COLUMBIA, S.C. — Environmental advocates are sounding the alarm over a proposed gas-fired power plant near the Edisto River.
The proposal is part of a recently introduced bill dubbed the ‘South Carolina Ten Year Energy Transformation Act.’
John Tynan, President of Conservation Voters of SC, expressed concerns over the bill, dubbing it the "polluter profits bill”.
“We are facing the most significant threat to South Carolina's environment that this state has ever seen,” said Tynan.
The proposed power plant, slated to be constructed in Colleton County, has raised questions about its impact on the nearby Edisto River and surrounding homeowners.
“Gas plants while touted as a source of reliable energy come with significant costs. And those costs will be passed on disproportionately to marginalized communities, low-income households in vulnerable populations,” said the director of the South Carolina Energy Justice Coalition.
It’s unclear how much the project would cost and still needs to go through several approvals before it is finalized.
Director of External Affairs for Santee Cooper Mollie Gore tells News 19 the plant is necessary to meet South Carolina’s growing energy needs.
“We also need the capacity to serve new people AND new industries. We also need new capacity because we’re planning to retire 4 coal plants in the next decade,” said Gore.
Gore added that Santee Cooper produces 2,100 megawatts of solar power.
“We just need something To keep the lights on when solar power’s not generating,” said Gore.
RELATED: Dominion Energy awards over $250,000 to SC nonprofits: Here's what some are doing with their grant.
Advocates also compared the project to the failed $9 billion V.C. Summer Nuclear plant.
“We're still paying for it out of our own pockets. Some people are already paying 30% of their monthly income on energy bills,” said Rep. Heather Bauer.
Additionally, the bill includes provisions that could reshape the state's energy regulatory framework.
Among the proposed changes is a reduction in the Public Service Commission from seven members to three, subject to approval by the General Assembly.
A house panel heard hours of testimony for and against the proposal on Tuesday. They did not take any action on the bill.
“Our goal is to try to find the best possible solution to a very real problem that is facing our state. That problem is going to be energy generation in the future,” said Rep. Jay West.
While the bill has broad bipartisan support, not all lawmakers are on board.
“96% of the energy that's coming online in the United States is clean energy. Let's make sure we do this right so we are not the 4%,” said Rep. Seth Rose.