Which state has the least stringent regulations for siting a coal-fired power plant?

[XemaSab]

My boss asked me to find out the different regulatory processes for siting a coal-fired power plant in the southwestern US.

California is assumed to have the most stringent regulations.

So what do you think, O e/e gurus?

:evilgrin:

[LiberalFighter]

1. My first thought was Texas

[hunter]

2. Oh bother, just "expand and improve" an existing site.

Claim it will pollute less and cross your fingers behind your back, especially when it comes to carbon dioxide.

[Nihil]

3. Nevada

Those folks like to gamble so let them bet on the health risks
of a coal-fired plant on the outskirts of a city!

Seriously though, the continual growth of cities there regardless
of energy, food and fresh water supplies suggests that the state
admin don't have much of a clue with regard to environmental matters
so your coal burner can probably sneak in quite easily.

Shame that they'll only compound the problem by putting it in
the middle of some pristine desert ...

[NMDemDist2]

4. I'm thinking it's AZ so the Navajos can keep their plants n/t