Legalectric

Another coal plant bites the dust — #68 so far per Bruce Nilles, Sierra Club. Another good news aspect is that it’s a Gates investment, or shall I say “Cascade Investments, LLC” which is the Gates’ investment arm, the same Cascade Investments, LLC that has invested in Big Stone! So, is Big Stone next? The scenario is similar, “doubling the plant size” and the heat is on…

PNM Resources drops Texas coal-plant expansion
Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:44pm EDT

HOUSTON, Aug 12 (Reuters) – PNM Resources’ Energy Co venture with Cascade Investments LLC has dropped a plan to double the size of a Texas coal plant, the company said on Tuesday.

Albuquerque, New Mexico-based PNM (PNM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) said in a release it would not pursue a 305-megawatt expansion at its Twin Oak coal-fired plant in Robertson County, about 130 miles (210 km) northwest of Houston. The existing Twin Oaks plant has two units, totaling 300 MW.

The company did not give a reason in the statement.

Last year, PNM signed a non-binding letter of intent to contribute the existing coal units to Energy Co, an unregulated energy joint venture with Bill Gates’ Cascade Investments unit.

PNM also said it will sell its Texas electric retail business unit, First Choice Power, and reduce its dividend payment as it works to restore the financial health of its regulated utility business in New Mexico, according to the release.

(Reporting by Eileen O’Grady; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

Another coal gasification bites the dust — yes, it took a coon’s age to get this posted, what can I say, the CapX hearings are taking up a lot of time… This was the best news in ages, continuing the theme that IGCC is a bad idea, too risky, too costly. This plant was one that seemed to have a lot of backing, which to me means that IGCC is done. When I’d posted about it, it garnered some wild NRG employee comments on this blog, ones that I hope that those employees’ bosses are aware of! I know NRG is watching, but I think some of their employees need to have their typing fingers taped together and/or not operate a computer while soused!

Here are a few articles with some choice comments:

From the Buffalo News:

Power Authority stops $1.6 billion plans for advanced coal plant at Tonawanda’s Huntley Station

Power Authority officials estimate that it would take an additional $175 million to $200 million per year in subsidies – on top of the significant aid already promised for the project – to bring the price of the electricity produced at the advanced coal plant down to the point where it could compete with other conventional sources of generation.

From newsday.com:

NYPA halts plans for clean-coal plant in Tonawanda

After pursuing various state grants and tax incentives, NYPA determined it is not possible to fully close the gap between what NYPA would have to pay for electricity and competitive market rates.

And from the Post Journal:

NYPA withdraws support for North Tonawanda clean coal project

”The economic, technological and regulatory obstacles are too great to warrant any further efforts at this time,” said Christine Pritchard, a NYPA spokeswoman.

… and…

NYPA officials were also uneasy about the technology. According to the company, there are only two IGCC plants operating nationwide, and 11 IGCC plants were either delayed or cancelled in 2007. In addition, the largest sequestration operation in the world is burying only 1 million tons of carbon dioxide underground annually, a third of what the NRG plant would be required to sequester – and carbon capture and storage technology has never been demonstrated off a clean coal power plant.

… and…

”It is also clear that an explicit and rigorous regulatory process with public support is a prerequisite for sequestration on a large scale. And while some amount of risk is necessary to prove new technology, the financial and environmental risk associated with this large-scale commercial power plant is simply too great,” the report concludes.

… and…

”Simply, at this time, the price gap is too large to overcome” said Pritchard of NYPA.

Tell us something we didn’t already know!!!

Yup, burning coal has an impact, you betcha.  Tell us something we didn’t already know.  But here’s a study that shows some specific results when comparing neurodevelopment of children exposed prenatally with those who were not exposed because the coal plant had been shut down.

Here’s the study:

Benefits of Reducing Prenatal Exposure to Coal Burning Pollutants

So what more do we need to know that shutting down coal plants is overdue?

IGCC – coal gasification — it’s getting around…

There are some interesting posts on the majari blog from  “the #1 portal for Indonesian engineering students.”

IGCC: Technology Overview

IGCC: Major IGCC Sections (2)

I imagine there will be more.  These are well done, getting some of the major points, but overly optimistic about IGCC.  Given that IGCC is tanking in the US, I’m sensing a promotional effort by those in the US invested in IGCC to ship this pipedream technology overseas.  Why?  Because we know how they’ve been trying to infiltrate those IGCC tentacles all over the US — lots of advertising and promotion with zilch about the problems, zilch about the emissions, zilch about water usage and contamination, zilch about high and now skyrocketing costs.  And note this advertiser on the site, it’s the “Clean Coal, America’s Power” routine, with their classic image:

And there are others too.  The financing in the US was a creative scheme, putting together federal and state doles, cutting equity required of utilities/developers, and shifting the risks and burdens to the ratepayers.

William G. Rosenberg, Dwight C. Alpern, Michael R. Walker, Deploying IGCC In This Decade with 3Party Covenant Financing, Vol. I, May 2005 Revision, John F. Kennedy School of Government, particularly pps. 1-21.

So what I’m seeing is an unworkable technology chasing/making development opportunities overseas, where word may not have gotten out about the problems with IGCC.  And what an opportunity for World Bank!  And then there’s the Mesaba Project and Excelsior Energy’s Julie Jorgensen’s experience in World Bank:

Julie Jorgensen CV

A couple specific examples she provides:

• Founded a Latin American infrastructure development fund in partnership with the International Finance Corp., a World Bank affiliate, and another independent power producer.
• Advised foreign governments on energy policy in conjunction with World Bank and U.S.A.I.D. initiatives.  Participated as expert panelist in Baltic States energy policy conference sponsored by the U.S. Energy Association in Riga, Latvia.

Otter Tail Corporation’s Corporate Governance Page

Otter Tail’s David Sasseville (Lindquist & Vennum) said that they had no objection to administrative of their filings of June 3, 2008. What else did he have to say? Here’s his missive after I filed the mncoalgasplant.com Motion for Disclosure & Commission Notice; Exhibit A – Otter Tail Power 8k filing to, duh, have the filing disclosed and for Official Notice by the Public Utilities Commission:

This reply is submitted on behalf of the Big Stone II Applicants, and that project’s lead developer, Otter Tail Power Company. Ms. Overland’s communication to the Commission and the parties in the Big Stone II transmission docket regarding Otter Tail’s filing yesterday was inappropriate and unnecessary. Otter Tail has not formed a holding company and has not reorganized. Rather, it merely filed applications yesterday in Minnesota, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, North Dakota and South Dakota for permission to form a holding company. The SEC filing referenced by Ms. Overland merely reflects the fact that Otter Tail is seeking permission to form a holding company. Whether that ultimately occurs, and whether and how Otter Tail’s organizational structure changes, will be resolved in the context of the FERC, SDPUC and NDPSC dockets, and the MPUC docket that was created yesterday (No. PA-08-658). Under no circumstances will yesterday’s filing have an impact on the Big Stone II docket, or on Otter Tail’s ability to proceed with its obligations and commitments in that docket. Otter Tail’s filing is available electronically at the PUC’s web site. In addition, Ms. Overland and/or MNCoalgasplant.com may add their names to the mailing list in the docket to receive future filings in the matter. David L. Sasseville Lindquist & Vennum P.L.L.P. 4200 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 612/371-3237 612/371-3207 (fax)

Yes, the filing is NOW available on the PUC eDockets site. Go to www.puc.state.mn.us and then to “eDockets” on the left, and then to “Search Documents” and search for 08-658. Inappropriate and unnecessary? When the parties are making final arguments in the Big Stone II case and Commission is making a decision, it’s fully appropriate to nail down disclosure and notice by the Commission … sigh… and here’s my response:

Mr. Sasseville and all: It is my belief and the purpose of this Motion that: 1) this filing should be formally disclosed within the Big Stone II proceeding by Otter Tail Corporation/Otter Tail Power (as of your missive, it now has been acknowledged); and 2) this filing should receive Official Notice in the Big Stone II deliberation by the Public Utilities commission. It is unknown whether there will be any impact, and the Motion does not address substantive issues of the reorganization nor suggest that substantive issues be addressed in the Big Stone docket, just that it should be disclosed and receive Official Notice of the Commission. Carol A. Overland for mncoalgasplant.com

To which he responded:

Ms. Overland: Your email implies that the Otter Tail filing portends something the Commission should be aware of, but isn’t, and that such information is a matter of actual or potential significance to the proper determination of the Big Stone II Transmission Certificate of Need and Route Permit proceeding tomorrow. While these implications are unfounded, the Big Stone II Applicants, including Otter Tail, have no objection to the Commission taking administrative notice of any and all docket filings in matters before it, including Otter Tail’s June 3, 2008 filing, and assigning whatever weight to those filings it believes is appropriate.

Well, that’s good, “the Big Stone II Applicants, including Otter Tail, have no objection to the Commission taking administrative notice of any and all docket filings in matters before it, including Otter Tail’s June 3, 2008 filing…” which is the entire point! Get it out there in the open…

Otter Tail Corporation’s News Release Page – do you see a press release about this filing?

…so then I says:

Mr. Sasseville – My concern, again, is twofold, first, that Otter Tail disclose the fact of the filings to the Commission and the parties (I do not believe this had been done prior) and it should be in the record, and second, that the Commission take administrative notice of these filings. That’s all. Because you state that “the Big Stone II Applicants, including Otter Tail, have no objection to the Commission taking administrative notice of any and all docket filings in matters before it, including Otter Tail’s June 3, 2008, filing,” I trust that disclosure and a statement that Otter Tail has no objection will occur.. Thank you for your statement of Otter Tail’s position. Carol for mncoalgasplant.com

And so what happened at the deliberation, what’s happening right now? Who knows… Was this addressed? Who knows…