Latest version of PUC draft rules
August 17th, 2014
We’re working on the revisions of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission rules for Certificate of Need (Minn. R. Ch. 7849) and for Routing/Siting (Minn. R. Ch. 7850), and it’s OH SO PAINFUL and tedious. But this is where it happens — the rules developed here will be presented to the PUC to release for public comment and adoption — and once they’re released, they can’t adopt rules that are significantly different, so realistically, there won’t be major changes. It’s now or never… this is where participation matters.
Our next meeting is Wednesday, August 20 from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. in the Commission’s Large Hearing Room in the Metro Square Building, located at 121 Seventh Place East, St. Paul, MN 55101. The PUC will provide refreshments.
FINAL MEETING – Wednesday September 24, from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
Please take a look at these rule drafts and send in your comments. Here are the latest drafts.
The next meeting is this Wednesday, so not much time for review and comment. Comments can be sent to kate.kahlert [at] state.mn.us and/or posted in the PUC’s Rulemaking Docket, 12-1246. To see what all has been filed in that docket, go to PUC SEARCH DOCKETS PAGE and search for 12-1246 (“12” is the year, “1246” is the docket number).
IGCC Kemper plant lawsuit
August 6th, 2014
Thanks to John Blair, Valley Watch and Bruce Nilles for the heads up on this IGCC project settlement. We fought off one here, the Excelsior Energy Mesaba Project, which took a lot of people, a lot of groups, a lot of approaches and a lot of coalition, and thanks to all, we do not have a coal gasification plant in Minnesota.
What’s disturbing is that they get to run this boondoggle $5.2 billion dollar project (initially billed as $2.6 billion) at all, though they are shutting down older coal plants and converting to natural gas. It’s the most expensive power plant in history, and guess who’s paying for it?
Newark Data Center gas plant dead…
July 10th, 2014
Three cheers for Rep. John Kowalko, who was on the front lines taking the heat about his opposition to the “Data Center” natural gas plant proposed for Newark.
This from Alan Muller, Green Delaware:
“ Gas attack: U of Delaware kills $1 billion data center/power plant.”
“The Data Center” was a scam so blatant, so absurd, that it should never have gotten any traction at all.
That it did is a sad commentary on the intellectual and ethical emptiness of Delaware’s “Chamber of Commerce” business community, and, of course, the administration of Gov. Jack Markell. The so called “Delaware Economic Development Office,”especially, demonstrates a consistent and predictable idiocy backed up by secrecy and dishonesty.
Per usual in Delaware, the scam was assembled by various parties, including the Markell Administration, the University of Delaware, and the City of Newark, before the public was given notice. Then, it was rolled out as a done deal. Thankfully, it apparently has been undone. (Note that the objection is mostly to the power plant, not to a data center as such.)
Aside from the obvious lie of saying a 278 megawatt gas-burning power plant was “auxiliary” to a data center, consider the un wisdom, or the symbolism, of a large new fossil-fuel power plant in a state so vulnerable to the effects of climate change that much of it will soon enough be under water. Delaware has the lowest mean elevation of any state at 60 ft above sea level. (Florida and Louisiana are next at 100 ft.) The mean elevation of Kent County is only 36 feet. Current measured sea level rise is around 3.4 mm per year and speeding up–it varies from place to place–and almost every new official prediction of sea level rise is higher than the last one. See “ Waters rising … Delaware going away?”
It is long past time to be shutting down the the existing combustion power plants that drive climate change and sea level rise, far less a time to be building new ones. (The total generating capacity in Delaware is on the order of 3300 megawatts.)
In the face of this, Markell has allowed investment in wind, solar, and energy efficiency to mostly come to a stop–suiting the interests of Delmarva Power–while embracing various schemes for burning more natural gas. (All considered, it appears that the climate change impact of natural gas is at least as high as coal, because of the unburned methane emissions.)
Residents of the City of Newark, and faculty and students of the University of Delaware came to life to oppose a scam in which the City and the Administration of the U of D were deeply involved. In recent decades is has been rare to see signs of political life in Newark, but self-interest does have an energizing effect. See Newark Residents Against the Power Plant.
The Delaware Chapter of the Sierra Club (especially Amy Roe) and the Delaware Audubon Society contributed.
But the real hero of this fight, in my opinion, is Rep. John Kowalko of Newark. Kowalko relentlessly sought accurate information from various parties so he could represent the true interests of his constituents. It doesn’t take a lot of courage for professors or environmentalists to oppose a power plant, but Kowalko, a longtime union man, took a lot of heat from any-job-at-any-cost Delaware union officials.
Kowalko, as usually does, behaved with gumption, integrity, and right-on values. Consider the oath of office that Delaware’s Constitution prescribes for public officials:
I, (name) , do proudly swear (or affirm) to carry out the responsibilities of the office of (name of office) to the best of my ability, freely acknowledging that the powers of this office flow from the people I am privileged to represent. I further swear (or affirm) always to place the public interests above any special or personal interests, and to respect the right of future generations to share the rich historic and natural heritage of Delaware. In doing so I will always uphold and defend the Constitutions of my Country and my State, so help me God.
How many legislators take their oath seriously? John Kowalko is one who clearly does. (I don’t know what role has been played by Senators representing the area.)
Compare the “Data Center” fight with the fight of people around Millsboro against a giant Korean chicken-killing plant, another Markell project just as absurd and undesirable. See “ Just how disgusting can the Markell administration get? Is there any bottom?” That area is represented by Gerald W. Hocker and John C. Atkins, two of the most special-interest-serving legislators in Delaware. (Atkins has been in the news recently, and Green Delaware has featured him before.)
Friday and Saturday are forecast to be Code Yellow bad air days in Delaware. Saturday is also Code Yellow for particles. Some discussion of the meaning of this is here.
Alan Muller
Muller and Kowalko just prior to arrest at Legislative Hall years ago
We have to destroy the eagle in order to save it…
July 9th, 2014
American Wind Energy Ass.’ John Anderson is spouting off in the DelmarvaNow Opinion section, and good thing it’s in the Opinion section because it’s a little skewed on facts and displays a disturbing outlook.
Anderson’s bio says:
I am the industry lead on national wildlife and non-wildlife siting issues for both land-based and offshore wind development. In this role, I get to work on critical issues related to the deployment and operations of U.S. wind energy facilities, which – once addressed – will aid in the advancement of a form of energy generation that is key to combating climate change.
Two things jump out at me:
- John Anderson is the industry lead, but I’m not seeing anything about development of wind siting that’s respectful of humans or wildlife, and in his opinion piece, it discounts documented issues of eagle kills and projected eagle kills and it minimizes the potential for eagle and other bird kills via wind turbines.
- John Anderson advances the fiction that “deployment and operations of U.S. wind energy facilities, which – once addressed – will aid in the advancement of a form of energy generation that is key to combating climate change.” Oh, pleeeeeeeaze… Building wind turbines does not reduce carbon emissions — shutting down coal plants does. Not one Renewable Energy Standard/Mandate links building and using renewable energy generation with shut down of any generation that produces CO2. PERIOD. There is no link. This is a problem that needs to be corrected, but as it stands, building all the wind in the world, adding to the existing surplus of generation, will not decrease carbon emissions. The economic depression actually did something for reducing CO2 emissions, but we’ve got a surplus. AWEA is a big fan of transmission, which rather than force shutdown of the CO2 emitters, adds to transmission capacity for regional marketing, and allows those coal plants to continue operating. If they were shut down, there’d be plenty of capacity for all the wind they could want on those wires, actually taking the place of the coal now on the wires. The massive transmission build-out is all about keeping “Coal on the Wires.” ICF – Midwest ISO Benefits Analysis explains it quite well, and succinctly, when it states that the benefits of the transmission build-out is best achieved where coal displaces natural gas. Great… just great policy…
I’m concerned about this both as an attorney who has worked for clients intervening in wind project dockets with significant eagle kill issues, modeling showing deaths of both Bald Eagles and Golden Eagles would occur (see record for the Goodhue Wind project here in Goodhue County, PUC Dockets 08-1233; 09-1176; 09-1349 and 09-1350), and as a former board member of the National Eagle Center, referenced with a quote from its site (though he’s misnaming it as “National Bald Eagle Center.” The name is a BIG deal to the National Eagle Center.) I’m also concerned about this because its appearing in Delmarvanow, as I have ties to Delaware and my partner Alan Muller is Executive Director of Green Delaware, instrumental in the Delaware Public Service Commission’s RFP selection of a wind/gas combo in a level playing field comparison between wind, natural gas, and IGCC (coal gasification).
It seems the lessons of the Goodhue Wind Project and its Avian and Bat Protection Plan, typical of wind projects and eagle take permits in Minnesota, need review:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife predicted the following eagle mortality would accompany the small 78MW Goodhue Wind Project a/k/a New Era Wind Farm, and yes, folks, it would require an eagle take permit:
USFWS Comment on Goodhue Avian & Bat Protection Plan January 16, 2013
Let’s be clear — an eagle take permit is a federal permit allowing the permit holder to kill eagles.
The National Eagle Center’s website states under “Do wind turbines need an eagle take permit” an incorrect answer:
This needs correction. Many wind projects do require take permits. Eagle take permits are on a project by project basis and they absolutely can and are required for wind projects, the project here in Goodhue a local example. FYI, it’s not just wind projects, it’s transmission that kill eagles too, and the AWEA folks are fond of promoting transmission “for wind” (NOT). The CapX 2020 transmission project required eagle take permits for its Belle Plaine Minnesota River crossing and for the Mississippi River crossing near Alma, Wisconsin.
Today at Delmarvanow.com:
Like people, eagles benefit from clean environment
Another U.S. Supreme Court air decision
June 23rd, 2014
An air emissions decision emerged from the bowels of the U.S. Supreme Court today. Here’s the PDF:
U.S. SCt Court Case No. 12-1146_ Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA
Here’s the gist from the syllabus:
I’m glad for the most part that my practice doesn’t get deep into these issues, this is pretty dense. But what strikes me is the absurdity of any reliance or reference to “carbon capture and storage” as useful in a BACT analysis. Oh my…