… and the Prairie Island uprate and dry cask recommendation…
October 27th, 2009
I got a call yesterday that reminded me that I’d forgotten to post this. Hope to see some good coverage — this is an important step in an important decision because it commits us to how many more years of nuclear and nuclear waste?!!??! Is this where we want to be? Literally… this plant is in “my” town and my bluff faces the plant, immediately down river and down wind.
The ALJ’s Recommendation for the Prairie Island uprate and dry cask expansion is out — no surprises here:
We’ll see what the PUC has to say. The legislature has the option of nixing any PUC decision, but I’m not holding my breath.
Goodhue Wind files application
October 26th, 2009
Here we go… Goodhue Wind, LLC has filed an application.
To see the docket, go to www.puc.state.mn.us and search for docket “08-1233.”
It came in the mail today, and I looked at the service list, and I don’t think these guys are very interested in public relations or being good neighbors.
I’m the only non-industry wonk on the service list, no one, not one of the many people who have expressed interest in this project, not one of the many people in the area who have filed comments on various dockets, not one of the many people who attended the wind meeting in Wanamingo a few months ago, NONE were included on the service list.
Let’s see, they first filed this sucker a year ago… and now they’re getting around to filing an amended application.
I’ll post links here soon…
Some of those are pretty big, and the “B-F” wouldn’t reduce, so it’s a link. Oh well…
LEC meets today — MOES presents “Resource Assessment”
October 23rd, 2009
Today’s the day that the Legislative Energy Commission meets to hear about MOES Resource Assessment Study. Focus is on the horse’s ASS of Assessment, it is deserving of one of these guys:
Here it is:
The LEC meeting starts in 10 minutes — hammer down!
FRIDAY, October 23, 2009
12:30 PM
Room: 200 State Office Building
And when you get there, hammer on them, there’s no excuse for a report like this. Look at their forecasts, they admit the system peak was 2006, folks, it’s been downhill from there, that’s more than a “blip” and when you add in the 1.5% conservation mandate, where are we? They’ve not addressed this.
If you look at where Xcel thought we’d be, in their 2004 forecasts for Blue Lake, we’re below where they said we’d be in 2004. Hmmmmmmmmm, take a look at Xcel’s forecast:
And Xcel’s peak demand reality:
And very graphically:
We’re down at least 2-2.5% in 2009 from SEC filings. At this rate, how long before we’re at the 2004 forecasted 9,100MW? MOES, how stupid do you think we are? If I were on the LEC, I’d be outraged! I’m not on the LEC so I’m just … just… lacking in words… If I produced something like this, I’d be fired.
Report on Monday Chisago meeting
October 22nd, 2009
Blake Wheatley promotes his vaporware project (from Chisago County Press, fair use)
Here’s the latest from the Chisago County Press:
Hundreds attend LS Power information meeting sponsored by county and Lent Township
If citizens feel the system still failed to consider issues, the decision of the PUC can be appealed to the state Court of Appeals.
Read the rest of this entry »
Minnesota Resource Assessment Survey
October 21st, 2009
From the Minnesota Office of Energy Security:
… the Minnesota Resource Assessment … sigh…
Get out your waders… from the solicited Comments at the end, from “stakeholders,” (did I miss some notice and comment period here??? Did any of YOU get notice???) the problems raised are nearly universally complaints.
OK, now open it up and look … and in it on page 6 is that MOE’S napkin calulation that they finagled into the CapX 2020 record after we got extracted some damning testimony about decreased demand, this is such utter bullshit, look at this and see for yourself:
And you may ask, what that in the X axis? Good question, there’s no identification. And the Y? Same.
WTF?
This is the report we’ve been waiting so long for?
This is the report that, at the Legislative Energy Commission I testified at, Chair Solon-Prettner was asking for, demanding, because it was way late?
This report was presented in all seriousness to the Legislative Energy Commission? I would hope that I could hear them laughing all the way down here in Red Wing…
Here’s “Capital Costs” from page 19:
And further back, the Preliminary Capital Costs:
Oh, please… Commerce was part of the Mesaba Project, and Elion Amit did the economic analysis. From that 2005 data, this is way way off, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS WHATSOEVER.
IGCC in 2005 dollars was $3,595/kW and now it’s more.
IGCC w/ sequestration is, first, NOT POSSIBLE, and second, price would double just for capture, and the storage can’t be done.
Coal is more expensive that that and you know it.
Wake me up when you can deliver some meaningful numbers.
Look at “Generation by fuel source under selected scenarios” starting on p. 87. In only one scenario does coal go down at all, and that’s for a “National RES” scenario, and it only goes down a teeny teeny bit. Give me a break…
DOH!
If you have questions or comments on this Minnesota Resource Assessment contact:
Marya White, Reliability Administrator
Minnesota Department of Commerce
85 7th Place East. Suite 500
St. Paul, MN 55101
651-297-1773
marya.white [at] state.mn.us
If you want to tell Steve Rakow what you think of his “Forecast Comparison” and analysis:
Steve Rakow
Minnesota Department of Commerce
85 7th Place East. Suite 500
St. Paul, MN 55101
steve.rakow [at] state.mn.us
Once more with feeling…