As I sit here watching the cooling tower plume of Salem I & II waft by, it’s hard to ignore the idiocy of the state of energy generation proposals.  Coal gasification… nuclear… Whatever are they thinking????

In a number of states, legislation is being introduced, a la Harvard, which gives IGCC perks and benefits to make IGCC seem competitive, to make it seem like a good idea. It happened in South Dakota recently, and now it’s Florida’s turn.

Florida’s taking a dive off the cliff and quickly moving toward legislation to pave the way for coal gasificaiton (IGCC). Remember the Harvard Report, Volume 1? Deploying IGCC in this Decade with 3 Party Covenant Financing. If you haven’t read it, at least read the first 21 pages to get the depth and breadth of what they’re proposing. It sets out a detailed scheme of risk shifting to facilitate coal gasification market penetration — something that ought to have the free marketers across the country flapping… The Harvard plan requires federal perks, like outright grants; the DOE “studies” on sequestration, use of different coals; tax breaks like the 48A DOE credits; federally guaranteed loans. It requries state perks like outright grants, more tax breaks, and regulatory acquiesence. And from the project proposer, they can get by with 20% equity, not the typical 45% for a generating plant, and worse, they can get into it with just a Power Purchase Agreement as their equity. So we’ve got a new, unproven shaky technology that HAS been proven to have a capital cost of $2,155,680,783, or $3,593/kW; a piss-poor emissions profile and which doesn’t capture CO2; and that costs 9-13 cents/kWh… well, folks, it seems to me the market has already decided that IGCC is a pig in a poke. On top of that is a pattern of IGCC proposals where there is no demonstrated need for the power. AAAAAAAAAARGH!!!

But states march on in lockstep. Most likely the legislators, like the enviros supporting IGCC (NRDC,Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, TNC, Audubon, et al.), have no clue of the realities, they do not have a clue what we’ve learned via Excelsior’s Mesaba Project. That’s a pretty irresponsible position, and worse, if they DO know and advocate none the less, that’s reprehensible. The problems with IGCC are all laid out so well in the Excelsior Energy Mesaba Project docket at our PUC. Or like the Delaware PSC docket on NRG’s proposed IGCC project, rated as the lowest of three bidders:

Delaware Independent Consultant Report

Delmarva RFP Bid Evaluation Report

Florida specifically, though, has a first hand expert view of the problems with IGCC in response to pseudo-enviro demands that IGCC be considered (WHAT IS SO DIFFICULT ABOUT “NO NEW COAL PLANTS” ?????):

Testimony of Steve Jenkins – Florida Glades Power Plant

But when you’ve got “friends” like Richard “the Vermin” Furman demanding IGCC, well, those’s fightin’ words:

Testimony of Richard C. Furman – Florida Glades Power Plant

So enough background and now on to the point — as this Glades Power Plant project moves through the Florida PSC, where a big coal plant is proposed, there’s legislation in Florida:

Bill Number: HB549/SB1202
Sponsors: Rep. Traviesa & Senator Bennett



At those sites are links to the Senate version.

Author in the House is Traviesa and co-sponsors are Ambler; Aubuchon; Brandenburg; Brisé; Cusack; Garcia, R.; Glorioso; Grimsley; Hasner; Homan; Kendrick; Kreegel; Machek; Mayfield; McKeel; Murzin; Nehr; Planas; Precourt; Richardson; Seiler; Troutman; Weatherford; Williams.

Author in the Senate is Bennett and co-sponsors are Aronberg; Dockery; Lynn; Fasano; Joyner; Constantine; Jones; Gaetz.

To contact Florida Senators and Representatives, click on their name above to get to their individual page to send an email. TELL THEM WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT IGCC!!!

One Response to “Florida doesn’t need IGCC either!”

  1. Harry Jaeger Says:

    Ms. Overland,

    Thanks for reference to Mr. Jenkins’ expert testimony. All of those interested in learning the truth about it can visit:

    In Mr. Jenkins’ own words, thanks to one of his recent tutorials that you found for me:

    Overall Technology Assessment-IGCC

    IGCC can provide:

    • High efficiency
    • High availability
    • Fuel flexibility
    • Superior environmental profile
    • Marketable by-products
    • Future CO2 capture

Leave a Reply