Mesaba – and more deals in the offing
October 25th, 2005
Here’s the Mesaba Daily News report of the Scoping hearing:
Environment, jobs top concerns at Excelsior scoping meeting
And here’s the MPR lead=in for today’s meeting:
Coal gasification gets environmental review
Damn, caught in the act! But I couldn’t be bought, the dining room set offered just isn’t enough — I keep telling Micheletti he can’t afford me but he doesn’t get it — he’s been hit by a hockey puck too many times… or was that his brother???
Anyway, today’s meeting was… large… standing room only. Most of the Excelsior crew was there. Reps. Irv Anderson and Loren Solberg and Sen. David Tomassoni (the bill’s primary Senate promoter) were there, Mayor of Taconite and part of the City Council, an Itasca County Commissioner and more… the local elected officials seemed to have no idea of the project details, yet they were all doing their rah-rah promo speeches. How much is Taconite getting in Personal Property Taxes, or is this project exempt? Who is paying for the infrastructure — we know the county is taking on bonding for some… What about public safety necessities, like first responders, the volunteer fire department — it reminds me of Lake City’s volunteer fire department as the first responder to nuclear emergencies!!!! One council member acknowledged this problem, as a fire fighter he would be hard pressed to ignore it, and he was wondering where the needed training would come from. GOOD! Somebody’s thinking here! Chuck Michael, of Short Elliot Hendrickson, and who also runs the “Community Readiness Committee” has at least done his homework, but that’s probably because he actually works on the projects. As opposed to yahoos like Ron Dicklich, a lobbyist for GRE and Range Association of Municipalities and Schools, who gave the most pathetic “we’re going to freeze in the dark in an incubator without a job” comment, after all. He brought up that 6,300MW need and of course no mention of the 16,712MW in the MISO queue, I mean, it’s all from the same report, CapX2020, and you don’t even have to read narrative or do math to figure this one out — it’s pictures — LOOK AT PAGE 7. He’s about to inherit my monikor for Dick Day!!! OH, excuse me, I forgot, what do facts have to do with this… we don’t have the “facts” about this project anyway. Yes, I get that development of a project is always a moving target, but this is absurd.
Before the meeting, there was an informational session where the reps were there to jaw with the folks, which we all did, and we got info that’s not been public before — for example, Highway 7 is going to be rerouted. This was news to the guy who’s land it’s going through, and he learned at the meeting. When asked why he hadn’t been informed, he was told that they’d given plans to neighbors to pass around. Can you spell “communications issues?” Here’s the map, Hwy. 7 is the green line that is on the bottom half, a horizontal near the middle of the plan and then turns down to the south. He was in shock, and as we were talking, Tomassoni walks by, I nail him, “Here’s somebody you need to talk to,” and he was caught for a couple minutes at least. But he said, “I’m the guy you need to talk to, but I’m not the guy to tlak to, I don’t really know what they’re proposing.” Can this be true? Oh, I forgot, what do facts have to do with this…
Here’s Excelsior’s Bob Evans backlit by some fun “facts” about the project that we’ve not been privy to before — can you believe they didn’t have this on handout for the folks? I raise that they should hand this out to the folks there, and there’s no initiative whatsoever. Thankfully, Bill Storm of the EQB/PUC/Commerce (whatever the hell it is nowdays), said he’d post it on their site and Rick Hargis of the DOE said he’d email it to me, but my concern isn’t for ME, it’s that the public needs this information. I can get it one way or another, but if this is a public meeting, the folks need to be able to take this stuff home and digest it. Again, risking sounding like a broken record, how in the hell can people comment on EIS review of a project if they don’t know what the project is?
Excerpts from my Initial Comment:
Comment: Application (grant, project, whatever documentation provided information for the NOI) must be provided to the public at beginning of Comment Period. Meaningful scoping comments are difficult, if not impossible, and are thwarted where there is no project information available at the time of Federal Register publication. Notice was published on October 5, 2005, and to this date, this vague account is the most detailed information published about this project. I contacted the NEPA Document Manager, Mr. Hargis, and received a message that there was no underlying document. I contacted Michael Wadley of Excelsior and was told that there was a grant application that had been submitted, and he would check to see if that could be redacted and released. This dearth of information is not reasonable. It is impossible to guess at scoping issues or bounds, and it is not reasonable to have the public informational meeting just before the scoping meeting the first opportunity for the public to get any idea the details of the project if anything is produced. I’m not confident. But I am assuming that the DOE is not providing this private company with a massive grant and a billion dollars of loan guarantees for a project drawn on the back of a bar napkin. On the other hand, if it is, please consider this the application of Public Energy, Inc., for a similar project and send the check to the address above!
Comment: DOE must conduct wider alternatives analysis. I am disturbed by the DOE�s notion, without citation, that the DOE�s environmental responsibility is lessened because this is not a federal project, and that it is a private project. THIS DEMONSTRATION PROJECT WOULD NOT GO FORWARD BUT FOR DOE FUNDING. Because DOE funding is essential, the DOE�s responsibility is equal to or heightened from a project where there is a federal ownership interest. The DOE is not relieved of its environmental responsibilities under NEPA by ownership or lack thereof.
Comment: This project threatens environmental mitigation steps taken by the MEQB. In an effort to prevent bulk power transfers, increased use of coal generation, and the resultant increased mercury deposition and greenhouse gasses, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requested, and the Environmental Quality Board ordered, limits to the capacity of the Arrowhead transmission line. The capacity limit of the line is �enforced� by a phase shifting transformer, specified for this line to provide stability, and in this case, it was limited to 800 MVA � the line will receive only the electricity the transformer provides. However, Excelsior has discovered that addition of the Mesaba project to the grid creates grid instability:
� The studies showed that development of 345kV lines into and out of Arrowhead Substations causes the 230kV phase shifter installed to control the flows onto the Arrowhead-Weston 345kV line to become ineffective as the phase shifter is effectively by-passed.
o This issue has been brought to the attention of the project developers � Minnesota Power and American Transmission Company � and is being evaluated.From Excelsior Energy Powerpoint presentation to MAPP NM-SPG. Given the grid in the area, the Arrowhead-Weston line is the logical choice, and it�s difficult to imagine an alternate route. The EIS must address the impact of increased mercury deposition and production of greenhouse gasses due to the bypass of the MPCA and EQB limitation.
Comment: This project threatens public safety by putting the grid at risk. In light of the above, the project puts public safety at risk by by-passing a transformer that has a grid stability function. The EIS must address public safety and risk to the grid of Mesaba interconnection.
Comment: If this project is to connect into the Blackberry substation, significant upgrades will be required. According to a Minnesota Power fax of 4/6/99, and subsequent analysis by Steve Leovy, WI-PSC staff engineer, the Blackberry to Arrowhead line and others are already in need of upgrade before this project is even considered. The EIS must examine safety and stability of this interconnection.
I’ll have a lot more to say about specifics, but today I wanted to stress some procedural issues, make sure they get that information must be provided and that the alternatives analysis must be more than “do we finance it or do we not finance it.” Good enough never is.
Here’s the “other Mike,” Excelsior’s Michael Wadley, talking with “The Face of Mesaba” Linda Castagneri and Ron Gustafson.
Here’s Tom getting in the last word. More tomorrow…
The Face of Mesaba & the Cox & Bull Story!
October 21st, 2005
Last night was the Energy Discussion that Mike Bull put together, one of many he’s doing around the state. Here’s his name in lights this week: Energy plan tilts to windmills. Mike’s the Assistant Commissioner for Renewable Energy and Advanced Technologies, and I’d guess he’s probably hitting those areas that need the help that only the Gov’s top energy boy can lend! Coming up soon, Morris, Preston, and somewhere on the Range in December! Without a doubt, it’s campaign season in Minnesota…
As Ray notes in his blog, many of those present were lobbyists — how many can you name in this photo???
After Mike’s presentation, it was opened to questions, and there was a lot of talk about biodiesel, and Jesse Streitz did have great comments about reducing energy and the need to make energy options available to all, making it an individual action that people can really take — I sure couldn’t afford solar or a new hybrid car, much less a home like Ray built for Jesse!
The Face of Mesaba
The drum roll came as Linda Castagneri spoke. She and her husband Ron Gustafson are the “Face of Mesaba.” Linda is a native of the range who grew up with the Michelettis. Ron and Linda are very real people who are faced with this insane concept of trains and trucks roaring through their yard, transmission lines overhead, underground pipe lines for natural gas and water, constant industrial sounds and bright lights… who could have imagined that one day this project would come to their beautiful haven nestled between two lakes in the old growth pine bog?
Linda and Ron are two of the landowners affected by the Mesaba coal gasification plant. Here is the site plan Download file
Linda asked Rep. Cox why he supported the bill exempting Excelsior from a Certificate of Need, and giving them, a private company, the power of Eminent Domain. Ray admitted to supporting the Bill, but stated that it has turned out to be a “bait and switch” as legislators were led to believe the project was to be built in Hoyt Lakes. He did not say that he’d do anything to change it!
Mike Bull stated several times that the Excelsior Energy Plant was not a done deal, and said the state is “kicking the tires” and not quite sure to buy into the project or not. He said it has become very expensive and that no one knows at this point what it will actually cost. Ron, who had the DOE Notice of Intent, reminded him that the Federal Register lists the cost at 1.9 billion, plus the state bond costs, and he let us know that Excelsior Energy had come to the County wanting even more money, more than $50 million for infrastructure. Mike also stated that although the statute exempts Excelsior from a Certificate of Need, it does not prevent the state from requiring Excelsior to prove the need for the plant, and they will have to do this at the PUC when the Power Purchase Agreement goes before the Commission. This statement was contrary to what Bill Storm, the EQB project manager, has previously told Ron and Linda. It’s also contrary to my take on the law and agency process. And claims that “it’s not a done deal” do not alter the fact that everyone concerned about Mesaba will have to participate in every aspect of the permitting process — I’ve already been on this project since December, 2001. It keeps moving forward, and it is moving forward, it has not stopped.
Mike Bull said that neither he nor the state considers coal gasification as a renewable energy source, although there were legislative attempts to classify it as renewable. He thinks the coal gasification process MAY be a cleaner alternative to present coal burning plants and an alternative to nuclear plants, and the state needs to look at all alternatives. Ron pointed out that the Federal Register identifies Coal Gasification as a “Demonstration Project of high economic risk”.
Linda and Ron also provided Cox and Bull with handouts of the law from the 2003 Special Session, Chapter 11, HF 9, photos of their property and their neighbors, and the Federal Register Notice of Intent from the Department of Energy. Mesaba is going forward. It’s time those who promote it recognize the real damage it will do, and recognize the impacts it has on the very real people who live in its footprint and beyond.
This is the face of Mesaba… Linda’s statement was riviting.
It’s time to hold the supporters of Mesaba accountable. You could build tens of thousands of off-grid energy efficient homes before it would offset the negative impact of this one Mesaba plant.
Transmission Projects roaring through Minnesota
September 25th, 2005
From the STrib’s Shortcuts:
Give ’em a break
“This bill is based on the premise that we believe in private free-market capitalism to develop the resources of this land in a cost-efficient fashion.”
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, describing Congress’ new energy bill, which gives $14.5 billion in new subsidies and tax breaks to the oil, gas and nuclear industries.
In Minnesota we have our own version of “giving them a break.” Minnesota invested heavily in NEW coal in last session’s Omnibus Transmission Bill from Hell. As a utility rep said, “You let us build transmission and we’ll build coal, if you don’t, we’ll build distributed generation.” The horse is out of the barn, and here we go with transmission to support coal! Three groups of projects coming soon to a field and town and backyard near you.
Great River Energy, on behalf of the CapX Utilities sent a missive announcing a slight change in plans, following on the heels of their statewide transmission meetings, a “by the way” notice that the utilities are going forward with BIG transmission plans in Minnesota that were NOT discussed at the meetings. Here’s the notice: Download file I’ll just describe them briefly, so you get the large picture.
Here’s the one by me — from Prairie Island to Rochester to LaCrosse, a big new 345kV line, it’s the red dotted line in Minnesota, and blue dotted line in Wisconsin, which I’ve learned they did talk about specifically at the part of the meeting I missed because I’m the eternally late Overland:
This line is claimed to have grown from a Rochester Public Utilities study to cover provision of electricity to Rochester, but it really goes back to the 1998 WRAO report, it’s WRAO Option 2. I have the DRAFT study from Rochester Public Utilities, email me if you want a copy, it’s too big to upload. I’ve found a few things I need to talk to them about, a lot more on that later, but essentially, costs are grossly understated, need is grossly overstated, and the report from a Rochester perspective is a clear demonstration of the need for distributed generation. Oh, well… I’ve been following this study at the MAPP meetings for a while now, and there, and at the Rochester Minnsota Transmission Owners meeting about the Biennial Report, Southeastern Zone they did announce it’s a probable line, that’s after denying it at the MAPP meetings I’d attended. Great, here we go. That’s also what was said about Dairyland’s big coal plant in Adams, so I guess we ought to expect that too, even though it’s not listed on their “Power Supply Updates” page.
… sigh… here’s another one, or two, or three, the red dotted lines, part of the “It’s for Wind!” lie (check Transmission for Dummies #1, 2 – It’s not for Wind!, and 3) and on this map, there’s Big Stone at the western end of the lie, er… line. The divide it into three categories, called “Big Stone II Transmission,” “Buffalo Ridge Outlet” and “Buffalo Ridge — Metro 345kV. Here’s the map:
This is what they say about Big Stone’s 600MW coal upgrade, no suprise for anyone who’s paying attention, but for those who believe the party line, it may be a shock:
The first element to be presented for certificate of need approvals will be transmission facilities associated with the Big Stone generation project. While the Big Stone II partners include some non-CapX members, those of us responsible for transmission associated with Big Stone II have been working closely with the rest of the CapX members and with MISO. As was outlined in the Big Stone notice plan, MISO interconnection studies show that a second unit at Big Stone requires a minimum of two 230kV interconnection lines. The Big Stone partners now intend to propose constructing the line connecting Big Stone and Granite Falls to 345kV standards to better meet and be integrated with CapX, state, and regional objectives. As a result, the Big Stone transmission project, in addition to providing interconnection facilities for a second unit at Big Stone, is now being planned as the first phase of a 345kV line between southwestern Minnesota and the Twin Cities metro area. The Big Stone transmission partners expect to file a certificate of need for these facilities in September.
And last but not least… the “Northwest” project, a misnomer because this first one looks like it ties into Mesaba, which is planned for just a titch north of Bovey, east of Grand Rapids, and the lines there tie into the Arrowhead substation:
And the big honkin’ 345kV line from Fargo to the Metro that will aptly handle that anticipated Coal Creek upgrade:
As we say in transmission, “It’s all connected!”
And as they say in transmission, “You let us build transmission and we’ll build coal, if you don’t, we’ll build distributed generation.”
Take out your WRAO reports, pps. 8, 12, Appendix C-1 p. 1-10, and note that they want to build WRAO Option 2. Hmmm… wasn’t Arrowhead the be all and end all of transmission? But then the’ve permitted parts of WRAO Option 9 and Chisago is WRAO Option 5 and …
Let’s look at what WRAO recommended (p. 12):
Plan 1 (Salem – Fitchburg) – they may do 2 and from LaCrosse to Salem, so…
Plan 2 (Prairie Island-Roch-LaCrosse – to Columbia or W.Middleton) – application pending
Plan 3 (Arrowhead) permitted
Plan 5 (Chisago Weston 345kV) pending at 115/161kV with Arrowhead level capacity
Plan 9 (Lakefield-Columbia) parts to Lakefield are permitted, other parts pending
Plan 10 (King-Weston 345kV) rate increase docket in WI says King-Arpin to be upgraded
WRAO developed many options, recommended that just one, the Arrowhead line, was necessary because it was the be all and end all of transmission, yet here we are with each option considered going forward, some as planned, some morphed, but all of them now planned or permitted.
Yup, it’s all connected. Here we go, massive transmission infrastructure for Minnesota, coming soon to a community near you — or even your own back yard.
Like a coal train, Mesaba rolls along…
August 22nd, 2005
This just in from Ron Gustafson, landowner right by the red and white pine old growth forest where Excelsior Energy announced it wants to put the Mesaba plant, a big coal gasification power plant. Here’s what he’ll see out his door:
The group of local landowners has put together the Minnesota Coal Gasification Plant Information Site.
Ron said this column was in yesterday’s Hibbing Tribune.
Questions remain in Excelsior Energy project
By Aaron J. Brown
The words ?eminent domain? seem harmless on paper, but for some local landowners those words crush dreams.
Ron Gustafson, his wife and brother-in-law own a cabin on Big Diamond Lake in Itasca County they had hoped would be a retirement paradise starting next year. Instead, they recently learned that Excelsior Energy might take over the unspoiled forests around Big Diamond and Dunning lakes to build a coal gasification power plant.
?It would end our Minnesota dream,? Gustafson told me in a recent radio interview on 91.7 KAXE.
Even more troubling was that Gustafson and other affected landowners only found out about possibly losing their land in the pages of their local newspapers.
Two years ago, we heard an idea to produce power on the Iron Range, creating good jobs and needed energy for the Midwest?s increasingly taxed power grid. Excelsior Energy, a fledgling company run by the lobbyist couple of Tom Micheletti and Julie Jorgenson, said the Mesaba Energy Project would involve an innovative new plant on the former LTV mine site in Hoyt Lakes.
Iron Range Resources invested millions of dollars early on, with support from local state lawmakers. Those same lawmakers passed legislation that gave Excelsior the right to use eminent domain in unprecedented ways, while also waiving the law that requires power companies to show they have an actual customer for the power. In most regions of the country, this would never fly, but ?jobs, jobs, jobs? was the rallying cry, and it went through.
Two weeks ago, President Bush signed a massive energy bill that included $800 million in loan guarantees for Excelsior Energy. The project enjoyed support from both sides of the aisle. Now the company says it will raise the remaining funds and start the plant sometime after 2010.
We need growth in Northeastern Minnesota. Retail development from Grand Rapids to Hibbing, possible steel and iron nugget production and a revved up mining industry all feel good after Northern Minnesota faced such bad economic news over the past five years.
But we need to be smart about that growth, and when taxpayers invest in something the way we?ve invested in this Mesaba Energy Project, we need to be firm in our expectations.
We were told this project would be on the site of the former LTV mine, already an industrial location. Instead, Micheletti announced in June that the Big Diamond Lake area and its all-natural surroundings off of Scenic Highway 7 was the new site. I still don?t have a firm idea of the reason for this.
We were told at one time that this project would create as many as 1,000 jobs. In the same June announcement Excelsior halved that figure. And, even 500 jobs seems high when compared to other similarly-sized power plants. How much of this was designed to win political favor?
And there is still lingering doubt in my mind about a 500-plus megawatt power plant where the only possible customer (Xcel Energy) is mandated by the government to purchase power produced from sources like coal gasification. Another major coal gas plant created under a similar set of circumstances in Indiana closed, and couldn?t reopen until once again bailed out by government funding (much of it from the same energy bill signed last week).
Maybe what bothers me the most about this is Excelsior?s impaired sense of irony. You see, the word ?scenic? in Scenic Highway 7 is not just an adjective, but it?s part of the OFFICIAL NAME OF THE HIGHWAY. Abundant signs tout the name, and the road itself leads to Scenic State Park. The site Excelsior now wants to use is in large part an untouched forest, when literally dozens of large, vacant industrial settings exist from one end of the Iron Range to the other.
The former mine sites and other vacant areas around Hibbing seem full of potential power plant sites. Perhaps the power company found it easier to push around private citizens than mining land feeholders?
Indeed, the lakes along Scenic Highway 7 might be ideal channels to send millions of gallons of warm water discharge through wetlands, the Swan and Mississippi rivers according to Excelsior Energy. But that doesn?t make it the best place to put a power plant. As of today, we taxpayers have put more money into this project than anyone else. As an Itasca County taxpayer, I expect better. The Big Diamond and Dunning Lake landowners expect better. So should you.
Producing cleaner energy on the Iron Range remains a sensible pursuit, worthy of support, but don?t sell us on one site and then pull the wool over our eyes. Lots of well-intentioned local leaders supported this project, but if Excelsior plans to abuse its almost unbelievable rights of eminent domain it should not expect the good will to last much longer.
Aaron J. Brown is a columnist for the Hibbing Daily Tribune.
The Minnesota League of Women Voters included the Mesaba Project in its 2005 Capitol Letter — click on Energy scroll down for Mesaba!
Here’s the site they’ve picked: View image
We’ll have to be sure the Mesaba supporters get the thanks they deserve, including Northfield’s Rep. Ray Cox, a coauthor of the Mesaba bill, H.F. 964, and off in Washington, Sen. Mark Dayton and Sen. Norm Coleman… what’s appropriate for something this absurd?
Stop the Mesaba loan guarantees!
July 25th, 2005
The Mesaba (Two Lobbyists & a Wife) coal gasification plant loan guarantees are a corporate boondoggle part of the dreadful energy bill that’s moving forward.
The decision not to shield MTBE manufacturers from environmental lawsuits should clear the way for negotiators to complete work on a final bill, perhaps as early as today, and send it to the House and the Senate for approval by the end of the week…
…The bill includes a raft of measures designed to promote domestic production of oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear power, spur energy conservation and strengthen the nation’s electricity grids.
A few contentious issues remain to be settled, such as whether to require 10 percent of the nation’s electricity to be generated from alternative sources, such as solar and wind power, by 2020, whether to permit a survey of offshore oil and gas resources and how much corn-based ethanol should be added to the nation’s gasoline supply.
The “raft of measures” includes a liferaft for Mesaba, the $800 million in federally guaranteed loans. Toadies ‘R’ Us — Looks like they’re having way too much fun at our expense.
Call and ask them to stop the $800 million in federally guaranteed loans:
> Senator Coleman: (202) 224-5641
> Senator Dayton: (202) 224-3244
> Rep. Gutknecht: 202-225-2472 (energy LA is Eric Keber)
> Rep. Kline: 202-225-2271 (energy LA is Monica Jirik)
> Rep. Ramstad: 202-225-2871 (energy LA is Adam Peterman)
> Rep. McCollum: (202) 225-6631
> Rep. Sabo: (202) 225-4755
> Rep. Kennedy: 202-225-2331 (energy LA is Michael Yost)
> Rep. Peterson: (202) 225-2165
> Rep. Oberstar: 202-225-6211 (energy LA is Kipp Johnson)
—————————————–
Meanwhile, the Mesaba plant moves forward in the Minnesota regulatory process, the Mesaba EQB application expected in August, “or earlier or later,” that’s the word from the EQB’s Bill Storm, who’s handling that project.
But for some inexplicable reason, Mesaba isn’t applying for the Hoyt Lakes site that was the basis for the legislative approval, it’s instead planning to site just north of Bovey. Ron Gustafson, who lives near the site, is part of a group that has put together a web site explaining the Mesaba proposal, and he forwarded the site:
The web site includes the proposed site plans — even the EQB hasn’t posted them because when Excelsior Energy ended their tour of the proposed site, THEY CONFISCATED THE MAPS!!! They’re also on my site in an earlier post.
Here’s something to pay attention to — the legislation for this plant, 2003 Special Session H.F. 9, gave Mesaba unbelievable regulatory circumventions and perks, exempt from Certificate of Need, forced Xcel Power Purchase Agreement so Mesaba didn’t have to worry about selling the power in these times of energy glut, $10 million free money from the Renewable Development Fund, etc, etc, etc… BUT the plant legislation is premised on location on a taconite site. The area around Ron Gustafson is NOT a taconite site.
From Minnesota Coal Gasification:
40.27 (3) that is designated by the commissioner of the iron
40.28 range resources and rehabilitation board as a project that is
40.29 located in the taconite tax relief area on a site that has
40.30 substantial real property with adequate infrastructure to
40.31 support new or expanded development and that has received prior
40.32 financial and other support from the board.
What happend to their other site? This new site sure doesn’t fit the legislative criteria! IS ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS? That should be sufficient to get the application booted out of the EQB before it even lands.
Other coal gasification plants – this section has some information on the Terre Haute plant that was shut down not long after it started because it couldn’t pay its electric bill!!!!
Yup, coal gasification power plant on the tax payers and rate payers tab… great idea…