Xcel Energy is asking state regulators to allow it to keep a coal plant running a year longer than planned to ensure the utility can meet growing electricity needs while its largest power plant is out of commission.
Xcel filed a petition Monday with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission seeking to keep the second unit of the Comanche coal-fired power station in Pueblo County open through 2026. The 335-megawatt plant was scheduled to close by year’s end to help meet state-mandated targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
The PUC will consider whether to extend Comanche 2’s life while Comanche 3, Xcel Energy’s largest single generating unit, is down. The 750-megawatt plant hasn’t worked since mid-August after a malfunction and could be out of action until June.
Xcel Energy-Colorado President Robert Kenney said the company is requesting an extension for Comanche 2 to keep providing reliable service to customers across the state. The staff at the PUC, the Colorado Energy Office and the Colorado Utility Consumer Advocate office signed onto the petition.
Xcel Energy is moving ahead with efforts to fast-track up to 4,000 megawatts of new renewable projects to take advantage of federal tax credits being phased out. However, Xcel doesn’t expect any of those projects to be ready until after 2027, said Jack Ihle,vice president of regulatory planning and policy.
Kenney said another factor in asking to keep Comanche 2 open is problems with supply chains and the timely delivery of equipment and materials. Keeping the unit open while Comanche 3 is offline would also decrease the number of power purchases on the spot market that Xcel would have to make, he added.
Comanche 3 has experienced mechanical and operational problems throughout much of its existence. Xcel, the unit’s majority owner and operator, has agreed to retire it by the end of 2030. One of the three coal units was shut down in 2022.
Xcel said it will report on the Comanche’s 3 status in March and apply for any further variances by June.
Several environmental and community groups said the PUC should demand protections for area residents and ratepayers if Comanche 2 stays open.
“Keeping polluting coal plants online without strong commitments to community protections and operational limits will pile on to the burdens my community experiences, like dirty air and expensive energy bills,” said Jamie Valdez, a Pueblo resident and an advocate with GreenLatinos.
State officials view keeping the plant open as a short-term solution.
“We do feel very much that it makes sense to extend Comanche 2 while Comanche 3 is down and that it will go a long way towards protecting ratepayers from any price spikes during the winter and help to ensure reliability in the summer,” said Will Toor, executive director of the Colorado Energy Office.
PUC Director Rebecca White said the commissioners will discuss the request to keep Comanche 2 open during their weekly meeting Wednesday. “We do expect it to go pretty quickly and be resolved within the next month.”
As for the effects on Xcel’s work to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, Kenney said the company is on track to meet the state target of cutting its emissions 80% from 2005 levels by 2030 even if Comanche 2 runs past its original closure date. He said the utility has reduced emissions 57% so far.
“While Comanche 3 is down, it will likely lead to reductions in emissions in the near term and it doesn’t really affect the long-term trajectory,” Toor said.
The PUC has been working for a while on the transition to renewable energy and approved the retirement date for Comanche 2 in 2018, White said.
“We’ve been very thoughtful about this and have been able to pivot when we need to as we go along,” White said.
The office of the Utility Consumer Advocate, which represents the public before the PUC, decided that keeping Comanche 2 open was the most cost-effective option in the short term, said Joseph Pereira, deputy director. He said the state is still on track for meeting its goals for reducing carbon emissions.
“At the root of it is that UCA, in our broad public interest mission, has to support the idea of resource availability and ultimately keeping the lights on,” Pereira said.
The conservation organization Western Resource Advocates said it will review Xcel’s petition to delay the coal plant’s retirement with a focus on the potential environmental and economic harm.
“This request to delay the long-planned retirement of Comanche 2 will lead to increased costs for utility customers at a time when people are already economically struggling,” said Erin Overturf, clean energy director at WRA.
The plan to close the coal plants in Pueblo County has won both support and disapproval in the county. Proponents have cheered replacing coal with more renewable energy and decreasing pollution. But others, including some business leaders and union members who work at the plants, say renewable energy facilities won’t produce the same level of jobs and tax revenue as the coal plants have and they want to see Xcel replace coal with natural gas facilities or small, modular nuclear reactors.
Xcel Energy has proposed replacing the coal plant with wind and solar power, battery storage and natural gas generation.
Colorado Congressman Jeff Hurd, whose district includes Pueblo County, has asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to issue an emergency order that the two units at the Comanche power plant keep operating to avoid the risk of an energy shortfall if the coal plants close. The Trump administration, which has championed coal and nuclear power, issued emergency directives to keep coal plants in Michigan and Pennsylvania operating despite plans to retire them.
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in Colorado supports the decision by Xcel Energy and the Polis administration to petition the PUC to extend operations at Comanche 2 through the end of 2026, Austin Maier, business manager of IBEW Local 111, said in a statement.