3/19/2007
Mark Fix
Highwood
Final EIS Comments
Dear Mr.
Fristik,
I would
like to comment on the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Highwood Generating Station.
I am a
member of Tongue River Electric Cooperative and I am opposed to this power
plant. There is a better way to acquire our power then building this
plant near Great Falls.
There
were no scoping meetings held in the areas covered by these Cooperatives.
The meetings were held in Great Falls and the City of Great Falls is not a
member of any of the cooperatives requesting this power plant.
I object
to this plant as a ratepayer. This will dramatically increase our bill to
Tongue River Electric. Why is this plant being built for 250 MW of energy
when only 37 MW will be required? How can SME pretend it is an
independent Corporation and require that we pay for financing of this new power
plant? I will be paying for building a power plant that is far beyond
what is needed. How can I be required to pay for a power plant that will
supply most of its power out of state or to members that do not belong to a
rural electric cooperative? How can the federal government sign onto a
loan for a power plant like this that could be sending power to Las Vegas or
other non rural electric customers? The economics of this are very
suspect and should be looked into more thoroughly. If the majority of the
power from this plant is being used for areas other than those within the rural
electric grid then this EIS should evaluate the areas that will be using the
power as well. If this power is sent out of state, will the entities that
are buying the power take it if it is not green power? This power will be
more expensive then other types of power. What will the cost of this
power be to out of state investors? Could the power be too prohibitive
for them to buy when the transportation costs are added on?
The EIS
states that there will be additional power required for Coal Bed Methane (CBM)
development in Tongue River Electric service area. This additional power
requirement will be for 10 to 12 years while CBM is being developed. Will
I have to pay for the additional cost of these power lines being put in
place? Will these lines be taken down when the CBM play is over?
Will we be required to pay operations and maintenance for these lines if they
are not taken down? This is only for a short term duration. How can
we justify building this huge power plant for a short term need?
If we
want to create more green power in our area, will we be allowed to do so?
Will we be told that the Highwood Generating Plant must be used as it is our
supplier of power and any extra power we try to generate will be turned
away?
If SME is
so determined to get its power supply from coal, why doesnŐt it look at the
Colstrip plant and determine if it can get extra power from Colstrip?
There was a new power plant that was just built in Hardin. Could it
supply the 37 KW that we need? Why donŐt we look forward and get the
energy we need from wind power or from some of the hydro-power sources near
Great Falls? Why are we going backwards in energy development from a
pollution standpoint? You have dismissed any concerns about global
warming and carbon dioxide pollution because we are not part of the Kyoto treaty.
Do we have to be part of the Kyoto treaty before we do something about carbon
dioxide emissions? As a member of Tongue River Electric I feel we should
create power in new and cleaner ways and send an example to the large
corporations that are controlling power in the West. Several more coal
fired power plants are proposed throughout the United States in the near
future. These will all have a cumulative effect on carbon dioxide
emissions and global warming. CanŐt we set a better example and generate
our power in a cleaner cheaper way?
Coal
plants are a consumptive use of water. We should try to conserve
water. This plant would consume enough water to supply almost 26,000
people with water for a year. It would consume enough water to supply
almost 303,000 head of cattle with water for a year. Montana has better
uses for the water then to consumptively use it in a coal fired power
plant. Why does SME want to waste this much water? ShouldnŐt we try
to conserve water? Existing hydro facilities could utilize this water and
still pass on a large amount for downstream users. IsnŐt it in the best
interest of the State of Montana to conserve water?
In the
final EIS Volume 2 there was a list of people that support the power plant that
had sent in post cards to the Yellowstone Valley Electric Cooperative. I
contacted a couple of the people I knew from that cooperative and they did not
send in postcards of support or they marked up the postcard and sent it in
saying they did not support the power plant. I challenge the USDA to
verify that postcards were actually received and posted as support for the
power plant. Could this be a list of Yellowstone Valley Electric members
and no postcards were actually received? Would these Yellowstone Valley Electric
members have signed in support if they realized that this power plant will
increase their electric bill significantly over what they are paying now?
Would they sign if they knew that they were paying for a power plant that is
over 6 times bigger then it needs to be to satisfy their needs?
Thank you
for allowing me to comment on the final EIS.
Sincerely,
Mark Fix