Activist Action

Coal Plant Investment Rejected by City

Help stop this coal plant from being built!  On vacation last week, I drove by the Big Stone coal plant near the Minnesota-South Dakota border.  The current dirty fossil fuel pollution factory is called Big Stone I,  and  Big Stone II, to be built nearby,  is still on track for construction next year.  On the side of the road near the existing plant,  drivers can see this sign full of happy, busy, healthy-looking people.

Big Stone Coal Plant Billboard in South Dakota

Big Stone Coal Plant Billboard in South Dakota

Notice the words this giant piece of propaganda uses to sway the opinions of those who see it:  Efficiently.  Cleanly.  Reliably. If I got my information from billboards, I would think coal plants were the best things ever!

The new coal plant, like the existing one, will pump millions of tons of CO2 and other harmful substances into the air and environment in this beautiful area on the border of two states.  It will greatly add to climate change and global warming.  It will add to the dirty energy sources already dooming  future generations of people to non-livable environment.  The plant will withdraw cooling water from Big Stone Lake, which is co-managed by Minnesota and South Dakota authorities.

Given the enormous risk of building a new coal plant these days investors are not so willing to put money into these projects as they used to be. Pictured below is the coal plant, which sits in South Dakota instead of in Minnesota, where pollution laws are more strict.  It was purposely built in South Dakota to get around MN pollution laws, even though most energy will be going to Minnesota customers.

Big Stone Coal Plant

Big Stone Coal Plant

There is some small bit of  positive  news regarding the potential building of the new Big Stone II coal plant. Recently, Elk River, a city in Minnesota that was to get electricity from this new coal plant, rejected coal as a good investment for the city.

“Elk River Municipal Utilities yesterday rejected a proposal to become a partial owner in Big Stone II. Elk River’s rejection was the same day as a decision by Basin Electric Power in South Dakota to pull plans for a new coal-fired power plant.

Elk River’s disavowal of coal is part of a trend. A string of 100 coal plants–with Intermountain Power coal plant in Utah as the landmark number 100– have been defeated or abandoned since the beginning of the coal rush in 2001.  Activists calling for a transition away from coal call this a significant milestone in the shift to clean energy.

Clearly, “activists”  (people who speak out against coal power, for example) have made a difference, though they have not yet stopped the construction of it.

“For the past six years pro-environment allies have been running a hard-hitting campaign to expose the dirty truth about coal. Tremendous grassroots pressure, rising costs, and upcoming federal carbon regulations all contributed to the demise of the 100 plants. In Minnesota hundreds of volunteers turned out to public hearings, held rallies and met with officials to push for cleaner alternatives to the Big Stone II plant.


The Big Stone II plant would emit about 4.5 million tons of global warming pollution every year, along with harmful levels of soot and smog pollution, which can worsen asthma and cause other respiratory illnesses.  In addition to harming our health, the Big Stone II plant would stunt renewable energy projects in the region.

“The community opposition to the Big Stone II coal plant here is just one part of a growing nationwide movement,” said Rich Femling, local volunteer with the Sierra Club coal campaign since 2001. “It’s clear that the American people are ready for a switch to the clean energy technologies that can help repower our economy.”

In September, investors in Big Stone II will vote on whether or not to proceed with the plant. Both Great River Energy and the Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency have already backed out of the project.

From the MN Independent:

Elk River’s decision was the target of Twin Cities area activists who urged supporters to call Elk River officials asking them to turn down the project. At the recent meeting of the Elk River city council and utilities board, council members expressed no dissatisfaction with using coal-generated power, but questioned the price tag the utility would have to commit to the project. The utilities board had previously voted not to recommend the project, and the city council took no action, effectively killing Elk River’s participation.

More info on Big Stone can be found at the Sierra Club, Northstar chapter, although they don’t have much that is up to date. The Big Stone II plant is unfortunately still on track to being built in 2010 despite these setbacks.  And this Big Stone II plant will benefit from cap and trade.

“Sharp [spokesman for the Big Stone II] says one factor that could be a benefit to this project would be if so-called cap-and-trade legislation becomes a reality. Then, Big Stone II would be about 20 percent more efficient than the existing facilities and would be in line to receive credits that could be traded on the open market.”

20 percent more efficient is not nearly good enough.  And Congress, via cap and trade, will be giving this coal plant its blessing to continue to pollute — with credits to trade.

Here is some Sierra Club Background on Big Stone

» Description
» Factsheet
» Sierra Club comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (pdf, 99k)

The power companies involved in this decision that people can contact are:

Otter Tail Power, Fergus Falls MN Lead developer

You can write to Otter Tail Power here. Give ‘em hell!

Missouri River Energy Services, Sioux Falls, SD 2nd primary owner

Heartland Consumers Power District, Madison SD

Montana-Dakota Utilities Co, Bismark, ND

Coal power is flat-out stupid. There is no need for it.  People who say we need it to keep the lights on are not being honest. There is more than enough wind in this area of the country to light every light and provide plenty of electricity to everyone.  All we need is the willingness of those who make decisions to make the decision to stop using the dirtiest, most dangerous fossil fuel we use.

Let’s stop this coal plant!

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Comments denying global warming by deniers or skeptics will not be published, so don't bother. And don't spam this site with garbage comments. I DON'T PUBLISH THEM. Otherwise, go for it.

Archives