Citizens for Clean Energy (CCE) Weekly Update

Synopsis of meeting of August 4
1) Mr. Clay Vincent, Sanitarian from Hill County (Havre), met with the group to exchange information and to discuss planning for the hearing in Havre on August 7. He also serves on Hill County’s Environmental Health Committee. Our group discussed strategy for the Havre hearing, and several folks from our Great Falls contingent made plans to attend and to testify. Jonathan Windy Boy of the Rocky Boy Reservation will help recruit Native Americans to testify against the coal plant. (You will recall that the Havre hearing only took place because of CCE’s formal request).

2) We received a report about the Aug. 1 informational meeting in Fort Benton that was hosted by SME. About 15 people were in attendance, including a few members from our group. In response to questions from the audience, SME proponents indicated that they would be responsible for road maintenance and that this had been factored into the costs; however, we have been unable to locate any documents that support this contention or any other part of their business plan. Further, SME said they would be selling their excess power to Bonneville Power Administration (ironically, BPA is the very same electric utility that pulled the contract that started this whole coal plant project in the first place).

3) Dr. Calanthe Wilson-Pant brought to our attention a letter addressed to our City/County Historic Preservation Officer. The letter outlined the significant adverse impacts the coal plant will have (visually and with industrial noise) on the newly dedicated Lewis and Clark Portage site. This issue was not raised at the hearing in Great Falls, and will be brought to the attention of interested parties by various members of our group, in order that this concern is addressed in our written comments.

4) Citizens for Clean Energy (CCE) will be hosting a program about Global Warming at the Great Falls Public Library (301 Second Avenue North) on Tuesday evening, Aug. 15, from 6-8 pm. There will be a panel discussion after the showing of two excellent new documentaries, entitled "The Air We Breathe" and "Too Hot Not to Handle". These were provided to us by Marie-Claude Guy from HBO Corporate Headquarters. Lisa Hardimann will be sending out a press release shortly. Charles Bocock and Cheryl Reichert will serve appetizers at 4:30 pm at their home beforehand (for panel and program participants and members of CCE ); please call 727-1964 for directions. After the program for those who have time and the interest, we'll go to Rio Ranch Grill, 220 Central Avenue, for a no-host dinner/snacks and to continue the discussion.

5) Several members of our group have requested an evening meeting time. We shall try to do this by holding at least one meeting a month during the evening. This month’s evening gathering will be at the Great Falls Library on Aug. 15 (see item 4). We’ll also continue to meet every Friday morning, at least through Aug. 25.

6) Please turn in your petitions as soon as possible. We’ll need time to reproduce them in advance of the Aug. 30 deadline.

7) Written comments on the draft EIS must be postmarked on or before Aug. 30. They can also be emailed. They can be sent either to the Montana DEQ or the Rural Utility Service. Please see documents below for addresses and logistical information and talking points. We really need lots of folks to take the time to do this.

8) Visit our CCE website, which now has new links to Russ Doty’s wind power proposals: http://homepage.mac.com/neiltaylor1/cce/page6.html

9) Our next meeting will be on Aug. 11 at Park and Ponder at 9:30 am. on the back porch. Come to hear a report on the Havre meeting. Bring your ideas about strategy. Learn about how the coal plant may contaminate the Giant Springs aquifer.
====================================================


According to MEIC: note that the draft EIS contained a revised emissions inventory, with somewhat larger numbers for some of the pollutants:

Highwood “By the Numbers”

Emissions Inventory:
According to the draft Air Quality Permit, the Highwood Power Project would release the following pollutants to the atmosphere:

    Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)                443 tons per year
    Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)           944 tons per year
    Carbon Monoxide (CO)        1177 tons per year
    Particulate Matter (PM-10)*        366 tons per year
    Carbon Dioxide (CO2) equivalent**    3,052,081 tons per year
                        (equivalent to 561,000 cars)
    Sulfuric Acid Mist            62 tons per year
    Volatile Organic Carbon (VOC)    38 tons per year
    Hydrochloric Acid Gas (HCl)    24 tons per year
    Hydrofluoric Acid Gas (HF)        20 tons per year
    Mercury                40 pounds per year

    *Note that Particulate Matter includes metals such as Arsenic, Beryllium, Cadmium, Manganese, and 560 pounds of lead.
    ** Note that the CO2e emissions of this plant represents an increase of 7.5% over ALL sources of greenhouse gases in Montana.

Natural Resource Consumption:
Unlike renewable energy sources which have no fuel requirements, the Highwood Power Project would consume significant quantities of natural resources - in particular, coal and water:
    Coal Usage                1.1 million tons per year (104 trainloads)
    Water Usage                1.7 billion gallons per year
                        (enough to meet the needs of 26,000 people)
<revised emissions EIS from Pat Judge.doc>
=================================================
This DEIS process will be the last meaningful opportunity for public input on the coal-fired plant. The postmark deadline for written comments is Aug. 30. A copy of the Environmental Impact Statement may be viewed at HYPERLINK "http://www.usda/gov/rus/water/ees/eis/htm" http://www.usda/gov/rus/water/ees/eis/htm or HYPERLINK "http://deq.mt.gov/eis/asp" http://deq.mt.gov/eis/asp . You may also request your own hard copy by contacting Kathy Johnson at 406-444-1760 (email katjohnson@mt.gov). There is no charge for the document or the postage. The document is 700 pages long, key points are listed below.

Comments must include name, mailing address and date. All comments are part of the public record, and by law the government is required to address each concern in the final Environmental Impact Statement. Question may be emailed or phoned to Mr. Fristik at 202-720-5093. Richard.fristik@wdc.usda.gov

Mail comments to:
Richard Fristik
USDA Rural Development, Utilities Programs
1400 Independence Ave. SW
Mail Stop 1571, Room 2237
Washington D.C. 22050-1571

Or:

Kathleen Johnson
Department of Environment Quality
Director’s Office
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, MT 59620-0901
========================================================================



Possible talking points as offered by concerned citizens :

1. Constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. Especially damaging to downwind and downstream neighbors in Fort Benton, Big Sandy, Havre, and on Rocky Boy Indian Reservation.

2. Risky financial investment for the taxpayers


3. Global warming.... The equivalent of all the cars in Seattle.

4. Mercury poisoning, especially downwind and downstream

5. SME’s public statements about quantity of mercury (0.9 lbs per trillion btu) don’t match permit (1.5 lbs per trillion btu), and contrary to SME’s promise of immediate installation of active carbon injection, permit requires NO specific mercury controls beyond what is required for SOX and NOX and particulates.


6. Lack of meaningful public input until this public hearing process.

7. Montana is already a net exporter of energy. According to SME 2004 Load Forecast, some of the electricity will be sold in northern Wyoming to increase the profit margins for operators of natural gas and coal bed methane companies.

8. No lights will go out in Montana if this plant is not built. Other rural cooperatives will meet the needs of SE Montana, and probably at lesser rates. Central Montana rural electric cooperatives that supply our area of Montana have mostly refused to participate in this venture.

9. No comprehensive business plan with signed contracts for coal, rail shipments, building supplies, longterm customers. No factoring for inflation or increased cost of borrowing money over the last 18 months. No consideration of carbon tax. No recognition that California will not buy energy that contributes to global warming.

10. Inadequate evaluation of renewable energy alternatives.


11. Use of twenty year old technology with no current assessment of
IGCC, with its many environmental and economic advantages

12. Grossly erroneous calculation of carbon offset by tree planting.

13. Not the “cleanest coal plant” that is being “sold” to the public.


14. Establishes a precendent for “finger annexation” of County property by the City.

15. Visual impact of coal plant set against the Highwoods. Loss in real estate values. Near Lewis and Clark historic portage site (Class IV visual distraction), only 1.3 miles away. Creation of haze, dust, & noise.

16. Effect on the fish and fishing and tourism industry.

17. Impact on birds, especially those that eat fish like bald eagles. Proximity to Benton Lake wildlife refuge.

18. Necessity of doing baseline studies on land and water samples is not addressed. Need to monitor air discharges on a continuous basis with data made available to the public via the internet.

19. SME needs to compensate farmers and ranchers for reduced land values.

20. Intentional disinformation campaign by Annapolis Center for Science Policy, sponsored by Exxon Mobile.

21. Gross mismatch of size of plant with SME’s need. Baseload vs. peak power. Costly burden of finding market for excess power. This CFB plant cannot be used to firm windpower. This appears to be a merchant plant.

22. Squandered water, mostly evaporated; half of what the entire populace of Great Falls uses on a winter day. Reduces Missouri River flow by up to 0.31%. Plant will use up to 3200 gallons per minute, or 4.6 million gallons per day, 80% of which will be evaporated in the cooling towers. This amount of water would fill 115,000 bathtubs!

23. Given the many variables, it is impossible to predict that this plant will successfully produce energy at a competitive price.

24. Management of solid waste from the plant, 225 tons of fly ash and bottom ash per day! (Groundwater contamination? Overflow with flooding? How to manage in subzero weather?) Another future superfund site? Possible contamination of the Giant Springs aquifer?