"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-15" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/triexplorer/" rel="nofollow">TRI Explorer,</a> EPA, accessed January 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-16"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-16" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/26/1793995/study-of-coal-ash-sites-finds.html" class="external text" title="http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/26/1793995/study-of-coal-ash-sites-finds.html" rel="nofollow">"Study of coal ash sites finds extensive water contamination"</a> Renee Schoff, Miami Herald, August 26, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-17"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-17" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HRDN581.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HRDN581.htm" rel="nofollow">"Enviro groups: ND, SD coal ash polluting water"</a> Associated Press, August 24, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-blind_spot-18">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-blind_spot_18-0" title="">19.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-blind_spot_18-1" title="">19.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-blind_spot_18-2" title="">19.2</a> <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/CoalAshChromeReport.pdf" class="external text" title="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/CoalAshChromeReport.pdf" rel="nofollow">"EPA’s Blind Spot: Hexavalent Chromium in Coal Ash"</a> Earthjustice & Sierra Club, February 1, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-19"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-19" title="">↑</a> "Damage Case Report for Coal Compustion Wastes," August 2008</li>

<li id="cite_note-20"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-20" title="">↑</a> U.S. EPA Proposed Coal Ash Rule, 75 Fed. Reg. 35128</li>

<li id="cite_note-21"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-21" title="">↑</a> EarthJustice, Environmental Integrity Project, and Sierra Club, "In Harm's Way: Lack of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans and their Environment," August 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-22"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-22" title="">↑</a> EarthJustice and Environmental Integrity Project, "Out of Control: Mounting Damages from Coal Ash Waste Sites," May 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-23"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-23" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.examiner.com/green-culture-in-mankato/coal-ash-waste-tied-to-cancer-causing-chemicals-water-supplies" class="external text" title="http://www.examiner.com/green-culture-in-mankato/coal-ash-waste-tied-to-cancer-causing-chemicals-water-supplies" rel="nofollow">"Coal ash waste tied to cancer-causing chemicals in water supplies"</a> Alicia Bayer, Examiner.com, February 1, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-24"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-24" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/The_Toll_from_Coal.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/The_Toll_from_Coal.pdf" rel="nofollow">"The Toll from Coal: An Updated Assessment of Death and Disease from America's Dirtiest Energy Source,"</a> Clean Air Task Force, September 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-25"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-25" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/Abt-Technical_Support_Document_for_the_Powerplant_Impact_Estimator_Software_Tool.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/Abt-Technical_Support_Document_for_the_Powerplant_Impact_Estimator_Software_Tool.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Technical Support Document for the Powerplant Impact Estimator Software Tool,"</a> Prepared for the Clean Air Task Force by Abt Associates, July 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-26"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-26" title="">↑</a> Dan Gearino, <a href="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2009/03/18/aep_increase.html?sid=101" class="external text" title="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2009/03/18/aep_increase.html?sid=101" rel="nofollow">"AEP given OK to raise rates in Ohio, but about half what it asked,"</a> Columbus Dispatch, March 18, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-27"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-27" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.pickocc.org/news/2011/pressrelease.php?date=04272011" class="external text" title="http://www.pickocc.org/news/2011/pressrelease.php?date=04272011" rel="nofollow">"OCC coalition asks PUCO to stop AEP's collection of $175 million in rates deemed unlawful by Supreme Court of Ohio"</a> Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel, April 27, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-EIA-28">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-EIA_28-0" title="">29.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-EIA_28-1" title="">29.1</a> <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat2p2.html" class="external text" title="http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat2p2.html" rel="nofollow">Existing Electric Generating Units in the United States, 2005</a>, Energy Information Administration, accessed April 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-29"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-29" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101019-710106.html" class="external text" title="http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101019-710106.html" rel="nofollow">"American Electric: Seeking To Replace 5,000 MW Coal Power"</a> Naureen Malik, '"Wall Street Journal, October 19, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-American_Electric_Power-30">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_Electric_Power_30-0" title="">31.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_Electric_Power_30-1" title="">31.1</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-American_Electric_Power_30-2" title="">31.2</a> <a href="http://projects.publicintegrity.org/climatelobby/Results.aspx?ClientName=American%20Electric%20Power&LobbyingFirm=&Expense=-1&LobbyistName=&Quarter=&BizCategory=&Results_BizCategory=1&Results_ClientName=1&Results_Expense=1&Results_LobbyingFirm=1&Results_Quarter=1" class="external text" title="http://projects.publicintegrity.org/climatelobby/Results.aspx?ClientName=American%20Electric%20Power&LobbyingFirm=&Expense=-1&LobbyistName=&Quarter=&BizCategory=&Results_BizCategory=1&Results_ClientName=1&Results_Expense=1&Results_LobbyingFirm=1&Results_Quarter=1" rel="nofollow">"American Electric Power"</a>, Center for Public Integrity, accessed July 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-desmog-31">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-desmog_31-0" title="">32.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-desmog_31-1" title="">32.1</a> <a href="http://www.mediafire.com/file/9dcyzlqzeo1ais9/coal%20ash%20report_lores.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.mediafire.com/file/9dcyzlqzeo1ais9/coal%20ash%20report_lores.pdf" rel="nofollow">Coal-Fired Utilities to American Public: Kiss my Ash</a> DeSmogBlog.com & PolluterWatch, October 27, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-32"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-32" title="">↑</a> Political Economy Research Institute, <a href="http://www.peri.umass.edu/Toxic-100-Table.265.0.html" class="external text" title="http://www.peri.umass.edu/Toxic-100-Table.265.0.html" rel="nofollow">"THE TOXIC 100: Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States"</a>, April 23, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-33"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-33" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.rtknet.org/new/tox100/toxic100.php?company1=1233&chemfac=chem&advbasic=bas" class="external text" title="http://www.rtknet.org/new/tox100/toxic100.php?company1=1233&chemfac=chem&advbasic=bas" rel="nofollow">"American Electric Power"</a>, Toxics Release Inventory, RTK Net, 2002. RTK Net is a project of <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=OMB_Watch" title="OMB Watch">OMB Watch</a>.</li>

<li id="cite_note-34"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-34" title="">↑</a> U.S. Department of Justice, <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2000/March/090enrd.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2000/March/090enrd.htm" rel="nofollow">"U.S. Expands Clean Air Act Lawsuits Against Electric Utilities"</a>, Media Release, March 1, 2000.</li>

<li id="cite_note-35"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-35" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/Superfund/SiteResults.aspx?act=american%20electric%20power" class="external text" title="http://www.publicintegrity.org/Superfund/SiteResults.aspx?act=american%20electric%20power" rel="nofollow">EPA database courtesy Center for Public Integrity</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-36"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-36" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.agrnews.org/?section=archives&cat_id=36&article_id=967" class="external text" title="http://www.agrnews.org/?section=archives&cat_id=36&article_id=967" rel="nofollow">Earth First! Blockades Power Plant</a>, Asheville Global Report, July 26, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-37"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-37" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/2006/07/11/resisting-king-coal-rising-tides-1st-direct-action-in-north-america/" class="external text" title="http://www.risingtidenorthamerica.org/wordpress/2006/07/11/resisting-king-coal-rising-tides-1st-direct-action-in-north-america/" rel="nofollow">Resisting King Coal</a>, Rising Tide website, July 11, 2006.</li>

<li id="cite_note-38"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-38" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/101018604.html?ref=604" class="external text" title="http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/101018604.html?ref=604" rel="nofollow">"Inspectors have cited coal companies near flooded area"</a> WKYT, August 18, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-39"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-39" title="">↑</a> Peter Dykstra and Terry Frieden, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/08/pollution.suit.settlement/index.html" class="external text" title="http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/08/pollution.suit.settlement/index.html" rel="nofollow">"Sources: $4.6 billion settlement in power plant air pollution case"</a>, CNN, October 8, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-40"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-40" title="">↑</a> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, <a href="http://digital50.com/news/items/PR/2007/10/09/DCTU010/u-s-announces-largest-single-environmental-settlement-in-history.html" class="external text" title="http://digital50.com/news/items/PR/2007/10/09/DCTU010/u-s-announces-largest-single-environmental-settlement-in-history.html" rel="nofollow">"U.S. Announces Largest Single Environmental Settlement in History"</a>, Media Release, October 9, 2007. The full decrees are <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html" class="external text" title="http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</li>

<li id="cite_note-jz-41"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-jz_41-0" title="">↑</a> Jonathan Zasloff, <a href="http://legalplanet.wordpress.com/2010/08/26/the-sg-brief-in-connecticut-v-aep-worse-than-you-think/" class="external text" title="http://legalplanet.wordpress.com/2010/08/26/the-sg-brief-in-connecticut-v-aep-worse-than-you-think/" rel="nofollow">"The SG Brief in Connecticut v. AEP: WORSE than you think"</a> Legal Planet, August 26, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-42"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-42" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/12/06/06-aep-supreme-court.html?sid=101" class="external text" title="http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/12/06/06-aep-supreme-court.html?sid=101" rel="nofollow">"High court will review AEP climate change lawsuit"</a> The Columbus Dispatch, Dec. 6, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-43"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-43" title="">↑</a> Environmental Integrity Project, <a href="http://www.dirtykilowatts.org/Dirty_Kilowatts2007.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.dirtykilowatts.org/Dirty_Kilowatts2007.pdf" rel="nofollow">Dirty Kilowatts: America’s Most Polluting Power Plants</a>, July 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-44"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-44" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://carma.org/dig" class="external text" title="http://carma.org/dig" rel="nofollow">Dig Deeper</a>, Carbon Monitoring for Action database, accessed June 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-45"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-45" title="">↑</a> Deaths attributable to fine particle pollution, as estimated by Abt Associates. See interactive map at <a href="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/coal/problems/power_plants/existing/" rel="nofollow">"Find Your Risk from Power Plant Pollution,"</a> Clean Air Task Force interactive table, accessed February 2011. Also see <a href="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/The_Toll_from_Coal.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/The_Toll_from_Coal.pdf" rel="nofollow">"The Toll from Coal: An Updated Assessment of Death and Disease from America's Dirtiest Energy Source,"</a> Clean Air Task Force, September 2010, and <a href="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/Abt-Technical_Support_Document_for_the_Powerplant_Impact_Estimator_Software_Tool.pdf" class="external text" title="http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/Abt-Technical_Support_Document_for_the_Powerplant_Impact_Estimator_Software_Tool.pdf" rel="nofollow">"Technical Support Document for the Powerplant Impact Estimator Software Tool,"</a> Prepared for the Clean Air Task Force by Abt Associates, July 2010</li>

<li id="cite_note-46"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-46" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2710347720100527?type=marketsNews" class="external text" title="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2710347720100527?type=marketsNews" rel="nofollow">"AEP to run 10 old coal units part-time due economy"</a> Reuters, May 27, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-47"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-47" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=7a85de6b-77c8-4d1f-bebd-2f5ebbebf78e" class="external text" title="http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=7a85de6b-77c8-4d1f-bebd-2f5ebbebf78e" rel="nofollow">"International Energy Agency issues warning on carbon capture,"</a> The Vancouver Sun, October 24, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-48"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-48" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.energycurrent.com/index.php?id=3&storyid=20123" class="external text" title="http://www.energycurrent.com/index.php?id=3&storyid=20123" rel="nofollow">"AEP seeks government money for cleaner coal project,"</a> Energy Current, August 20, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-49"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-49" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/American-Electric-Gets-Fed-zacks-2387038129.html?x=0&.v=1" class="external text" title="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/American-Electric-Gets-Fed-zacks-2387038129.html?x=0&.v=1" rel="nofollow">"American Electric Gets Fed Funds,"</a> Zacks Equity Research, December 7, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-50"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-50" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.aep.com/environmental/climatechange/carboncapture/" class="external text" title="http://www.aep.com/environmental/climatechange/carboncapture/" rel="nofollow">"Carbon Capture, Sequestration"</a> American Electric Power website, accessed May 4, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-51"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-51" title="">↑</a> Matthew Wald and John Broder, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/business/energy-environment/utility-shelves-plan-to-capture-carbon-dioxide.html?r=2&ref=energy-environment" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/business/energy-environment/utility-shelves-plan-to-capture-carbon-dioxide.html?r=2&ref=energy-environment" rel="nofollow">"Utility Shelves Ambitious Plan to Limit Carbon"</a> NY Times, July 13, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-52"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-52" title="">↑</a> Scott DiSavino and Timothy Gardner <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/14/us-utilities-aep-carbon-idUSTRE76D34C20110714" class="external text" title="http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/14/us-utilities-aep-carbon-idUSTRE76D34C20110714" rel="nofollow">"AEP halts carbon capture plan due climate inaction"</a> Reuters, July 14, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-53"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-53" title="">↑</a> Ken Ward <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/07/15/w-va-leaders-keep-their-heads-in-the-sand-on-climate-change-and-mountaintop-removal/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/07/15/w-va-leaders-keep-their-heads-in-the-sand-on-climate-change-and-mountaintop-removal/" rel="nofollow">"W.Va. leaders keep their heads in the sand on climate change and mountaintop removal"</a> Coal Tattoo, July 15, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-54"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-54" title="">↑</a> James Fallows <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/07/mountaineer-sobering-news-out-of-west-virginia/241996/" class="external text" title="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/07/mountaineer-sobering-news-out-of-west-virginia/241996/" rel="nofollow">"Mountaineer: Sobering News out of West Virginia"</a> The Atlantic, July 15, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-55"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-55" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/americanelectricpower-infosht1007.html" class="external text" title="http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/americanelectricpower-infosht1007.html" rel="nofollow">"American Electric Power Service Corporation Information Sheet,"</a> U.S. EPA, accessed November 5, 2009</li>

<li id="cite_note-56"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-56" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/200903080488?page=1&build=cache" class="external text" title="http://www.dailymail.com/Business/200903080488?page=1&build=cache" rel="nofollow">"American Electric fires up new scrubber at John Amos plant,"</a> George Hohmann, Charleston Daily Mail, accessed November 5, 2009</li>

<li id="cite_note-bc-57">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-bc_57-0" title="">58.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-bc_57-1" title="">58.1</a> Barry Cassell, <a href="http://www.pennenergy.com/index/articles/newsdisplay/1300993281.html" class="external text" title="http://www.pennenergy.com/index/articles/newsdisplay/1300993281.html" rel="nofollow">"Ohio Power seeks Ohio approval for fast retirement of Sporn coal unit"</a> Penn Energy, Nov. 4, 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-kwj-58">↑ <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-kwj_58-0" title="">59.0</a> <a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-kwj_58-1" title="">59.1</a> <a href="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/06/09/aep-would-shutter-5-coal-plants-to-meet-epa-rules/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wvgazette.com/coaltattoo/2011/06/09/aep-would-shutter-5-coal-plants-to-meet-epa-rules/" rel="nofollow">"AEP would shutter 5 coal plants to meet EPA rules"</a> Coal Tattoo, June 9, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-59"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-59" title="">↑</a> [<a href="http://www.eaglecountryonline.com/news.php?nID=1881" class="external free" title="http://www.eaglecountryonline.com/news.php?nID=1881" rel="nofollow">http://www.eaglecountryonline.com/news.php?nID=1881</a> "Return to News AEP Shutting 3 of 4 Units At Tanners Creek"] Eagle Country Online, June 10, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-60"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-60" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_953d308f-f1a4-5ddf-8aa4-c9d811fc9a3f.html" class="external text" title="http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/article_953d308f-f1a4-5ddf-8aa4-c9d811fc9a3f.html" rel="nofollow">"Utility's cuts could trim demand for Wyoming's Powder River Basin coal"</a> Jeremy Fugleberg, Star-Tribune, June 12, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-61"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-61" title="">↑</a> Laurence Hammack, <a href="http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/breaking/wb/289284/" class="external text" title="http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/breaking/wb/289284/" rel="nofollow">"AEP announces plan to close coal-burning Giles County power plant"</a> Roanoke Times, June 9, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-62"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-62" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703818204576206662079202844.html" class="external text" title="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703818204576206662079202844.html" rel="nofollow">"EPA's War on Coal"</a> Wall Street Journal, June 13, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-63"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-63" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/opinion/20mon1.html?r=1&scp=2&sq=American%20Electric%20Power%20&st=cse/" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/opinion/20mon1.html?r=1&scp=2&sq=American%20Electric%20Power%20&st=cse/" rel="nofollow">"AEP protests too much"</a> New York Times, June 20, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-64"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-64" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9O4GJ6G0.htm" class="external text" title="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9O4GJ6G0.htm" rel="nofollow">"AEP spent $2 million lobbying in the 1st quarter"</a> Bloomberg, June 27, 2011.</li>

<li id="cite_note-65"><a href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Electric_Power#cite_ref-65" title="">↑</a> Annie Sartor, <a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/179UsK/understory.ran.org/2011/07/08/whos-bankrolling-aep-the-coal-company-lobbying-for-more-coal/" class="external text" title="http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/179UsK/understory.ran.org/2011/07/08/whos-bankrolling-aep-the-coal-company-lobbying-for-more-coal/" rel="nofollow">"Who’s Bankrolling AEP, the Coal Company Lobbying for More Coal?"</a> RAN, July 8, 2011.</li>

</ol>

<h3>External resources</h3>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.aep.com/about/history/default.asp" class="external text" title="http://www.aep.com/about/history/default.asp" rel="nofollow">Company History</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.followthecoalmoney.org" class="external text" title="http://www.followthecoalmoney.org" rel="nofollow">FollowtheCoalMoney.org</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.oilchangeusa.org" class="external text" title="http://www.oilchangeusa.org" rel="nofollow">Oil Change USA</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.appalachianvoices.org" class="external text" title="http://www.appalachianvoices.org" rel="nofollow">Appalachian Voices</a></li>

</ul>

<h3>External articles</h3>

<ul>

<li>Kirsty Patterson, <a href="http://www.climatechangecorp.com/content.asp?ContentID=5341" class="external text" title="http://www.climatechangecorp.com/content.asp?ContentID=5341" rel="nofollow">"AEP's energy strategy: Burn coal until told otherwise,"</a> ClimateChangeCorp, May 20, 2008</li>

</ul>

As freshly reported by the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/01/renewable-energy-states_n_4194915.html" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Huffington Post</a>, ALEC is winding down a year of mostly failed attacks on clean energy laws, concluding with the ongoing final battle to <a href="http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2013/10/30/ohio-koch-alec-and-dirty-energy-cos-attack-clean-energy-jobs/" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">weaken Ohio’s renewable portfolio standard</a>and energy efficiency incentives.A new <a href="http://www.progressnow.org/alec/alecvcleanenergy.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">report by Progress Now</a>, co-released by Greenpeace and several other organizations that bring sunlight to ALEC’s dirty work, outlines ALEC’s attacks on state clean energy laws in 2013, as well as bills to keep fracking chemicals secret from the public, its work to promote the Keystone XL pipeline and its work to end regional greenhouse gas reduction programs. At least <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/08/12193/dirty-hands-77-alec-bills-2013-advance-big-oil-big-ag-agenda" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">77 of ALEC’s anti-environmental bills</a> hit the statehouses this year.Now, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is working on new model laws to protect its <a href="http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2012/05/10/whats-on-alecs-polluter-agenda-tomorrow/" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">polluting member companies</a> that participate in ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture task force (EEA).For the first time, ALEC has posted the task force agendas for its States and Nation Policy Summit in Washington, DC this December. In a post on <a href="http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/11/12292/alec-posts-legislative-agendas-while-hiding-its-very-special-interests" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">PR Watch</a>, the Center for Media and Democracy notes how ALEC carefully omitted information that could be used to hold their secretive operations accountable, such as which ALEC members are sponsoring the new model bills.Here is a quick overview of <a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">ALEC’s anti-environmental agenda for its upcoming EEA task force meeting in Washington, DC</a>:<h2 style="border: 0px; margin: 1em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Newly Drafted Model Resolutions</h2>Updating Net Metering Policies Resolution (<a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">p. 11</a>)This bill would make it more costly for people and businesses that produce their own electricity and feeding it back into the electric grid–typically with their own installed solar panels–to pay utilities for using the grid…even though they’re offering up extra electricity generated at their homes or businesses. <a href="http://www.seia.org/policy/distributed-solar/net-metering" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Net metering</a> helps decentralize energy production and encourages the growth of clean energy (especially solar), among other benefits.The intentions of this bill reflect recent conflict in Arizona, where ALEC member* utility Arizona Public Service (APS) has <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/10/arizona-solar-dark-money-aps-net-metering-sean-noble" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">financially supported</a> Koch-funded front groups running attack advertisements against rooftop solar power in AZ.*<a href="http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/04/12/aps-ending-alec-membership-srp-considers-doing-same/" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">APS lobbyist Jessica Pacheco told the Arizona Capital Times</a> that it left ALEC last year. I spotted Ms. Pacheco at ALEC’s annual meeting in Chicago last August. It is possible she paid just to attend the conference. It’s possible APS’ holding company Pinnacle West never left ALEC, or it’s possible that APS lied to the Capital Times just like<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/25/solar-arizona-net-metering_n_4164731.html" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">APS lied to Huffington Post about funding the anti-solar ads</a>.Resolution in Response to EPA’s Plan to Regulate Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act (<a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">p. 7</a>)andResolution Concerning EPA Proposed Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards for New and Existing Fossil-Fueled Power Plants (<a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">pp. 8-10</a>)These two draft resolutions are the newest in ALEC’s ongoing work to block policy solutions to climate change, mainly by slowing down the inevitable phaseout of carbon pollution from coal plants. The new language simply updates ALEC’s previous resolutions to prevent the US Environmental Protection Agency from controlling greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.The latter resolution against greenhouse gas emission reduction includes more specific references to EPA’s New Source Performance Standards and the development of Carbon Capture and Storage technology. ALEC member utilities will likely argue behind the scenes over this language at next month’s meeting since some ALEC members are <a href="http://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/aep_alstom_mountaineer.html" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">already developing CCS</a>, and the ALEC resolution lambasts the technology.This ironically includes American Electric Power–the company that <a href="http://www.alec.org/task-forces/energy-environment-and-agriculture/" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">co-chairs ALEC’s Energy, Environment and Agriculture task force</a>–and Duke Energy, whose Edwardsport coal plant may be <a href="http://en3pro.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/CCS-fact-sheet.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">expanded</a> to include CCS technology. Edwardsport was more than a billion dollars over budget, with <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/blog/power_city/2013/08/green-groups-duke-energy-reach-deal.html?page=all" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">customers footing $2.6 billion of the 3.5 billion bill</a>.<h2 style="border: 0px; margin: 1em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Presentations</h2>ALEC’s presentations often indicate which topics they’ll have model bills for in the future, as they are spending time at their conference paying special attention to these issues, based on the priorities of their corporate members and sister groups in the State Policy Network.ALEC’s posted agendas do not name the people or organizations that will be leading these discussions–something that is included in <a href="http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=8072485" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">private versions of ALEC’s 35-day mailings.</a>On December 6th, ALEC will have several presentations involving fracking and natural gas (<a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">pp. 5-6</a>)<ul style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em 2em; padding: 0px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“Natural Gas as a Motor Fuel”</li><li style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“New Member Introduction: America’s Natural Gas Alliance.” ANGA was founded with help from the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/08/21/ousted-chesapeake-energy-ceo-aubrey-mcclendon-beginning-ohio-land-grab" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">disgraced</a>former CEO of Chesapeake Energy, <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/aubrey-mcclendon" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Aubrey McClendon. </a>Chesapeake Energy is an ALEC member and one of the largest fracking companies in the United States.</li><li style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“EPA’s Adversarial Oversight of States’ Regulatory Regimes for “Fracking,” and What It Means for the Future”</li><li style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">“Discussion: Gauging Interest for Future Natural Gas, Hydraulic Fracturing, and Pipeline Symposium”</li></ul>ALEC will also have a presentation on “EPA Approaches to Regulate Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Power Plants,” another on “Alarmism and the Science of Chemical Risk,” and a special “EPA Strategy Session,” on December 4th.<h2 style="border: 0px; margin: 1em 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.25; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Retiring Old Bills</h2>With two new model resolutions against EPA regulation of greenhouse gases on ALEC’s agenda, ALEC plans to retire its older version of the “Resolution in Opposition to EPA’s Plan to Regulate Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act” (<a href="http://alec.org/docs/EEA_2013_SNPS_35_Day.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">see p. 13</a>).In addition to the older version of its resolution against EPA regulation of greenhouse gases, ALEC also plans to retire a <a href="http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/d/df/3E13-Urging_Congress_to_End_the_Outer_Continental_Shelf_Moratorium_on_Oil_and_Natural_Gas_Exploration_and_Production_Exposed.pdf" target="blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">model resolution promoting offshore oil and gas drilling</a>. This is largely in response to the Obama administration’s cooperation with the oil industry over opening up more of the U.S. coast to drilling.<hr style="border-color: gray; height: 1px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" />The article originally appeared in <a href="http://greenpeaceblogs.org/2013/11/05/alecs-forges-new-bills-for-its-polluting-company-members/" target="_blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none;">Greenpeace blog</a>.

Am Electric Power AEP

Attachments