UPDATED Friday, December 12, 2008 --- 10:40 a.m.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Wisconsin Power & Light says it won't appeal state regulators' decision rejecting the utility's proposal to build a coal-fired power plant along the Mississippi River at Cassville.

The Public Service Commission said the proposed $1.3 billion plant was too expensive and would create too much air pollution.

WP&L contended it needed the plant to handle increasing demand for electricity.

The Alliant Energy subsidiary has been working on the plant proposal since early 2006. Plans called for a 300-megawatt facility that would provide enough energy to power 150,000 homes.

Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

___________________________________________________

UPDATED: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 --- 4:20 p.m.

Alliant Energy's plans for a multi-billion dollar new coal and bio-fuel plant in our area have been rejected.

It's a victory for some environmentalists but is leaving a community disappointed.

The plant would have been built in Portage or Cassville and has some in Cassville worried about their communities future.

It's a plan that split the environmental community, would have raised utility bills and now has Alliant Energy headed back to the drawing board.

For months the arguments have been loud and clear but after a Tuesday decision only one side was singing the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin's praises.

Ryan Schryver of Clean Wisconsin says, " We're extremely excited. We think this is a watershed moment for Wisconsin's energy future and really opens up the door for renewable energy."

It is a door some say is opening because another is closing on Alliant Energy. State regulators are rejecting their plans to build a $1.3 billion coal and biofuel plant.

Alliant Spokesperson Rob Crain says, "Certainly we're disappointed but at the same time we're looking forward to working with the commission to determine what's next for the state and what's next for the customers of Wisconsin Power and Light."

The plant would have burned 80-percent coal and 20-percent biomass like switchgrass and wood.

Environmentalists were split on whether it was a good first step in renewable energy, or still too much coal.

Regulators shared the worry saying the plant could quickly become outdated if carbon dioxide regulations were tightened.

Tim Le Monds with the Public Service Commission says, "At the end of the day this is still a coal plant and our models show a very inefficient design."

Another concern was cost that would be passed down to customers.

Crain says, "Certainly bills would have gone up with this proposal, absolutely. No matter proposal we put forward bills are going to go up. It's a matter of what we heard today, commissioners felt bills were going to go up too much under this proposal."

Le Monds says, "I think what we were clear on today is that this is the wrong project at the wrong time."

Alliant says there's still a rising electricity demand that needs to be met and they'll need to go back to the drawing board to find a solution.

The decision leaves the community of Cassville very disappointed.

They were looking forward to new jobs and an economic boost and this afternoon their tourism coordinator tells us, for a small town this was a big opportunity.

___________________________________________________

UPDATED Tuesday, November 11, 2008 --- 12 p.m.

Wisconsin regulators say no to new power plant

MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- State regulators have rejected a plan to build a new coal-fired power plant in southwestern Wisconsin.

Alliant Energy subsidiary Wisconsin Power & Light has been working for months to win permission for the $1.3 billion plant in Cassville on the Mississippi River. The company says the plant could produce enough energy to power 150,000 homes.

Environmentalists have opposed the project. But Alliant says it would use renewable fuel for 20 percent of the plant's output and shut down an aging coal-fired boiler in Sheboygan.

Public Service Commission Chairman Eric Callisto says the project looks too expensive and the emissions control proposals won't offset the plant's pollution. He suggested Alliant buy power from elsewhere or consider natural gas-fired plants.

Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

___________________________________________________

UPDATED Sunday, November 9, 2008 --- 2:15 p.m.

MADISON, Wis. (AP) --- Wisconsin regulators plan to decide this week whether to approve plans for a new $1.3 billion power plant.

Alliant Energy wants to build a 300-megawatt coal-fired facility in Cassville or, as an alternative, Portage. The power company says it would use renewable fuel for 20 percent of the plant's output and shut down an aging coal-fired boiler in Sheboygan as part of the deal.

The Public Service Commission is expected to decide whether to accept Alliant's application at a meeting Tuesday.

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.

___________________________________________________

Posted September 10, 2008 --- 8:00 p.m.

Environmentalists are butting heads over a proposed coal plant in Southwest Wisconsin.

It's a plant that if approved, could be financed on the back of people like you, the utility paying family.

Now, both sides are rolling out all the stops.

The chants of an angry opposition are only matched by the roar of a diesel engine, as the debate over a controversial coal plant makes its way to the state capitol, both sides fighting to sell their opinion to others.

Clean Energy Advocate Ryan Schryver says, "There are better alternatives out there."

George Meyer with the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation says, "We think this is the right project and a good balance for the environment."

The project is a $1.3 billion expansion of a coal plant in Cassville.

Alliant Energy says if the expansion is approved, they'll burn 20 percent renewable fuel, things like the switchgrass and wood residue, to go along with burning 80 percent coal.

It is a plan that has the support of many, including some environmentalists.

President of Better Environmental Solutions Brett Hulsey says, "It's important to switch to switchgrass, biomass and other low polluting fuels and this plant is the first step towards doing it."

For others, burning 80 percent coal is still too much to overlook.

Jennifer Feyerherm with the Sierra Club says, "When you mix it with coal, all of those benefits go out the window. We're still accumulating global warming pollution in our atmosphere."

The price is also coming under fire.

Executive Director of the Citizens Utility Board Charlie Higley says, "They're using a technology that's not very efficient. It's like buying a car with bad gas mileage."

A truck provides another view, that this is progress and it comes with a price.

Many opponents argue that burning any coal is too much and simply conserving energy could solve the problem, but others say it's an unrealistic approach to meeting increasing demand.

The state Public Service Commission has until December 15th to rule on the project.