Legalectric

Seeing so many drought posts, photos of the Mississippi River at such low levels, looking at the Elephant Butte reservoir and the Rio Grande, drought affecting bird migration through California, essentially drought throughout much of U.S., particularly east of the Mississippi:

… and as I was deleting files, cleaning up computer as I clean up hard copy boxes and boxes of old files (i.e., the Mesaba Project, glad to be putting that one away), I found a report on water needs of power plants, it’s old, but I’d guess relevant, eh?

Here’s the 2011 update:

2011 Update: Estimating Freshwater Needs to Meet Future Thermoelectric Generation Requirements

Interesting that a search doesn’t turn up anything newer!!! Another from 2011:

A Review of Operational Water Consumption and Withdrawal Factors for Electricity Generating Technologies

There is this, so July 2022, must need other search terms???

NETL Co-Develops New Model for Sustainable Freshwater Use by Power Plants

When boats are having a hard time getting around on the Mississippi River, what does this mean for all the power plants dependent on the Mississippi for their water supply? Even our lovely garbage burner here on the river, not to mention Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant!

EXCELSIOR ENERGY’S MESABA PROJECT

PARTIAL DOCUMENT REPOSITORY

Well, a bit more than 20 years ago… January 15, 2002, just after the start of the legislative session, I was at an energy committee meeting, Senate? House? I think Senate was first, then heard again at House, and the following year they got their legislation through as a part of the 2003 Prairie Island bill.

• The Excelsior Energy link I’m using is compliments of waybackmachine. Note that now, if you plug in “excelsiorenergy.com” it becomes “excelsiorcapital.com (Excelsior Energy Capital).” essentially at a marina at 21960 Minnetonka Blvd.! Related?

Anyway, there was a presentation back in 2002 about the greatest thing since sliced bread (NOT!), a coal gasification project proposed for “somewhere” on the Range. Here’s what they presented:

Note the parts about “brownfield” and “existing infrastructure.” LIES, it’s that simple. Here’s what their site looked like, this was at the DOE and locals site visit in 2005:

Starting in 2005, I was representing “mncoalgasplant,” landowners and residents near the proposed project, joined in tandem by Citizens Against the Mesaba Project (CAMP) (site circa 2013 with live links, thanks waybackmachine!). We had such active folks, every hearing was PACKED, and eventually the project faded, never formally declared dead, but piece by piece, it went away.

HOWEVER, Excelsior Energy did manage to get an save passed by the legislature for a natural gas plant:

Week before last, I picked up files from a cohort who shall remain unnamed, and am scanning in boxes of files, to post here, and recycle hard copies for biomass (UGH, but that’s what Red Wing does. Thanks, Xcel Energy!). I’ll be posting them, some interesting stuff if you’re into energy and political and capital intrigue, some purely inside baseball that no one will care about.

MONEY TRACKING – Spreadsheets and invoices to IRRB for reimbursement

Various Contractor Invoices (some redacted)

What a pain in the patoot that was — TWO ENTIRE WASTEBASKET OF SCANNING!

Rio Tinto Press Release from February 2022 about its Talon mine (Talon Metals, Talon Nickel, whatever…):

DOE backs Rio Tinto led team to explore carbon storage at Tamarack

Did we learn nothing from the Mesaba Project and their bogus “carbon capture and storage” scam? Apparently not, here we go again…

Tesla will buy nickel from planned Talon Metals Minnesota mine

Here’s Talon’s June 2022 powerpoint:

This project is planned for the area around Tamarack, north mostly.

The Talon application to “continue” the “exploration plan” was approved earlier this year by the DNR, on April 12, 2022 (scroll down at link), less than a month after it was applied for!

The initial “exploration plan” was approved by the DNR on April 5, 2021:

Oh, but wait, that’s NOT the initial plan, there were two earlier applications to the DNR, also approved, oh, make that FOUR:

I’m BAAAAACK! Have had that awful sinus stuff turning into bronchitis, never again will I spread straw around after weeding the garden without wearing a mask. It’s been THREE WEEKS, really hard to get anything done, so I’ve not been doing anything, and I’m still hacking and wheezing, but have had 3 days now with only one episode of coughing up a lung in the middle of the night, so finally getting some sleep. That said, I’ve had camping reservations since last winter, so off we went with the Wawona 6 with its roomy vestibule “office!”

Spent the better part of a week at Clubhouse Campground, in the Chippewa National Forest, and it’s a great spot. Fishing reigns, and boats of all sorts, pontoons, kayaks, canoes, in addition to the big fishing boats pulled by big pickups (and big travel trailers to match). There were few during the week, maybe 4-5 sites occupied in each of the north and south loops. It’s cheap, and with the senior pass, 1/2 price! Reservations and more info: Clubhouse Campground.

I had wanted to go up there for years, and at long last, so off we went. Why? Here we are, sitting at Clubhouse Lake, looking east to the other side, at the huge chunk of land my father used to own, lots of lakeshore and quite a ways back into the woods.

From the info I got after my mother died, the land is highlighted on Itasca County map, with “Sold 1955?” written in — close, because my father brought a tree from the land and planted it in our backyard, house bought in 1955. I just can’t get over that he sold that land!!!!

We had a direct path from our campsite, #14, down to the lake on the other side of the loop:

The story is that the guy who owned the land just to the north, which “My Lake Road” went through to access my father’s property, would not allow access. Don’t know if there was an easement, or if that was a public road — now it is open to the many parcels along the shore (the plot was divided up decades ago, I think it was then “Lot 9” and has since been split up, and it’s hard to tell, his parcel may have extended all the way to that bold line to the east:

We went down Clubhouse Lake Road to My Lake Road and to the end of the road:

It’s in Itasca County, where I spent a lot of time circa 2005-2010 during the fight against the Excelsior Energy Mesaba Project. Like Freeborn County, it’s a home away from home. We checked out the North Star campground, also in Chippewa Nat’l Forest, just south of Marcell on 38, which also has lakeshore sites, and there are so many more campgrounds in the forest:

Camping in Chippewa National Forest

We also went to many of the sites on the “Edge of the Wilderness” trail, which really isn’t much — this is the “Scenic Overlook” SNORT!

The “Lost Forty” was worthwhile, 40 acres of trees that clear cutting missed due to survey error, so the old growth remains. More picnic tables, please!! A while back a youtube had appeared about it, can’t seem to find that one, but here’s another:

Back in the Mesaba Project daze, I’d learned that the Joyce Estate was up there, really odd considering that the Joyce Foundation was a massive funder of coal gasification promotion. The proposed site for the Mesaba Project was about 10 miles as the crow files from the Joyce Estate. What on earth were they thinking??

I wasn’t up for a long hike, any exertion sets me coughing and wheezing, so we’ll get there another time.

Summit Pipeline Solutions, LLC, has been threatening to file an application for a pipeline, well, pipelines, several, around Iowa, and also southern Minnesota in Jackson and Martin counties, in Nebraska, South Dakota, and getting into North Dakota. The Iowa docket was opened up in October, people have been commenting and objecting.

CLICK HERE for the Iowa Utility Board docket summary!

The Iowa Petition was filed last Friday, you can find it and all the appendices at the link above.

The Petition filed by Summit Carbon Solutions was so detail-lite that I filed this, with some basic questions to be answered, basic info to be provided:

Here’s what I think they need to consider, a very narrow part of it, but based on what I learned through the Mesaba Project CO2 capture fiasco:

• The total CO2 generation of each facility proposed to utilize this pipeline;
• The tons/year of CO2 to be captured from each facility proposed to utilize this pipeline;
• The percentage of total CO2 generation at each facility to be captured and shipped from each facility proposed to utilize this pipeline;
• Megawatts of CO2 capture technology at each facility and whether there is sufficient capacity in facility transmission to operate carbon capture equipment;

• Efficiency impact of CO2 capture to each facility proposed to utilize carbon capture;
• Pumping stations at each facility to bring psig to pumping level and megawatt requirements of each;
• Disclosure of transmission load and capacity and whether there is adequate transmission capacity at CO2 generation facilities to handle CO2;
• Locations and megawatts of each pumping station along the pipelines’ approximately 681 miles traversing Iowa;
• Disclosure of transmission infrastructure, load, and capacity for pumping stations at each location along the pipelines’ approximately 681 miles traversing Iowa;
• Disclosure of company’s plan for acquisition of land for pumping stations and transmission lines to power pumping stations;
• Megawatt requirements for all the pumping stations combined for total parasitic load;
• Disclosure and consideration of CO2 impacts of increased electric generation required to capture CO2, pump into pipeline; pump through pipeline, and pump into earth at receiving end;
• Disclosure and consideration of annual operations and maintenance costs.
• Disclosure of locations and total area of land needed and costs for easements and fee purchases;
• Disclosure and consideration of cost per ton of CO2 capture, pipeline, pumping stations, and transmission capital and interconnection costs, and easements for all infrastructure.

That should keep them busy for a while. I attached the Mesaba Project proposal to give them an idea that these considerations are REAL, and that these CO2 proposals are not all they’re cracked up to be. CO2 capture is difficult and expensive, even small amounts cost a lot in dollars, and costs a lot in efficiency, and that’s not even getting into pipelines sending it somewhere. Yet they had this vision… a nightmare:

And the important details weren’t revealed then, and for sure aren’t now. From Mesaba Project’s Exhibit EE1067, p. 20:

Details matter, facts matter, and what’s hidden here matters.

Meanwhile, back in Minnesota, anticipating an application of some sort, the Public Utilities Commission has requested comments on whether the definition of “hazardous” for pipelines should include “CO2.”

INITIAL COMMENTS DUE TODAY! JUST 2 HOURS LEFT!

But really, look at that — the only thing they think is worth addressing is amending the definition of “hazardous liquid.” Good grief… we need CO2 specific rules.

My initial comment:

And then after a quick review of the Summit Carbon Solutions Petition, got this filed today, with the Excelsior Energy Mesaba Project bogus proposal for CO2 capture and sequestration (to the plant gate!!! What then? They didn’t say… ahem…), so I let the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission know what I’d filed in Iowa, not that they care, and revived Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project exhibit EE1067, their bogus CO2 capture proposal, TO THE PLANT GATE:

Once more with feeling:

Details matter, facts matter, and what’s hidden matters.