Map showing the location of
the proposed Big Stone II plant
Source
Midwest Coal Rush
Welcome to the Big Stone II Age?Just across the Minnesota border in South Dakota, near Big Stone Lake and Big Stone Lake Park - which straddles the state line, Otter Tail Power and other companies want to build a huge, polluting coal plant. The lake, which is managed by both the Minnesota DNR and South Dakota authorities, is known for fishing, recreation, and lakeside camping. But it is already under fish consumption advisories for mercury.[1]
The proposed plant, called Big Stone II, would be a huge, 600 MW, expansion of the existing 450 MW Big Stone facility. The energy produced would serve customers in Minnesota, South Dakota and North Dakota - an area that is one of the planet's most fertile grounds for developing wind energy.
Minnesotans are already too dependent on inefficient, dirty coal which currently provides about 75% of our electricity. We need a mix of energy sources, and the last thing we need is more pollution from coal plants. Minnesotans support investments in clean energy solutions, and it's up to us to ask decision-makers to require investments in clean renewable energy as an alternative to building yet another coal plant at Big Stone.
Minnesota energy sources
Every time a new coal plant is built, we commit ourselves to dirty energy for generations to come. Coal plants are long-living, massive polluters. They produce global warming pollutants, mercury, pollution that contributes to smog and regional haze, and particulate matter that increases the risk of respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses. Minnesota issues air quality alerts for ozone and particulate pollution recommending certain populations avoid exposure to outdoor air to protect their health. On these days, the elderly, children, and athletes are often those encouraged to stay indoors. Although Big Stone II is across the border in South Dakota, air pollution knows no boundaries. Furthermore, it is the goal of Big Stone II to sell its dirty power to Minnesota. Is this the kind of energy future you support for Minnesota?
Investment in Clean Energy Makes Sense
A stronger Minnesota demands investment in wind, solar, biomass, energy efficiency, and other clean energy options. It is not only an environmental imperative, it also means economic investment and new jobs. According to the Job Jolt Study conducted by the Environmental Law and Policy Center, an aggressive clean energy development plan that advances renewable energy production and maximizes energy efficiency efforts would have the potential to create more than 200,000 new jobs across a 10 state Midwest region by 2020. In fact, wind power alone would create 22 direct and indirect construction and manufacturing jobs for each MW of installed capacity. The Minnesota Department of Commerce is recommending that Ottertail Power's long-range plans be rejected by the Public Utilities Commission, mainly because Ottertail does not evaluate renewable energy alternatives to the Big Stone coal plant.
Clean Energy is Good for the Economy
Every dollar that goes into buying outside energy or importing coal is a dollar leaving Minnesota. Further, dirty conventional coal plants cost a lot. True costs include harm to human health and the environment, a bill passed on to everyone in higher health care expenses, more hospital visits, lost work days, children's schooling missed due to record levels of asthma, mercury in our lakes and fish, and more.
In addition, the growing impacts of global warming means that regulations of global warming pollutants are inevitable in our future, which will raise coal's cost even further. These are the hidden costs that customers will pay. Major private utilities are expecting carbon taxes on coal plants within five years — meaning that today's cost estimates for coal will be obsolete.
Minnesotans need to know what the real cost of this proposed coal plant will actually be. Help push decision-makers like the MN Public Utilities Commission stop dirty coal plants and support clean wind power.
Coal is Dirty
Coal plants are the single largest source of mercury emissions, contributing to Minnesota's declaration of statewide fish consumption advisories. The coal industry would like citizens to believe "increasingly clean" coal is the answer to our energy needs, but there is no such thing as clean coal. Clean energy only comes from clean, renewable sources.
Coal burning is also one of the largest sources of global warming pollutants like carbon dioxide, and Big Stone II would only exacerbate the problem. Every day the threats of global warming to our environment, agricultural economy, and lifestyle are more apparent. To cite one example, a recent study by Carter Johnson of South Dakota State University estimated that waterfowl populations could decline by more than 50 percent by 2050 when the prairie pothole region dries up — an inevitable outcome of global warming. The prospect of future regulations to fight global warming actually makes a current investment in coal an expensive risk for the future. Clean technologies like renewable energy and energy efficiency that do not produce global warming gas and mercury pollution are better options.
Get a PDF version (pdf, 254k) of this factsheet.
1 —
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=06015200
Update : PUC Approves Big Stone II Certificate of Need
On January 15th, 2009, in front of a crowd of over 150 people, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to grant the Big Stone II Certificate of Need despite growing concerns about coal's role in our energy future. The decision comes with conditions: (1) a plan for closure of Otter Tail Power's Hoot Lake coal plant (145MW) by 2018; (2) cap ratepayer responsibility at $26/ton for carbon emissions associated with global warming; and more. To read a summary of the decision, visit the PUC's website.
Sierra Club Organizer Cesia Kearns summed it up well in the press: "This is certainly not the end of the road," remarked Cesia Kearns, organizer with the Sierra Club. "We know that coal is a risky financial gamble — coal plants are dropping like flies around the country, and with a carbon constrained future, it's likely Big Stone II will join the ever-growing list of abandoned projects."
More on the decision:
» Minnesota Independent: Big Stone II transmission project gets utility commission OK
» Lake Elmo Leader: Big Stone approval has strings attached