TOPEKA | A controversial coal plant expansion in Western Kansas could move ahead despite a regulator’s objection under a proposed law pitched Wednesday by plant supporters.

But the plant would have to reduce its carbon emissions and pay a tax on any excess carbon it puts out. That’s meant to address worries that the plant would add to global climate change.

“This is really a bill that’s fair to both sides,” said Rep. Rob Olson, an Olathe Republican and vice chair of the House energy committee. “It’s a great compromise and it’s groundbreaking action.”

The bipartisan bill aims to defuse what became a hot political fight after Department of Health and Environment Secretary Rod Bremby rejected Sunflower Electric Power Corp’s plans to expand its Holcomb, Kan. coal-fired plant.

While supporters touted the bill as the first of its kind in the United States, many states already put caps on emissions from coal plants. And critics say the bill could actually allow more emissions because the penalty for exceeding the cap is a “pittance.”

Bruce Nilles, director of Sierra Club’s Midwest Clean Energy Campaign, said the bill could lead to Kansas’ becoming the “ashtray of the Midwest.

“Kansas is the first state that we know that is proposing to accelerate global warming,” Nilles said. “That is a real black eye for Kansas to be the one state right now proposing to accelerate global warming.”

In rejecting Sunflower’s proposal to expand its plant, Bremby, an appointee of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, cited estimates that the plant would emit 11 million tons of carbon dioxide, a leading contributor to global climate change.

Many lawmakers, especially those from Western Kansas, cried foul: The plant, they said, would be cleaner than any currently operating, create jobs and investment in a struggling region, and provide a reliable and affordable energy source. Sunflower has filed suit challenging Bremby’s October decision.

Sebelius and Bremby have yet to weigh in on the bill. A Sebelius spokeswoman said the governor wasn’t involved in crafting the legislation, though Sebelius has said she was “in conversations” with plant supporters. Any attempt by Sebelius to fight the bill or veto it could set up a political standoff.

The proposal has several pieces, some meant to satisfy environmental groups and others meant to please supporters of the coal plant. The most significant portions would make it more difficult for regulators to reject plants, and put in place new emission rules for plants that are built.

The bill would rewrite state law to say the Secretary of Health and Environment can’t hold utilities to a standard higher than the Federal Clean Air Act unless he has legislative approval first.

That would take away the discretion Bremby used to reject the Sunflower plant expansion last year. Missouri already precludes regulators from going beyond federal law.

The bill, if made law, would also give Sunflower 60 days to ask Bremby to reconsider its earlier rejection. Bremby would then have 15 days to issue a new decision.

“And this time he better have a good reason (if he rejects the plan),” said Sen. Jay Emler, a Lindsborg Republican who chairs the Senate Utilities Committee. Emler, like many lawmakers, criticized Bremby for rejecting the plant even though it met all current environmental standards.

If the expansion is approved, the new plant would have to reduce carbon emissions by 20 percent within one year and an additional 10 percent within 10 years.

The bill would allow utilities to emit more carbon in exchange for investing in renewable energy, conservation or new, more eco-friendly technologies.

Plants that fail to meet the standards would pay a carbon tax of $3 per ton of carbon dioxide.

But Nilles said that $3 fee “is a pittance.” In Europe, the cost of a ton of CO2 is running from $20 to $30 a ton. The rules would apply to new plants but not existing ones.

Sunflower spokesman Steve Miller said the utility can likely meet the new rules.

“It’s quite a step,” Miller said. “But I don’t think it will harm our project. We’re going to be for this bill one way or another.”

The bill also includes new energy conservation standards for public schools and state government buildings; a new energy task force; new rules to allow those with solar panels to sell excess power to utilities; and a ban on so-called “merchant” power plants that sell wholesale power to utilities.