IBJNews

Duke uncertain about impact of Indiana unit shutdown

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Officials at Duke Energy don't know how soon they will be able to shut down two coal-burning units at a southern Indiana power plant after deciding to drop a multimillion-dollar project to convert them to natural gas.

The company must reduce air pollution from its four-unit Gallagher plant near New Albany under settlement of a federal lawsuit.

Duke had considered a $71 million project to build a 19-mile gas pipeline that would go underneath the Ohio River to the plant. Duke has now told Indiana regulators it will pay $68 million to buy a greater share of a power plant near Cayuga, about 30 miles north of Terre Haute.

Company spokeswoman Angeline Protogere tells The News and Tribune that some of Duke's 75 employees in New Albany will lose their jobs or be transferred if regulators approve the shutdown plan.

Protogere said Duke hoped for a ruling on its plan so that it could resolve the federal case by mid-November.

"Complying with the agreement we have with the federal government in a way that is most economic with our customers is the overriding consideration in all of this," she said.

Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke agreed in 2009 to spend about $80 million to cut sulfur dioxide emissions at the New Albany plant by nearly 35,000 tons a year.

That was part of the company's $93 million deal with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency over clean air violations at the plant where unauthorized changes significantly boosted air pollution.

Environmentalists have called the plant, which dates back to 1958, one of the nation's dirtiest in terms of air pollution produced per unit of electricity.

Protogere said Duke officials didn't yet know when the two units at the New Albany plant were expected to be shut down.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT