The DNR has announced a Supplemental EIS for the Essar Steel project (f/k/a MSI).

THREE DAYS NOTICE!

March 25, 2010 from 5:30 – 7:30 pm

Nashwauk-Keewatin High School

400 2nd Street

Nashwauk, MN, 55769

Notice published 3/22 for a meeting on 3/25?

CLICK HERE for the DNR’s page for the MSI EIS.

Here’s the document that is open for comments until April 21, 2010:

Essar – SEIS Preparation Notice

From the original MSI proposal, here’s the chart of Potential To Emit from the Air Permit:

MSI Air Permit – Potential to Emit Chart

So for a 50% increase, multiply those numbers in the Potential to Emit Chart by 150%.  Take a look at those numbers and ask if that’s what you’d like in your lungs and fish.

In light of the changes proposed, a few issues:

* Does Essar now or anytime during the term covered by the supplemental EIS now being considered, and the term of the air permit currently issued, intend to use any amount of coal or metallurgical coke in any part of the mining, taconite or steel production processes or for energy at the Essar Steel Minnesota, LLC Nashwauk area facility, mine(s) or waste disposal and tailings sites.

* How many tons per day of coal/coke are projected be required for the facility during full operation in July, 2013, July, 2018, and July, 2023.”

* How many peak and average megawatts of electricity are now projected to be required for the facility in each year of operation, and specifically during peak operation in July, 2013, July, 2018, and July, 2023.

* How many peak and average million cubic feet per hour of natural gas are now projected to be required for the facility during full operation in July, 2013, July, 2018, and July, 2023.

* When will MPCA put air permit amendment out for review and comment?

And now for the Essar Supplemental EIS:

CLICK HERE for the DNR’s Supplemental EIS for Essar page.

Here’s their announcement from the March 22, 2010  EQB Monitor:

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

PREPARATION NOTICE

DNR will prepare a Supplemental EIS on a proposal by Essar Steel Minnesota to increase the production capacity of the Nashwauk facility’s crusher, concentrator, and taconite pellet plant from 4.1 million tons per year (mtpy) to 6.5 mtpy. This will require the addition of a crusher/concentrator line, and the installation of a larger pellet furnace, to the project evaluated in the original Minnesota Steel Project EIS.

Page 4 EQB Monitor Vol. 34, No. 6
Publication Date: March 22, 2010

The SEIS is designated to deal only with impacts, alternatives, and mitigation that are no longer adequately examined in the original EIS due to the changes in the project, information, or circumstances.

The DNR proposes that the following alternatives, impacts, and issues will be examined as part of the SEIS.

Alternatives: The SEIS will address four alternatives for the increased production in taconite pellets: 1) the Proposed Alternative (Increase taconite pellet production from 4.1 mtpy to 6.5 mtpy), which was not addressed in the original EIS; 2) the No-Action Alternative, which is the original “Build or Proposed Project” Alternative evaluated in the Minnesota Steel EIS; 3) a re-evaluation of best available control technology (BACT) for criteria pollutants whose emission are estimated to increase in amounts greater than the significant increase thresholds under 40 CFR Part 52, for any proposed changes to the BACT identified in the original EIS; and 4) air emissions control technology alternatives for mercury.

Impacts and Issues: surface water quantity and quality; wild rice; solid waste generation; air quality; contribution to global greenhouse emissions; mercury; cumulative air quality: Class I PSD Pollutants, Class I Acid Deposition and Ecosystem Acidification, and Class I Visibility Impairment; cumulative mercury; cumulative effects – climate change; and socioeconomics.

Special Studies or Research: updated mine plan; updated water quantity and water quality balance; wild rice; solid wastes generation estimates and disposal options; air emissions inventory; BACT evaluation for air emissions; Class I air quality analysis; Class II air quality analysis; mercury mass balance and control technology assessment; human health screening level risk assessment; screening level ecological risk assessment; greenhouse gas emissions inventory; cumulative effects on Class I air quality – PSD pollutants; cumulative effects on Class I air quality – acid deposition and ecosystem acidification; cumulative effects on Class I air quality – visibility impairment; cumulative health risk screening assessment; cumulative mercury; cumulative effects on climate change; socioeconomic effects.

The DNR will accept written comments on the Preparation Notice during a 21-day period beginning March 22, 2010. Comments must be received by 4:30 PM on April 12, 2010. Comments may be emailed to environmentalrev@state.mn.us with “Essar Steel” in the subject line.   If using the email address, please include a name and mailing address so that it can be added to the mailing list.

A public informational meeting will be held on March 25, 2010 at the Nashwauk-Keewatin High School, 400 2nd Street, Nashwauk, MN, 55769, from 5:30 – 7:30 PM.

A draft SEIS is tentatively expected to be released for public review between October to December, 2010. The contact person at the DNR is: Bill Johnson, Planning Director, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155; 651-259-5126; bill.johnson@state.mn.us.

From the sanctuary of her $585,000 (assessed) Edina home by the country club, Kathering Kersten goes on another inciteful rant.  Somebody, please, lock her up in Gitmo so she gets a feel for what it’s all about!

In today’s STrib:

Katherine Kersten: ‘Pro bono,’ in this case is proterrorist

I couldn’t resist:

Showing ignorance of our “legal” system in practice

What
does Katherine Kersten know about constitutional law? Or practice of
law? Let’s see… there’s a “Katherine Kersten” at an Edina address,
attorney #0143078, “NOT AUTHORIZED: SUSPENDED FOR NON-PAYMENT OF FEES”

It was a packed house for the Upper Pittsgrove meeting regarding the Stella Solar project, or American Green Power Holding’s solar project, or whoever, they’re one and the same, Ed Stella is VP of American Green Power Holding, and according to their SEC filing, he did an “arms length” lease agreement with himself!  From which he’ll get $1.3 million annually for ~600 acres of land.  … sigh… I am really in the wrong business.  It’s time to put together a vaporware project!

There were so many people that they decided to hold this part of the Planning meeting at the Grange Hall, so when they were done with the first agenda item, then everybody came over to the Grange.  All the chairs were filled, and there was hour after hour of good questions.

In New Jersey, towns get an escrow to hire experts to review an application, and in this case, their experts are good.  Sarah Birdsall, particularly, did a good analysis.  I need to get the scanner working and post it.  She’s requesting that the Town require a copy of the Power Purchase Agreement — I also want to see the PJM application.

UPDATE: I’d looked at the PJM queue, but I didn’t go back far enough.  It’s in the “V” queue, and per Rania, their engineer, there are five 20MW queue spots, but I found 6, plus a 3MW, in Upper Pittsgrove (she’d said Shirley substation) so ???  Anyway, let’s get those feasibility studies in the record!  And the rest as they come out.  Given what the distribution system looks like there, and the low load, I’m not believing they can add in 100MW without some infrastructure changes, like substation expansion, new transmission (reconductored?  bundled?  double circuit?).  We shall see.

The other thing that I think is really important is the economics of this, which Birdsall gets to when she wants a copy of the PPA.  They don’t have one yet, and with the kidns of payments going to Stella under the lease, $1.3 million annually, and a $7.5 million kicker when they get the regulatory and land use permits nailed down, it’s very hard to see how a solar project would or could cash flow with those kinds of outgoes.  That lease and $7.5 could well make the project unmarketable.

Here’s the report from Today’s Sunbeam:

Upper Pittsgrove solar farm plan tabled – for now

Saturday, March 20, 2010
By Phil Dunn
pdunn@sjnewsco.com

UPPER PITTSGROVE TWP- A proposal to build a 512-acre solar farm here was tabled at Thursday night’s land use board meeting after over 200 residents filled the Elmer Grange to ask questions and express their concerns about the project.

The land use board decided to table the issue to gather more information from their own professionals to provide a clearer picture of how this plan will or will not fit into the township’s master plan.

“I think this is being rammed through at record speed and we should slow down and really take a look at this application,” said resident Mike Mathis.

The project as it stands right now is split into two sections – an east and west site.

The east parcel in total is comprised of 177 acres of farmland located near the intersection of U.S. Route 40 and Burlington Road. Ninety acres of that property would be used for solar panels.

The west parcel would be located along Route 77 and its intersections with Newkirk Station Road, Colson Road, Bridgeton Road and Jefferson Road. Of that 681-acre property, 422 acres would be used for solar panels.

“This is a horrible idea and bad planning to put solar panels on what potentially could be the downtown area of Upper Pittsgrove,” said Mathis. “I don’t see an upside to this.”

The applicant, Atlantic Green Power provided a three dimensional rendering of what the solar farms will look like if implemented. Extensive landscaping will surround the facility minimizing the site of the panels with trees. Fencing will also be put up for security.

“Eight-foot high evergreen trees will be planted in front of an eight-foot high fence,” said Evan Hill, engineer for Atlantic Green Power.

The fence will also have a one or two inch gap at the bottom to allow for small wildlife to enter and exit the site, said Hill.

Though the project will cover a roughly 850-acre area the actual surface area that will be covered with panels is quite less.

“The surface area of panels for the project includes approximately 75 acres over the entire 858 acres site,” said Hill. “That is nine percent of the total developable land.”

In total, the project will generate 72 megawatts of electric that will be sold to Atlantic City Electric Co. This is enough electricity to service 7,000 homes.

Issues of additional electric poles needed to transfer energy from the solar panels to the PJM power grid were still unclear as Director of Technology and Strategic Planning Rania K. Pontikos said those studies are not complete as of yet.

Resident Nancy Merritt expressed at the meeting that she believed Atlantic Green Power is not in this for the environmental benefits, but they are developing the project strictly to make a profit.

“This is a for-profit project,” said Merritt. “No one is in it to save the planet. They want to make a profit.”

Other residents brought up noise concerns and the potential of decreased value to their property.

The noise would come from approximately 80 inverter cooling units that will be placed throughout the 512 acre site.

Steve Vavirk, sworn in as an expert witness from Sun Energy, said roughly 65 decibels of sound will be given off from the cooling inverters.

Vavirk said the refrigerator-size inverters give off a noise similar to that of an air conditioning unit.

“We all heard the Orchard Substation wasn’t going to produce noise, but come by my house and hear that going 24/7,” said Merritt, referring to Atlantic City Electric’s facility on Bridgeton Road in the township.

Vavirk said the inverter will run only in the daytime when the panels are producing energy, but will turn off at night.

No decision making will be made on the application until at least the May land use board meeting.

Land Use Board Solicitor George Rosenberger said the board has roughly 90 days to make a decision or ask for an extension.

This is a map of the footprint of the 78MW Stella Solar and Atlantic Green Power project proposed for Upper Pittsgrove, New Jersey.  I’ve ehard there are others planned nearby, but that this is the biggest.

Project description from Atlantic Green Power Holding Company 3Q 10-Q filing:

Pittsgrove Solar Farm

There are two meetings coming up about this project:

Informational Meeting

Elmer Grange Hall

Tuesday, March 16, 2010 from 6 to 8:30 p.m.

and the Land Use meeting where the town will approve or deny the application:

Upper Pittsgrove Town Hall

Thursday, March 18, 2010 at 7:30 p.m.

Now you all know how I love solar, from the solar hot water my father designed for the Minnesota Zoo to those simple little heaters you can make or buy:

Build a Simple Solar Heater

Northern Tool sells simple solar air heaters

Every house needs these simple solar heaters.

Solar PV should also be on the roof of every big box there is, and on every home.  But to be clear, I don’t think it belongs covering prime ag fields a long way from load.  That isn’t “highest and best use,” and  just doesn’t make sense when you consider the capacity factor of solar and the line loss over transmission.  So, this project seems odd…

Why do it?  Well, look who is involved and the incentives — means, motive and opportunity — and given that, I hope the town will take a close look before jumping, at the very least, require these conditions (off the top of my head):

1. No ag land be removed from production; and
2. No ag land be removed from ag preservation designation; and
3. Commercial solar be limited to commercial and industrial areas; and
4. Commercial solar be limited to roofs in rural areas.

WHO IS GOING TO BUY THIS POWER?

LET’S SEE THE POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT!

The article way below, from Today’s Sunbeam, says it is to be built on land that “is currently owned by Ed Stella and will be leased to Atlantic Green Power…” but the Atlantic Green Power site says that Edward Stella, Jr., is the “Vice President of Project Development.”  From what I can see, this is their FIRST project.  Edward Stella as VP?  Really, it’s right here, so we’re not exactly talking about an arms length transaction:

Edward Stella, Jr.

Vice President of Project Development, Director

Edward Stella, Jr. was appointed as the Vice President of Project Development and as a Director of Atlantic Green Power Holding Company on February 3, 2010. He also was a founder of Atlantic Green Power Corporation, the wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlantic Green Power Holding Company, and has served as a Director thereof since its inception on September 17, 2009. He has over 30 years of experience in land development, land clearing and mulching operations. He is the President of Stella Contracting, Inc., one of the largest land-clearing companies operating on the East Coast, and the President of South Jersey Agricultural Products (SJAP), a company engaged in the sale of top soil and mulch to such customers as Scott’s, Coastal Supply, Home Depot and Lowes. Mr. Stella has had the honor of being nominated by Ernst & Young LLP for Entrepreneur of the Year in 2000 in the greater Philadelphia area.

If he’s connected to “such customers as Scott’s, Coastal Supply, Home Depot and Lowes” why aren’t they putting solar on the roofs of those big boxes, where it can be used, and not on prime ag land far away from big boxes?

Atlantic Green Power Holding Company has been in existence since September 17, 2009, and Edward Stella, Jr., has been “Vice President of Project Development” and a “Director” for all of a month.

A press released based blurb provides two sources for more information:

Robert Demos, Jr., President & CEO of Atlantic Green Power Holding Company

and

Howard Greene, Greene Inc., and CLICK HERE FOR GREENEINCPR.COM — HA!!

So now, let’s look at Lodestar Mining… from their site, their ONLY press release listed posts these links for Atlantic Green Power and Lodestar.  CLICK ON THESE LINKS THAT THEY PROVIDED:

AGPH per yahoo

So keep digging – here are their SEC filings

LGST – their own link says “There are no All Market results”

Hmmmmmmmmmmm…

CLICK HERE for Lodestar’s 10-Q for the year ending June 30, 2008, with this statement:

Lodestar’s financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and settlement of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business for the foreseeable future. Since inception, the Company has accumulated losses aggregating to $31,301 and has insufficient working capital to meet operating needs for the next twelve months as of June 30, 2008, all of which raise substantial doubt about Lodestar’s ability to continue as a going concern.

CLICK HERE FOR LATE FILED 2008 10-K.

From their 10-K regarding their one option contract:

As of March 13, 2009, the second option payment of $75,000 had not been made. Accordingly, Lodestar executed an extension agreement dated March 12, 2009 with Claim Lake Nickel wherein Claim Lake agreed to extend the term for the second payment to March 13, 2010.

Claim Lake intends to continue to develop its property through additional surface exploration comprising geological mapping, lithogeochemistry and soil geochemistry and diamond drilling. This activity is dependent on being able to raise additional funding.

If we are unable to complete any phase of exploration because we don’t have enough money, we will cease operations until we raise more money.  If we can’t or don’t raise more money, we will cease operations.  We do not intend to hire additional employees at this time.  All of the work on the property will be conducted by unaffiliated independent contractors that we will hire.  The independent contractors will be responsible for surveying, geology, engineering, exploration, and excavation.  The geologists will evaluate the information derived from the exploration and excavation and the engineers will advise us on the economic feasibility of removing the mineralized material.

And this snippet:

Liquidity and Capital Resources

To meet our need for cash we closed an equity offering and raised $50,500 in Canadian dollars.  We cannot guarantee that these funds will be sufficient to stay in business.  If we find mineralized material and it is economically feasible to remove the mineralized material, we will attempt to raise additional money through a subsequent private placement, public offering or through loans.  If the funds we raised are insufficient to complete our exploration of the property, we will have to find alternative sources, like a second public offering, a private placement of securities, or loans from our officers or others.

At December 31, 2008, we had a working capital deficit of ($137,602), which is currently insufficient for us to implement our business plan.

At the present time, we have not made any arrangements to raise additional cash other than through the offering that was registered with the SEC in March, 2008 and closed in 2008.  If we need additional cash and can’t raise it we will either have to suspend operations until we do raise the cash, or cease operations entirely.  The funds raised in the March, 2008 registration offering will allow the company to operate until March, 2010.  Other than as described in this paragraph, we have no other financing plans.

As of March 13, 2009, the second option payment of $75,000 had not been made. Accordingly, Lodestar executed an extension agreement dated March 12, 2009 with Claim Lake Nickel wherein Claim Lake agreed to extend the term for the second payment to March 13, 2010.

As of December 31, 2008, we have yet to generate any revenues.

We issued 3,000,000 shares of common stock pursuant to the exemption from registration set forth in section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933. On November 15, 2006, the corporation issued 3,000,000 shares of restricted common stock to Ian McKinnon, Chief Executive Officer of Lodestar Mining, Incorporated, that Rule 144 of the Securities Act of 1933 defines as restricted securities.  The shares were issued in consideration for payment of $30,000 US from Ian McKinnon.  These shares will be restricted by the resale limitations of Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933.

We registered 2,000,000 shares of common stock to be offered at $0.05 per share.  In 2008, we issued 1,010,000 shares at $0.05 per share for a total of $50,500 (Canadian dollars).

As of December 31, 2008, our total assets were $9,806 US and our total liabilities were $147,408 US.

And again, a statement of its tenuous existence as a going concern:

CLICK HERE for latest SEC filings as Atlantic Green Power Holding Company — SUDDENLY IT’S ATLANTIC GREEN POWER HOLDING COMPANY, NEW PEOPLE, NEW PUROSE

And again, the solar project particulars:

Pittsgrove Solar Farm

Something that caught my eye on their site — which is repeated in the SEC 3Q 10-Q filing — a press release that talks about the ARRA incentive, a 30% cash payment in lieu of federal investment tax credit, and federally guaranteed loans and a 30% investment tax credit.  Seems ALL of those would apply here, so let’s say Mr. Stella is  “motivated.”

In the U.S., the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act stimulus bill of 2009 (ARRA) contains several provisions designed to alleviate renewable energy project financing constraints resulting from the economic downturn.

The ARRA establishes a temporary grant program that will allow commercial solar customers to receive a cash payment to cover 30% of the cost of installing solar equipment in lieu of the federal investment tax credit. The ARRA also appropriated $6 billion for a new loan guarantee program which the government estimates could support up to $60 billion of loans specifically for renewable energy and transmission projects. In addition, ARRA includes up to $2.3 billion for a new 30% investment tax credit for U.S. based renewable energy product production facilities.

Here’s the article from Today’s Sunbeam:

Scoping Comments for the National Park Service EIS regarding the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission project are due today.  Here’s the Comments for Stop the Lines, and I’ll add those I receive from others that come in.

Stop the Lines – NPS EIS Scoping Comments