Great, just great. “About” a million gallons of Minnesota Power’s Boswell coal plant’s coal ash wastewater dumped into Blackwater Lake (appropriate name!), a pond connected to the Mississippi River, a pond where the plant’s cooling water is drawn from, and also a pond where people fish!

The good news is that MP didn’t do an Xcel and wait for MONTHS to disclose. It appears that MP got on the horn almost instantly after the spill was discovered and reported it.

There’s supposedly a press release, but it’s not posted on their “Press Release” page, so I asked about it. MP did get back to me and shared its statement — THANK YOU!

From KAXE:

1M gallons of coal ash wastewater spilled at Cohasset coal plant

Here’s what the STrib has to say:

One million gallons of coal ash wastewater spill at Minnesota Power coal plant

The Duluth-based electric utility said an unknown amount of polluted water had reached a nearby lake after a pipe leaked. 

By Walker Orenstein and Chloe Johnson Star Tribune

July 17, 2024 — 9:39am

Minnesota Power said about 1 million gallons of coal ash wastewater spilled at its large coal plant in Cohasset, Minn., pouring out over land with at least some reaching nearby Blackwater Lake.

The Duluth-based electric utility said in a news release that a pipeline leaked on Tuesday at the Boswell Energy Center that transfers wastewater from a pond containing the byproducts of coal combustion to the plant where it is used as process water.

Minnesota Power said the leak has been contained and the company is monitoring for potential impacts to water and wildlife, and also notified the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Environmental Protection Agency.

MPCA is investigating the spill, spokeswoman Andrea Cournoyer said in a statement.

According to a report to the State Duty Officer, the spill was originally discovered at 11:15 a.m. Tuesday. The report was made 15 minutes later, and Minnesota Power said a “loss of pump pressure” caused the spill.

Coal ash contains pollutants including mercury, cadmium and arsenic, which can pollute water and air if not properly managed, according to the EPA.

The 674-acre Blackwater Lake is a reservoir on the Mississippi River, according to the state Department of Natural Resources. Lake levels are controlled by the Pokegama Dam operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

It’s still unclear how far the material may have spread, or how long the pipeline was leaking. Walter Shadley, Cohasset’s public works and utility supervisor, said the town does not draw its drinking water from the Mississippi.

Minnesota Power draws water from the lake to cool its plant and releases heated water. The DNR describes the lake as “essentially a flooded river channel.” A bay where the DNR said the coal plant discharges heated water attracts fish and is popular with anglers, according to the agency.

The Boswell plant is Minnesota Power’s largest electricity source. Its two operating coal-fired units are capable of producing 932 megawatts of electricity. One unit at the plant is scheduled to retire in 2030, and the second is slated to close in 2035 as the utility transitions to carbon-free power to meet its climate goals and state regulations for a carbon-free grid by 2040.

Remember the huge coal ash impoundment ruptures/breeches dumping coal ash all over? THIS is why treatment and use of coal ash matters:

TVA coal ash slide – UPDATES

And even in Minnesota: TVA coal ash — we had our own ash slide here in MN

There was a rule update and comments in 2018, and it was remanded, and so here we go around again…

FEDERAL REGISTER ANNOUNCEMENT: Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities

Comments must be received on or before October 15, 2019!

From the EPA’s announcement (CLICK HERE):

Public Hearing on the Proposed Changes to the Regulations for Coal Combustion Residuals: Enhancing Public Access to Information and Reconsideration of Beneficial Use Criteria and Piles

Wed, October 2, 2019

9:00 AM – 8:00 PM EDT

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel

300 Army Navy Drive

Arlington, VA 22202

The public hearing will consist of three sessions:

• A morning session starting at 9:00 am and ending at noon.
• An early afternoon session starting at 1:00 pm and ending at 4:00 pm.
• An evening session beginning at 5:00 pm and ending at 8:00 pm.

CLICK HERE FOR THE PROPOSED RULE!

Just do it, comment away!!! Comments must be received on or before October 15, 2019.

tRump’s “Affordable Clean Energy Rule” would be quite the legacy (though he leaves so many, how to choose).

EPA’s Affordable Clean Energy Rule page

Here are the fact sheets from that page:

Fact Sheets (these are links below!):

• Overview of the proposed ACE rule
• CO₂ emissions trends
• Costs and benefits 
• Legal overview
• Permitting improvements under New Source Review program
• Side-by-side comparison of ACE and CPP

And the proposed rule as published in the Federal Register yesterday:

Affordable Clean Energy Rule-Federal Register-8-31-2018-18755

It’s 68 pages long, and intense.

Comments due October 30 — how to comment?  From their site:

Coal ash, remember that big impoundment release, photo above, not all that long ago?

Good grief, it was a DECADE ago, and it’s still a mess.  From the EPA page:

EPA’s response to the TVA coal ash release in Kingston, TN

And another ash impoundment failure, our friends at Duke Energy, from EPA page:

EPA’s response to the Duke Energy coal ash spill in Eden, NC

It’s an issue in Minnesota too:

Who cares?  Well, once a rule is proposed, there’s not much variation, because if there is, then it has to start all over again and go through this process.  This is proposed to “amend” the 2015 final rule, so it can’t be good.  Speak up NOW!  Go to EPA’s Regulations.gov and make Comments under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2017-0286 — open for 45 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register, which is/was when?  Figure it’s published NOW, and just do it.

From the EPA’s site, here’s the rule proposed to gut the 2015 final rule, because gutting regulation, that’s what this administration does:

View a pre-publication version of the proposed rule

And here’s the poop cut and pasted direct from the source:

Proposed Amendments to the National Regulations (Phase One)

On March 1, 2018, EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, signed the first of two rules that proposes to amend the April 2015 final rule. The proposal:

1. Addresses provisions of the final rule that were remanded back to the Agency on June 14, 2016 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit;
2. Provides states with approved CCR permit programs (or EPA where it is the permitting authority) under the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act the ability to set certain alternative performance standards; and
3. Addresses one additional issue that has arisen since the April 2015 publication of the final rule.

EPA is proposing six provisions that would allow states or EPA the ability to incorporate flexibilities into their coal ash permit programs. These flexibilities would also be available to facilities with U.S. EPA-issued CCR permits.

Additionally, the proposal:

• Clarifies the type and magnitude of non-groundwater releases that would require a facility to comply with some or all of the corrective action procedures set forth in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in sections 257.96 through 257.98 in meeting their obligation to clean up the release.
• Adds boron to the list of constituents in Appendix IV of 40 CFR part 257 that trigger corrective action.
• Determines the requirement for proper height of woody and grassy vegetation for slope protection.
• Revises the current regulations to allow the use of CCR in the construction of final cover systems for CCR units closing pursuant to 40 CFR section 257.101 that are closing with waste-in-place.
• Adds a new paragraph to 40 CFR section 257.103 to allow facilities to qualify for the alternative closure provisions based on the continued need to manage non-CCR wastestreams in the unit.

EPA will be accepting written comments on this proposal through Regulations.gov under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2017-0286 for 45 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.

Additionally, EPA will hold a hearing on this proposed rule. Additional information about the hearing will be posted in the docket for this proposal and on this website in the near future.

And more, cut and pasted from EPA:

• Frequent questions about the coal ash disposal rule
• Frequent questions about implementing the coal ash disposal rule  
• Frequent questions about beneficial use of coal ash
• Frequent questions about the relationship between the CCR Rule and the Clean Water Act permit requirements

Contact Page for Trump’s White House

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414

The Trump regime has published this “Energy Plan.”  WHAT?  Mitt Romney’s “Energy Plan” wasn’t much, and was grossly misguided, but it at least had SOME substance:

Romney’s Energy Plan – much ado about nothing

This is something a 5th grader could put together, nothing but blathering and slapped together code words.  It shows no thought or understanding of energy in the U.S. today.  I mean really, “clean coal” is so dead. During the Bush administration, they put billions in, between tax credits, grants, subsidies at state and federal levels — here’s a DOE announcement from 2006:

Energy Secretary and Secretary of the Treasury Announce the Award of $1 Billion in Tax Credits to Promote Clean Coal Power Generation and Gasification Technologies

The Bush Administration made coal gasification (IGCC) a priority, and even all that lobbying, subsidization, and wishful thinking couldn’t make it happen.  Minnesota’s Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project is one example of that abject failure (see also www.camp-site.info).  Delaware’s NRG coal gasification plant is another (note another NRG coal gasification plant proposed for NY went south too).

Meanwhile, existing coal is not economical, that’s why the older plants are being shut down, not anything to do with “Clean Power Plan,” and instead, that there’s a surplus of electricity and coal plants’ production costs a lot more than other available electric generation.  The market says no!  How does Trump think he can trump the market?  And even if he could, how is that in our interest?

Here’s a map of MISO market — note all the blue on these maps — I love using these as wallpaper, a constant reminder:

MISO LMP map

Here’s the PJM market map:

PJM LMP map

And the joint MISO/PJM market map:

Joint MISO/PJM LMP map

Coal cannot compete in the market, even with its outright and embedded regulatory subsidies, even the existing plants.  There’s a glut of electricity, has been for a decade now.  As Xcel’s Ben Fowkes says, recorded in the Seeking Alpha transcript of the XEL Earnings Call, January 31, 2013. 

So I think the economies are in decent shape across all our jurisdictions. Doesn’t necessarily mean it translates to high sales growth. And that’s consistent with our forecast. I mean, we’re not anticipating that we’re going to see a tremendous rebound in sales, even as the economies start to improve. I mean, I think, that’s our new normal, frankly.

So…. drumroll….  Here it is, cut and pasted from the White House site in its entirety (emphasis added in red)(and parenthetical comments):

How clueless can Trump be?  Well, we’re seeing… and it’s unbelievable… UNBELIEVABLE!