August 29, 2006
Dear Mr. Fristik and Ms. Johnson,
We are very concerned about the Highwood Power Plant as it is proposed in the draft EIS. As residents of Great Falls we find no compelling reasons to build this facility. It also seems that some fairly serious omissions from the draft EIS prevent a correctly comprehensive view of the project.
In the first place, the actual ÒneedÓ for a power plant of this magnitude (250 aMW) is not clear to us at all. Even with future planning in mind, the slow growth of this region doesnÕt demand this huge jump in electricity consumption. It also seems unwise to build a baseload generating facility in order to meet fluctuating peak demands of electricity.
Secondly, this plant has been described as the ÒcleanestÓ type of coal-fired plant we can build when this simply is not true. Coal-burning is one of the most polluting ways to produce electricity. At the very least, if a coal power plant is considered, the newer and more efficient IGCC-based technology needs to be looked at more closely. The yearly amounts of pollutants (mercury, CO2, lead, CO, etc.) released by this plant as proposed are both staggering and unsettling.
Thirdly, in the draft EIS there have been several significant factors left out. Omitted is the strong possibility of a carbon tax which, when enacted and factored in, will change the price tag on this project, increasing it by roughly $25 million. Also, no alternative energy sources have been explored and accurately articulated in the draft EIS.
A more responsible plan would include an IGCC coal-plant geared towards a lower baseload, coupled with cleaner, alternative (wind and/or solar) energy sources for the peak loads. The central part of Montana has an abundance of potential wind and solar energy to draw upon. This would collectively minimize the important factors of price, risk, energy output control and impact on the environment. Then this truly would be a Generating Station that Òpeople from all over the world would come and seeÓ (a description I heard several proponents use to describe the present plan at a recent public hearing in Great Falls) and Òone of the cleanest in the country.Ó As it stands now, the draft EIS is far from this ideal.
Please do not go forward with the plans as they exist in this draft EIS. They are incomplete and irresponsible. There are better ways to provide power, create jobs and generate revenue in this region of Montana without polluting our air, rivers and environment. This is not an either/or proposition and shouldnÕt be treated as such.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Smith and Scott Friskics
1306 3rd Ave N.
Great Falls, MT 59401