Mesaba is baaaaaack!

June 11th, 2012


Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project has raised its ugly head again.  There were rumors for a long time that Micheletti wanted to change it to a natural gas plant.  Then they went to the legislature and got the “incentives” for their boondoggle “clean coal” plant, the “innovative technology” that doesn’t work…  they went to the MPCA and their air permit was AGAIN rejected as incomplete, and now they’ve gone to the PUC, requesting confirmation that the permits they have are valid.  Oh, PUH-LEEZE!

Here we go again… will be filing comments, no doubt about it!

Would the PUC doesn’t transfer projects like this without amending the permit application, without verification of what indeed it is they want to do?  If you take the original ALJ Decision, the Permit Order and the Permit itself, redact everything related to coal gasification, what’s left?  Not much!  We need to know what they’re planning (if anything, this remains the vaporware project from hell).

This is the letter filed by Excelsior Energy — I don’t recall having received it, but will dig through the piles here, they DO have my correct address (though I note that they sent to Excelsior’s Evans, Greenman and Harrington at their OLD address!):

Excelsior Energy Request – May 31, 2012

Here is the PUC’s Notice of Comment Period, first round due June 29, 2012:

Notice of Comment Period

And what’s most disturbing is the legislative change in 2011, supported, DEMANDED, by Gov. Dayton:

Subd. 3. Staging and permitting.

(a) A natural gas-fired plant that is located on one site designated as an innovative energy project site under subdivision 1, clause (3), is accorded the regulatory incentives granted to an innovative energy project under subdivision 2, clauses (1) to (3), and may exercise the authorities therein.

(b) Following issuance of a final state or federal environmental impact statement for an innovative energy project that was a subject of contested case proceedings before an administrative law judge:

(1) site and route permits and water appropriation approvals for an innovative energy project must also be deemed valid for a plant meeting the requirements of paragraph (a) and shall remain valid until the earlier of (i) four years from the date the final required state or federal preconstruction permit is issued or (ii) June 30, 2019; and

(2) no air, water, or other permit issued by a state agency that is necessary for constructing an innovative energy project may be the subject of contested case hearings, notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, parts 7000.1750 to 7000.2200.

Here’s the link to the full Minn. Stat. 216B.1694.

Leave a Reply