Westar Energy, Inc. Materials for 43rd EEI Financial Conference November 9-12

Forward Looking Disclosures

The

following

presentation

contains

some

“forward-looking

statements”

with

respect

Westar

Energy,

Inc.’s

(“Westar”)

future

plans,

expectations

and

goals,

including

management’s

expectations

with

respect

future

operating

results

and

dividend

growth.

The

Private

Securities

Litigation

Reform

Act

1995

has

established

that

these

statements

qualify

for

safe

harbors

from

liability.

Although

believe

that

the

expectations

and

goals

reflected

such

forward-looking

statements

are

based

reasonable

assumptions,

all

forward-looking

statements

involve

risk

and

uncertainty.

Therefore,

actual

results

could

vary

materially

from

what

expect.

Please

review

our

Quarterly

Report

Form

10-Q

for

the

period

ending

September

30,

2008

and

Annual

Report

Form

10-K

for

the

year

ended

December

31,

2007

for

important

risk

factors

that

could

cause

results

differ

materially

from

those

any

such

forward-looking

statements.

Any

forward-looking

statement

speaks

only

the

date

such

statement

was

made,

and

not

undertake

any

obligation

update

any

forward-looking

statement

reflect

events

circumstances

after

the

date

which

such

statement

was

made

except

required

applicable

laws

regulations.

The

following

presentation

contains

some

“forward-looking

statements”

with

respect

Westar

Energy,

Inc.’s

(“Westar”)

future

plans,

expectations

and

goals,

including

management’s

expectations

with

respect

future

operating

results

and

dividend

growth.

The

Private

Securities

Litigation

Reform

Act

1995

has

established

that

these

statements

qualify

for

safe

harbors

from

liability.

Although

believe

that

the

expectations

and

goals

reflected

such

forward-looking

statements

are

based

reasonable

assumptions,

all

forward-looking

statements

involve

risk

and

uncertainty.

Therefore,

actual

results

could

vary

materially

from

what

expect.

Please

review

our

Quarterly

Report

Form

10-Q

for

the

period

ending

September

30,

2008

and

Annual

Report

Form

10-K

for

the

year

ended

December

31,

2007

for

important

risk

factors

that

could

cause

results

differ

materially

from

those

any

such

forward-looking

statements.

Any

forward-looking

statement

speaks

only

the

date

such

statement

was

made,

and

not

undertake

any

obligation

update

any

forward-looking

statement

reflect

events

circumstances

after

the

date

which

such

statement

was

made

except

required

applicable

laws

regulations.

Westar’s Strategic Approach

Embrace uncertainty rather than assume it away

Don’t try to outsmart markets or pretend to know the future

Place a high value on flexibility and remaining nimble

Preserving options and off ramps

Avoid over committing to a single strategy

Leverage actions and strategies around our unique attributes

Invest according to our strengths, which may mean we do things

differently than the pack

Collaborative and constructive approach to regulation

More predictability and less volatility

Ultimately results in lower prices for customers

Embrace uncertainty rather than assume it away

Don’t try to outsmart markets or pretend to know the future

Place a high value on flexibility and remaining nimble

Preserving options and off ramps

Avoid over committing to a single strategy

Leverage actions and strategies around our unique attributes

Invest according to our strengths, which may mean we do things

differently than the pack

Collaborative and constructive approach to regulation

More predictability and less volatility

Ultimately results in lower prices for customers

Our Strategy in Practice…

Defer commitments to a new base load plant

Diversify CAPEX across asset types

Flexible capital raising strategies

Raise equity capital through multiple channels

Work with regulators to:

Minimize regulatory lag

Make rate increases smaller and less volatile

Stick to what we think we know

Defer commitments to a new base load plant

Diversify CAPEX across asset types

Flexible capital raising strategies

Raise equity capital through multiple channels

Work with regulators to:

Minimize regulatory lag

Make rate increases smaller and less volatile

Stick to what we think we know

Advantages in Capital Raising

In February increased multi-year revolving credit facility by 50% to

$750 million

Between April 2007 and June 2008 issued more than $500 million

of equity

Three different methods

Three different times

All new equity reflected in recent rate settlement

Between May 2007 and May 2008 issued almost $500 million of

first mortgage bonds at 6.1%-6.6%

Present liquidity (cash and revolver) $380 million

Ample first mortgage bond capacity

Flexible equity shelf

In February increased multi-year revolving credit facility by 50% to

$750 million

Between April 2007 and June 2008 issued more than $500 million

of equity

Three different methods

Three different times

All new equity reflected in recent rate settlement

Between May 2007 and May 2008 issued almost $500 million of

first mortgage bonds at 6.1%-6.6%

Present liquidity (cash and revolver) $380 million

Ample first mortgage bond capacity

Flexible equity shelf

Advantages in Capital Planning & Project Management

Virtually complete with the first phase of large CAPEX plan

Three scrubbers

600 MW of peaking generation

300 MW of wind

First 345 kV transmission line

But haven’t yet started the next phase

Environmental projects at two other coal plants

Next two 345 kV transmission lines

765 kV transmission JV

Virtually complete with the first phase of large CAPEX plan

Three scrubbers

600 MW of peaking generation

300 MW of wind

First 345 kV transmission line

But haven’t yet started the next phase

Environmental projects at two other coal plants

Next two 345 kV transmission lines

765 kV transmission JV

Advantages from Rate Mechanisms

Retail Energy Cost Adjustment (i.e., fuel clause)

Operating as planned

Environmental Cost Recovery Rider

Presently capturing $27 million of annual revenue requirement

$22 million estimated annual increase in June

FERC Transmission Formula Rate & Companion Retail

Transmission Rider

$6 million estimated annual increase in September

Recently settled general rate case (pending final order)

Captured pre-determined plant investments as planned

Reflects CWIP as planned

Set stage for upcoming abbreviated case

Retail Energy Cost Adjustment (i.e., fuel clause)

Operating as planned

Environmental Cost Recovery Rider

Presently capturing $27 million of annual revenue requirement

$22 million estimated annual increase in June

FERC Transmission Formula Rate & Companion Retail

Transmission Rider

$6 million estimated annual increase in September

Recently settled general rate case (pending final order)

Captured pre-determined plant investments as planned

Reflects CWIP as planned

Set stage for upcoming abbreviated case

What This Means in Present Market Turmoil

More control over our own destiny

Not forced into tough capital markets

No need to change our strategy

Can adjust speed of implementation

Avoid the risk of half-completed projects that could reflect dead

regulatory investment

e.g., no half finished plants in need of expensive financing

More control over our own destiny

Not forced into tough capital markets

No need to change our strategy

Can adjust speed of implementation

Avoid the risk of half-completed projects that could reflect dead

regulatory investment

e.g., no half finished plants in need of expensive financing

Drivers of Retail Rate Case

May 2008, filed request for $178 million increase to recover:

Spring Creek investment

Emporia Energy Center

Phase I plant service

Phase II CWIP

Wind generation CWIP

December 2007 deferred ice storm cost

Update capital costs

Higher equity ratio

Request higher ROE

O&M and working capital

May 2008, filed request for $178 million increase to recover:

Spring Creek investment

Emporia Energy Center

Phase I plant service

Phase II CWIP

Wind generation CWIP

December 2007 deferred ice storm cost

Update capital costs

Higher equity ratio

Request higher ROE

O&M and working capital

Key Provisions of the Settlement

$130 million annual revenue increase

Ice storm recovery over five years

Increase in steam generating plant depreciation of $7.6 million

Wind and Emporia CWIP measurement through September 25

Rate base of

$3.1 billion and equity ratio of 51%

For purposes of accounting entries only, 10.4% ROE was cited

No incentive on existing wind projects

Parties agree to use abbreviated rate case to capture balance of

Emporia and wind investment

$130 million annual revenue increase

Ice storm recovery over five years

Increase in steam generating plant depreciation of $7.6 million

Wind and Emporia CWIP measurement through September 25

Rate base of

$3.1 billion and equity ratio of 51%

For purposes of accounting entries only, 10.4% ROE was cited

No incentive on existing wind projects

Parties agree to use abbreviated rate case to capture balance of

Emporia and wind investment

Nearing Closure of First Phase of Major Projects

Second JEC scrubber outage underway and within schedule

Wichita-Hutchinson 345 kV expected in-service before year end

All three wind farms expected in-service by year end

Emporia Phase II on schedule for spring in-service date

Third JEC scrubber outage next spring

Second JEC scrubber outage underway and within schedule

Wichita-Hutchinson 345 kV expected in-service before year end

All three wind farms expected in-service by year end

Emporia Phase II on schedule for spring in-service date

Third JEC scrubber outage next spring

Flexibility With Next Phase of Major Projects

Given conditions in capital markets and economy

We are taking advantage of the flexibility in our strategy

Not backed into a corner with “must do now”

projects

Capability to scale back, stop and re-start any of our second phase

projects without significant penalty or consequences

Expect downward adjustments in our 2009 capital forecast

2009 budgeting in full swing

Given conditions in capital markets and economy

We are taking advantage of the flexibility in our strategy

Not backed into a corner with “must do now”

projects

Capability to scale back, stop and re-start any of our second phase

projects without significant penalty or consequences

Expect downward adjustments in our 2009 capital forecast

2009 budgeting in full swing

Future Financings

Plan for continued use of multiple channels and opportunities as

they present themselves

Amount and type of financing will depend on nexus between our

2009 budget matched with capital market conditions

Next long-term financing likely to be a first mortgage bond offering

Potentially late this year or early 2009

Too soon to gauge next equity offering

Remain flexible with respect to timing and form

Plan for continued use of multiple channels and opportunities as

they present themselves

Amount and type of financing will depend on nexus between our

2009 budget matched with capital market conditions

Next long-term financing likely to be a first mortgage bond offering

Potentially late this year or early 2009

Too soon to gauge next equity offering

Remain flexible with respect to timing and form

Rates & Regulatory Events on the Horizon

Expect order on rate case settlement by late January

FERC approval of forward-looking transmission rate early 2009

Retail TDC to follow shortly

Expect ECRR update June 2009

Expect abbreviated rate case to be filed early-mid next year

Regulatory approvals for Prairie Wind

Expect order on rate case settlement by late January

FERC approval of forward-looking transmission rate early 2009

Retail TDC to follow shortly

Expect ECRR update June 2009

Expect abbreviated rate case to be filed early-mid next year

Regulatory approvals for Prairie Wind

Key operational facts

Pure-play electric

Vertically integrated

Rate regulated

6,500 MW of fuel-diverse generation

675,000 customers

Very low retail utility rates

Key operational facts

Pure-play electric

Vertically integrated

Rate regulated

6,500 MW of fuel-diverse generation

675,000 customers

Very low retail utility rates

Westar Business Overview

Kansas’

largest electric provider

Capable, experienced utility

management team

Track record of meeting and

exceeding commitments

Substantial, transparent,

diversified, regulated

growth

plan

Investment grade financial

profile

Strong liquidity

Solid dividend yield

Constructive regulatory and

political environment and

regulatory mechanics

Capable, experienced utility

management team

Track record of meeting and

exceeding commitments

Substantial, transparent,

diversified, regulated

growth

plan

Investment grade financial

profile

Strong liquidity

Solid dividend yield

Constructive regulatory and

political environment and

regulatory mechanics

Leveraging Unique Attributes

Leverage around unique attributes

Low rates

Quality baseload resources

Minimal present natural gas use

Flexible wholesale contracts

Abundant wind resources

Constructive regulation and energy policy environment

Policy support for added transmission

Create a set of unique advantages that gives us options others don’t

have

Leverage around unique attributes

Low rates

Quality baseload resources

Minimal present natural gas use

Flexible wholesale contracts

Abundant wind resources

Constructive regulation and energy policy environment

Policy support for added transmission

Create a set of unique advantages that gives us options others don’t

have

We Have Much In Our Favor

Coal

80%

Gas

Uranium

14%

0.0¢

1.0¢

2.0¢

3.0¢

4.0¢

5.0¢

6.0¢

7.0¢

8.0¢

9.0¢

10.0¢

Westar Energy North

Westar Energy South

Empire District Electric

(KS)

Kansas City Power and

Light (KS)

National

Average

6.3¢

6.1¢

8.7¢

6.9¢

$91.38

$15.21

$4.51

Uranium

Coal

Gas

Low Rates

Industrial

29%

Other

0.5%

Residential

33%

Commercial

38%

Growing, Diversified Retail Sales

High Quality, Diverse Generating Fleet

Ave. Fuel Cost

$18.42/MWh

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

2007

2011

2015

2019

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

2007

2011

2015

2019

Current agreements expire

from 2008 to 2019

Potential to renew

Potential to recapture

Wholesale Sales

Contract Portfolio

913

Source: Edison Electric Institute 12/31/2007

Our Plan / Progress Report

Status

Timing

Objective

Business Plan

Late 2007

Publish “A Strategic Plan for Uncertain TImes” (comprehensive plan)

Ongoing

Finance capital program targeting 50/50 capital struture

Mid 2008

Roll out first phase of conservation and efficiency programs

Regulatory

Dec 2007

Obtain KCC predetermination for wind

Early 2008

Establish and finalize KCC TDC to mirror FERC formula rate

Spring 2008

Obtain siting authority for Wichita-Oklahoma 345 kV line

Mid 2008

Update FERC formula rate with incentive returns

Spring 2008

File retail rate case

Spring 2008

Request KCC allow regulatory asset treatment of energy efficiency costs

January 2009

Complete retail rate case

Mid 2009

KCC orders in generic dockets on energy efficiency and cost recovery

2009

Obtain utility designation for Prairie Wind Transmission

Not started In progress Completed

Our Plan / Progress Report (continued)

Status

Timing

Objective

Capital Growth Plan

Late 2007

Execute wind contracts

Early 2008

Begin construction of Wichita-Salina 345 kV line

Spring 2008

First scrubber at JEC on line

June 2008

Emporia Energy Center phase I commercial operations of 310 MW

Fall 2008

Second scrubber at JEC on line

Late 2008

Bring 300 MW of wind on line

Late 2008

Construct Wichita-Hutchinson portion of the Wichita-Salina 345 kV line

Spring 2009

Third scrubber at JEC on line

June 2009

Emporia Energy Center phase II commercial operations of 300 MW

Finalize Lawrence Energy Center environmental project plan

Finalize with KCPL La Cygne environmental plan

Late 2008

Secure ROW Hutchinson-Salina portion of Wichita-Salina 345 kV line

Late 2009

Construct Hutchinson-Salina portion of Wichita-Salina 345 kV line

Est. 2009

Roll out AMI/MDM pilot

Early 2010

Secure ROW for Wichita-Oklahoma 345 kV line

Begin construction Wichita-Oklahoma 345 kV line

Not started In progress Completed

Investment Highlights

Transparent and straight-forward strategy

Pure-play, vertically integrated, regulated

electric

utility

Proven, experienced management team

Thoughtful and constructive regulatory mechanics

Stable & predictable

Aimed at reducing rate volatility and maintaining low-rate advantage

Large, diverse, growth plan

100% regulated

Friendly to the environment

Strong financial profile

Diverse revenue base

Investment grade ratings

Competitive total return prospects

Transparent and straight-forward strategy

Pure-play, vertically integrated, regulated

electric

utility

Proven, experienced management team

Thoughtful and constructive regulatory mechanics

Stable & predictable

Aimed at reducing rate volatility and maintaining low-rate advantage

Large, diverse, growth plan

100% regulated

Friendly to the environment

Strong financial profile

Diverse revenue base

Investment grade ratings

Competitive total return prospects

Prairie Wind Transmission, LLC

Joint venture between Westar Energy and Electric Transmission

America

Venture to develop 230-mile, 765 kV transmission in Kansas

50% Westar / 50% ETA

ETA is joint venture between AEP Transmission Holding Company and MEHC

America Transco

Proposed routing in western Kansas

Line

would

extend

from

Wichita

west

Dodge

City

and

then

south

from

Medicine Lodge to Kansas/Oklahoma border

Contemplate 50/50 debt/equity financing with JV issuing its own debt

Estimated in-service date end of 2013

Status

KCC –

filed application to request utility designation

FERC –

filed application for formula rate and incentives for project

Joint venture between Westar Energy and Electric Transmission

America

Venture to develop 230-mile, 765 kV transmission in Kansas

50% Westar / 50% ETA

ETA is joint venture between AEP Transmission Holding Company and MEHC

America Transco

Proposed routing in western Kansas

Line

would

extend

from

Wichita

west

Dodge

City

and

then

south

from

Medicine Lodge to Kansas/Oklahoma border

Contemplate 50/50 debt/equity financing with JV issuing its own debt

Estimated in-service date end of 2013

Status

KCC –

filed application to request utility designation

FERC –

filed application for formula rate and incentives for project

Coal Plant Emission Controls

Eight to 10 year program to improve air emissions

Investments to reduce SO

, NO

, particulates and mercury

Currently rebuilding three scrubbers at JEC

Project estimate $415 million

•

First unit placed in service July 2008

On schedule for:

•

Second unit planned in service fall of 2008

•

Third unit planned in service spring of 2009

Voluntary carbon accord

Eight to 10 year program to improve air emissions

Investments to reduce SO

, NO

, particulates and mercury

Currently rebuilding three scrubbers at JEC

Project estimate $415 million

•

First unit placed in service July 2008

On schedule for:

•

Second unit planned in service fall of 2008

•

Third unit planned in service spring of 2009

Voluntary carbon accord

Capital Expenditures to Reduce Emissions

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

$1,600

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

Particulates

SO2

NOx

Cap Ex

Fossil Capacity Additions

Peaking capacity

Emporia Energy Center 310 MW (phase I) completed spring 2008

Emporia Energy Center 300 MW (phase II) before summer 2009

Potential for smaller additions approximately 2013

Potential for 350 MW intermediate capacity

later next decade

Peaking capacity

Emporia Energy Center 310 MW (phase I) completed spring 2008

Emporia Energy Center 300 MW (phase II) before summer 2009

Potential for smaller additions approximately 2013

Potential for 350 MW intermediate capacity

later next decade

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2007

2008

2009

2010

13%

12%

14%

Capacity

Margin

Total System Peak

Responsibility

Load and Capability Forecast

14%

Planned Capacity Additions

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Emporia Energy Center

610 MW peaking facility

Project on budget at $318 million

Phase II on schedule for in-service

before summer 2009

Emporia Energy Center

610 MW peaking facility

Project on budget at $318 million

Phase II on schedule for in-service

before summer 2009

Estimate potential need for:

Additional peaking capacity about 2013

Intermediate capacity up to 350 MW

possible by middle of next decade

Estimate potential need for:

Additional peaking capacity about 2013

Intermediate capacity up to 350 MW

possible by middle of next decade

Additions of almost

1,100 MW or 17%

Gas

Nuclear

Coal

Customer and Shareholder Benefits

Expect customers to benefit from:

Continued access to low-cost, environmentally compliant generation

Improved system reliability and operational flexibility

Expect investors to benefit from:

Earnings and dividend growth driven by increased investment

Risks managed with timely cost recovery through rate adjustments

More predictability of cash flow

Expect customers to benefit from:

Continued access to low-cost, environmentally compliant generation

Improved system reliability and operational flexibility

Expect investors to benefit from:

Earnings and dividend growth driven by increased investment

Risks managed with timely cost recovery through rate adjustments

More predictability of cash flow

Kansas Energy Policy

Legislature and governor understand importance of energy

Evidence of this leadership includes:

Support for predetermination of ratemaking principles

Recognizing CWIP in rates

Aggressively encouraging renewable resources

Tax incentives

Imposing clear statutory timelines for regulatory matters:

120 days for siting authority

180 days for predetermination

240 days for rate cases

recently,

environmental

concerns

raised

about

new

base load coal

Legislature and governor understand importance of energy

Evidence of this leadership includes:

Support for predetermination of ratemaking principles

Recognizing CWIP in rates

Aggressively encouraging renewable resources

Tax incentives

Imposing clear statutory timelines for regulatory matters:

120 days for siting authority

180 days for predetermination

240 days for rate cases

recently,

environmental

concerns

raised

about

new

base load coal

Kansas Corporation Commission

Commission

Three commissioners, by gubernatorial appointment

Members serve staggered four-year terms

Thomas Wright, (D) chairman, term through 3/15/2010

Joe Harkins, (D) term through 3/15/2011

Michael Moffet, (R) term through 3/15/2008 (though still serving)

Staff

Combination of appointments and civil servants

Traditional cost-of-service framework

Recent adoption of constructive mechanics

Commission

Three commissioners, by gubernatorial appointment

Members serve staggered four-year terms

Thomas Wright, (D) chairman, term through 3/15/2010

Joe Harkins, (D) term through 3/15/2011

Michael Moffet, (R) term through 3/15/2008 (though still serving)

Staff

Combination of appointments and civil servants

Traditional cost-of-service framework

Recent adoption of constructive mechanics

Methods of Cost Recovery for Westar

Revenue Requirement

Method of Recovery

Comment

Fuel, purchased power and

environmental consumables

Timely adjustment based on

forecasted cost, with annual true-

up to actual costs

Allows recovery of actual fuel and

purchased power costs, protecting

against fluctuations in price, plant

performance and fuel delivery risk

Environmental capital

Environmental Cost Recovery Rider

adjusts annually

Allows timely recovery in rates of

capital costs for emisson controls

and signals to customer cost of

clean air

Transmission rate recovery

FERC formula rate adjusts

annually; KCC has approved TDC

tariff to allow a corresponding retail

adjustment

Allows timely recovery of

transmission system operating and

capital costs

General capital investments

Traditional rate case, but improved

through predetermination and

CWIP statutes

Typical rate case reflects current

level of operating expenses and

most recent plant investment

Property taxes

Annual adjustment to reflect

current property taxes

Allows timely recovery of actual

property tax costs in current rates

Extraordinary storm damages

Traditionally deferred accounting

treatment as rate base

Eliminates current period charge

for extraordinary storm expense,

reducing earnings and rate volatility

for these events

Provides timely price adjustment for fuel and purchased power

costs

Has been monthly

Rate case settlement changes to quarterly

Retail rates based on forecast of fuel and purchased power

costs and retail sales

Difference between forecast and actual is accrued/deferred

Quarterly approach should yield small differences

Annual settlement of accrued/deferred balance

RECA also used to rebate “asset-based”

wholesale margins as

a credit to retail cost of service

Beginning with new rates in February 2009, credits will match actual

results

Energy Marketing (i.e., non-asset) margins continue to be accounted for

below the line

Provides timely price adjustment for fuel and purchased power

costs

Has been monthly

Rate case settlement changes to quarterly

Retail rates based on forecast of fuel and purchased power

costs and retail sales

Difference between forecast and actual is accrued/deferred

Quarterly approach should yield small differences

Annual settlement of accrued/deferred balance

RECA also used to rebate “asset-based”

wholesale margins as

a credit to retail cost of service

Beginning with new rates in February 2009, credits will match actual

results

Energy Marketing (i.e., non-asset) margins continue to be accounted for

below the line

Retail Energy Cost Adjustment (RECA)

ECRR adjusts retail rates annually to reflect capital costs for

emission controls

Investment at December 31 begins recovery in rates following June

Eliminates need to file a rate case to capture rate base additions

Return of

and on

capital that is already in service

Return on

capital not yet placed in service (i.e., CWIP)

ECRR speeds recovery of investments in emission control

equipment

ECRR adjusts retail rates annually to reflect capital costs for

emission controls

Investment at December 31 begins recovery in rates following June

Eliminates need to file a rate case to capture rate base additions

Return of

and on

capital that is already in service

Return on

capital not yet placed in service (i.e., CWIP)

ECRR speeds recovery of investments in emission control

equipment

Environmental Cost Recovery Rider Mechanics

Regulatory lag limited to months, rather than longer lag typical

with

traditional rate case filings

Equipment investment not yet in-service receives the pretax return

investment until the project is complete, at which time it will

then

also receive a return of

the investment

(1) Illustration reflects only the projects publicly announced and assumes annual investment in-service at year end

(2) Illustration uses ˜

11% pretax return and 5% depreciation recovery

Regulatory lag limited to months, rather than longer lag typical

with

traditional rate case filings

Equipment investment not yet in-service receives the pretax return

investment until the project is complete, at which time it will

then

also receive a return of

the investment

(1) Illustration reflects only the projects publicly announced and assumes annual investment in-service at year end

(2) Illustration uses ˜

11% pretax return and 5% depreciation recovery

Clean Air Investment (1)

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Year 1

7.7

7.3

6.9

6.6

6.3

Year 2

36.7

34.9

33.1

31.5

Year 3

207.8

197.4

187.5

Year 4

198.4

188.5

Year 5

206.2

Year 6

Total Investment - net

7.7

44.0

249.6

435.5

620.0

Annual ECRR Revenues (16%) (2)

0.6

4.1

23.3

53.8

Cumulative ECRR Revenues

0.6

4.7

28.0

81.8

Illustrative ECRR Mechanics

FERC formula transmission rate

Annual update of FERC transmission rate to reflect changes in the cost of

service

Tariff updated annually in October using projected test year

•

Forecasted capital expenditures

•

Forecasted O&M

•

Tariff is based on year end consolidated capital structure

Allowed ROE 11.3%

Updated FERC transmission changes effective January 1

Annual true-up calculation compares projected revenue requirement to actual revenue

requirement, any difference incorporated into October update

Recovery of approved rate incentives on Wichita to Salina transmission line

Incentive ROE of 100 basis points above authorized FERC ROE, or 12.3%

Accelerated depreciation of 15 years vs. 45 years

Transmission Delivery Charge (TDC)

Kansas statute permits matching adjustment to retail rates to reflect changes in

transmission-related costs

FERC formula transmission rate

Annual update of FERC transmission rate to reflect changes in the cost of

service

Tariff updated annually in October using projected test year

•

Forecasted capital expenditures

•

Forecasted O&M

•

Tariff is based on year end consolidated capital structure

Allowed ROE 11.3%

Updated FERC transmission changes effective January 1

Annual true-up calculation compares projected revenue requirement to actual revenue

requirement, any difference incorporated into October update

Recovery of approved rate incentives on Wichita to Salina transmission line

Incentive ROE of 100 basis points above authorized FERC ROE, or 12.3%

Accelerated depreciation of 15 years vs. 45 years

Transmission Delivery Charge (TDC)

Kansas statute permits matching adjustment to retail rates to reflect changes in

transmission-related costs

Transmission Cost Recovery

Predetermination

Prior to construction of a generating facility, a utility may ask KCC to

predetermine ratemaking principles that will apply to recovery of the

investment over its expected useful life

Received predetermination ruling on both Emporia Energy Center and wind

additions

Construction

Work in Progress (CWIP)

The KCC shall include CWIP in rates when recovery is requested as part of a

rate case

Per predetermination orders, 2008 rate case included CWIP for:

$202M or approximately 72% of the wind investment

$79M or 66% of Emporia Energy Center Phase II

Predetermination

Prior to construction of a generating facility, a utility may ask KCC to

predetermine ratemaking principles that will apply to recovery of the

investment over its expected useful life

Received predetermination ruling on both Emporia Energy Center and wind

additions

Construction

Work in Progress (CWIP)

The KCC shall include CWIP in rates when recovery is requested as part of a

rate case

Per predetermination orders, 2008 rate case included CWIP for:

$202M or approximately 72% of the wind investment

$79M or 66% of Emporia Energy Center Phase II

Statutes for Predetermination and CWIP

Target 50/50 capital structure

Well positioned to finance planned investment

Investment grade bond ratings

$730 million revolver through 2012

Modest maturities to refinance

Target 50/50 capital structure

Well positioned to finance planned investment

Investment grade bond ratings

$730 million revolver through 2012

Modest maturities to refinance

Shaded area represents period of high planned capital expenditures

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

Commitment to Credit Quality

September 30, 2008

(millions)

Long-term

$2,042

Preferred

Common

2,192

Total Capitalization

$4,255

Debt Maturity Schedule

Debt

48%

Equity

52%

Preferred

<1%

(1) Upgraded August 2008

Secured

Unsecured

Outlook

Moody's

Baa2

Baa3

Stable

Fitch Ratings

(1)

BBB+

BBB-

Stable

Standard & Poor's

BBB

BBB-

Stable

Financial Highlights

In October revised 2008 earnings guidance down to $1.35 -

$1.45

Citing primarily cooler weather

Excludes potential favorable tax settlement

Fourth consecutive year of solid dividend growth

Recent 7.4% increase

Yield of 6%

Dividend target payout 60% -

75% of earnings

In October revised 2008 earnings guidance down to $1.35 -

$1.45

Citing primarily cooler weather

Excludes potential favorable tax settlement

Fourth consecutive year of solid dividend growth

Recent 7.4% increase

Yield of 6%

Dividend target payout 60% -

75% of earnings

$0.92

$1.00

$1.08

$1.16

$0.00

$0.20

$0.40

$0.60

$0.80

$1.00

$1.20

$1.40

2005

2006

2007

2008

$0.92

$1.00

$1.08

$1.16

$0.00

$0.20

$0.40

$0.60

$0.80

$1.00

$1.20

$1.40

2005

2006

2007

2008

Indicated

annual rate

Financing Philosophy and Plans

Internal funds to finance dividends and replacement capital

Fund growth plan, as necessary, with blend of debt and

equity to maintain target capitalization

Multiple equity channels available to increase flexibility and

reduce risk and cost

Dribble plan

Secondary offer

Negotiated transactions

Block trades

Planned appropriately with rate setting process

Internal funds to finance dividends and replacement capital

Fund growth plan, as necessary, with blend of debt and

equity to maintain target capitalization

Multiple equity channels available to increase flexibility and

reduce risk and cost

Dribble plan

Secondary offer

Negotiated transactions

Block trades

Planned appropriately with rate setting process

Management and Organization Structure

Executive Management

President & CEO, Bill Moore

EVP & COO, Doug Sterbenz

EVP & CFO, Mark Ruelle

EVP, Public Affairs / Consumer

Services, Jim Ludwig

Officers average [20+] years utility

experience, largely with Westar

Independent Board of Directors

Non-executive chairman

All directors other than CEO are

independent

Executive Management

President & CEO, Bill Moore

EVP & COO, Doug Sterbenz

EVP & CFO, Mark Ruelle

EVP, Public Affairs / Consumer

Services, Jim Ludwig

Officers average [20+] years utility

experience, largely with Westar

Independent Board of Directors

Non-executive chairman

All directors other than CEO are

independent

Board of Directors

Bill Moore

President and CEO

Mark Ruelle

Exec. VP, Chief

Financial Officer

Doug Sterbenz

Exec. VP, Chief

Operating Officer

Jim Ludwig

Exec. VP, Public

Affairs and

Consumer Services

Mike Lennen

VP, Regulatory

Affairs

Larry Irick

VP, General

Counsel and

Corp. Secretary

Greg Greenwood

VP, Generation

Construction

Tony Somma

Treasurer

Lee Wages

VP, Controller

Bruce Akin

VP, Operations

Strategy and

Support

Kelly Harrison

VP, Transmission

Ops & Environmental

Services

Ken Johnson

VP, Generation

Caroline Williams

VP, Distribution

Power Delivery

Peggy Loyd

VP, Customer Care

Jeff Beasley

VP, Corporate

Compliance and Internal Audit

Audit Committee

Wholesale Sales

Market-based sales (asset-based margins)

Opportunistic sales using as available

capacity

1/3 short -

real-time to month

1/3 mid -

month up to 6 mos.

1/3 long -

6 mos. up to a 1 year

Margins reflected in retail rates through

RECA

Market-based sales (asset-based margins)

Opportunistic sales using as available

capacity

1/3 short -

real-time to month

1/3 mid -

month up to 6 mos.

1/3 long -

6 mos. up to a 1 year

Margins reflected in retail rates through

RECA

Energy marketing (non-asset margins)

60% real-time to next day; 25% few

days to a few months

Energy transactions unrelated to our

generating assets

Market pricing

Financial and physical trading sourced

outside our control area

15% Energy management –

managing

load and resources for others

Not reflected in rates

Energy marketing (non-asset margins)

60% real-time to next day; 25% few

days to a few months

Energy transactions unrelated to our

generating assets

Market pricing

Financial and physical trading sourced

outside our control area

15% Energy management –

managing

load and resources for others

Not reflected in rates

Tariff-based sales

Long-term agreements

Cost-based tariffs

Primarily to coops, municipals and

participation agreements with other utilities

Reflected as credit to retail rates

Tariff-based sales

Long-term agreements

Cost-based tariffs

Primarily to coops, municipals and

participation agreements with other utilities

Reflected as credit to retail rates

Westar Power Plants

Westar's

Operator

Years Installed

Pulverized coal

Jeffrey Energy Center

2,016.0

Westar

1978, 1980, 1983

Lawrence Energy Center

532.0

Westar

1954, 1960, 1971

Tecumseh Energy Center

204.0

Westar

1957, 1962

LaCygne Station

709.0

KCPL

1973, 1977

Nuclear

Wolf Creek

545.0

WCNOC (1)

1985

Gas steam turbine

Gordon Evans Energy Center

526.0

Westar

1961, 1967

Hutchinson Energy Center

170.0

Westar

1965

Murray Gill Energy Center

287.0

Westar

1952, 1954, 1956, 1959

Neosho Energy Center

67.0

Westar

1954

Gas combustion turbine

Abilene Energy Center

72.0

Westar

1973

Gordon Evans Energy Center

296.0

Westar

2000, 2001

Hutchinson Energy Center

233.0

Westar

1974, 1975

Spring Creek Energy Center

272.0

Westar

2001

Tecumseh Energy Center

38.0

Westar

1972

Emporia Energy Center

610.0

Westar

Construction (2)

Gas combined cycle

State Line

204.0

EDE Co.

2001

Diesel

Gordon Evans Energy Center

3.0

Westar

1969

Hutchinson Energy Center

3.0

Westar

1983

Wind

Jeffrey Energy Center

1.4

Westar

1999

Central Plains

99.0

Westar

Construction (3)

Flat Ridge

50.0

Westar

Construction (3)

Capacity at 12/31/2007

6,178.4

Est. capacity at 7/31/2008

6,488.4

Future installed capability

6,937.4

(1)

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Company is a company formed specifically to operate Wolf Creek

for its owners. WCNOC is governed by a board of directors consisting of the CEO of WCNOC

and senior executives of the plant owners.

(2)

300MW of phase II to go in service before summer 2009

(3)

Under construction with planned in service by year end 2008

77.7%

101.5%

90.3%

100.0%

73.7%

89.3%

90.1%

87.0%

-10%

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

110%

Coal Capacity Factor

Wolf Creek Capacity

Factor

Coal Availability

Factor

Nuclear Availability

Factor

77.7%

101.5%

90.3%

100.0%

73.7%

89.3%

90.1%

87.0%

-10%

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

110%

Coal Capacity Factor

Wolf Creek Capacity

Factor

Coal Availability

Factor

Nuclear Availability

Factor

Westar Energy

2007 Results

NERC

5-Year Average

Plant Performance

Wolf Creek Generating Station

Commercial operation in September 1985

1166 MW Westinghouse PWR

Co-owners

Westar Energy –

47% (548 MW)

Great Plains Energy –

47%

KEPCo –

Operated by Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation

Separate and dedicated operating company

Owned and governed by plant’s co-owners

Current operating license until 2025

September 2006 filed request for 20-year extension

Progressing as planned

Operates on 18-month fuel cycle

Next scheduled refueling and maintenance outage Fall 2009

Commercial operation in September 1985

1166 MW Westinghouse PWR

Co-owners

Westar Energy –

47% (548 MW)

Great Plains Energy –

47%

KEPCo –

Operated by Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation

Separate and dedicated operating company

Owned and governed by plant’s co-owners

Current operating license until 2025

September 2006 filed request for 20-year extension

Progressing as planned

Operates on 18-month fuel cycle

Next scheduled refueling and maintenance outage Fall 2009