CANDIDATE FEEDBACK ON COAL
PLANT
Question:
(A) Do you favor the proposed coal-fired power plant east of Great
Falls? (B) If so, should the Legislature
grant the city of Great Falls the right to supply electricity to all customers
in the city?
VOTERS TAKE NOTE: To Date (10/12/06) four candidates are
openly opposed or doubt the validity of the course of action for the proposed
coal-fired plant (Mary Jolley, Mike Kasula, Ken Holtz & Jonathan Windy
Boy).
According to the draft Air
Quality Permit, the Highwood Power Project would release the following
pollutants to the atmosphere in Great Falls and surrounding areas:
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 represent an increase of 7.5% over
ALL sources of greenhouse gases in Montana.
Candidates take note:
Our Governor has gone on record as saying that the cleanest
coal to energy technology is IGCC (integrated gasification combined cycle) and will be used
in Montana. This current modern technology can greatly eliminate or reduce the
above compounds from the process and consequent emissions to the atmosphere.
Some of you have publicly here stated support for only ÒThe
cleanest technology availableÓ for the proposed Highwood Generating Plant. Please
keep our environment clean by backing up your words with statements supporting
the governorÕs vision of IGCC coal technology for ALL of Montana. Go to our contacts list
and voice your concerns to not dump the above noxious compounds on our populace
by incorporating IGCCÉÉ
A. Yes. B. Only if they can get legal
permission to do so legislatively, which presently they cannot do.
Brian Hoven, SD12,
Republican (businessman)
I favor the
coal-fired plant east of Great Falls. Hopefully, they will adapt the
technology to control mercury emissions. City owned utilities are common and successful. The
Legislature should agree to permit the city to distribute electricity. However,
the city must permit individuals and businesses to choose where they buy their
power
Mitch
Tropila, SD12, Democrat (son of above)
John Lennon's
song, "Power to the People," comes to mind. Montanans should own
their own power, not the corporate bigwigs on Wall Street. If the best
available technology is incorporated and if environmental standards are stringently met or exceeded, I
support it. Yes to the second part of the question.
Geannine Rapp, HD18, Democrat (see paragraph below)
I support economic growth that
is environmentally responsible and what is best for our families and neighbors.
At this point, I would be in favor of the proposed coal-fired power plant east
of Great Falls. As a representative in the Montana Legislature, I would insist
the plant hire Montana union labor whenever possible, support the plant's claim
for 90 percent mercury capture, and strongly encourage SME to continue to
explore even better technology as it becomes available. I also recognize the significant
benefits to the economy Ñ taxes, jobs and family security, potential for
economic growth, long-term and affordable energy for school district, hospital,
and public entities
Jesse OÕHara, HD18,
Republican, veteran legislator
Yes. I favor building the coal-fired generating plant if we can do it cleanly. And I believe we can with the new technology that is available these days. I believe we need the jobs, the additional tax base, and it will keep energy costs level for future needs Ñ another factor in recruiting businesses to central Montana. I am in favor of whatever gives our people in our community the best deal for their energy dollars.
I support the
construction of a coal-fired power plant east of Great Falls using the
cleanest available technology because Great Falls needs the jobs
Chris
Gregory, HD13, Constitution Party
To be truthful, I need more information on it to make an educated decision
Mike Kaszula, SD11, Libertarian
I do not support the Highwood mercury pump! Other technology,
solar or wind should be developed instead. It could be in the same place. The
infrastructure to support the Highwood mercury pump doesn't exist. The only
good thing about the process is it will likely never be built due to political
posturing and tax base greed. Trainloads of coal to power an Xbox game on pause
doesn't seem worth the trade.
If the
coal-fired power plant meets environmental regulations it should be permitted.
The plant will provide primary sector jobs, increase the tax base and will
create an energy source for local consumption. The City should be allowed the
right to supply electricity
I support the power plant because it will provide good
quality-paying jobs.
Yes to both. It'll create construction jobs and operational jobs,
while
Expanding our tax base. It will have minimal impact on our
environment. Of
Course
it won't be the first coal-fired plant in our midst; Malmstrom has operated one
for 23 years.
I
am in favor of the plant but not a city-run energy monopoly
No
The
ability to have some control over the energy needs of our community is
enticing. The short-term jobs
associated with the construction and the few ongoing jobs related to running
the facility would be a boon to the community. The increase in the tax base could provide some tax relief
to residential property taxpayers.
However, environmental impacts from mercury and other emissions could
negate all the gains realized by polluting our streams and rivers for
generation to come. Mitigating
those potential impacts should be
something on which we can all agree.
If the power plant goes through, all customers should be allowed to
purchase power from the lowest-cost provider available.
Yes, because it would
increase high-paying jobs and revenue to the area of Great Falls. I also would
support the power generated from the plant being offered to citizens of Great
Falls to increase competition in the utility market
I
favor the coal plant with reservations, primarily with the mercury and
greenhouse gas issues. A stringent mercury rule, which the Board of
Environmental Review may make this fall, will reassure me of public health
protection. If the board accepts the DEQ's (Department of Environmental
Quality) mercury limits; Montana does not participate in the national cap and
trade program; and if the company commits to pursue technology to capture
greenhouse gases, I support it. We
need the construction jobs and I commend SME (Southern Montana Electric) for
the pollution control commitments they have made. I support public power and
would consider allowing the city of Great Falls to supply electricity to its
residents.
Robert OÕConnor, HD25, Constitution
Party
Did not return a comment
Mary Jolley, HD22,
Republican
In 2003, the City Commission created
Electric City Power by enacting Ordinance 2861. The City ignored the "vote
of the people" part of Ordinance 2861 and spent $3 million on the coal
plant. On Nov. 1, 2005, our city commission voted to repeal our right to vote.
There was no mention of this repeal in any agenda reports, work sessions or
commission meetings. The Environmental Impact Statement is due soon. I want
citizens to have the right to vote yes or no on the plant, just like every
other city has. Allowing Great Falls to be the default supplier will depend on
the vote.
Rodger Nelson, HD22, Constitution Party
Yes, I favor the coal-fired power plant.
Based on my current understanding, service and price decisions should be left
to the owners of the power plant
Bill Wilson, HD22, Democrat
Yes,
if the cleanest technology is used
and Montana and union workers are hired. Additionally, the on-site wind power
component should be increased. I favor the city of Great Falls being allowed to
supply its residents.
Yes,
because it will supply an expanded tax base, provide permanent good paying jobs
with benefits, use our natural resources and provide for affordable
electricity. The legislature
should further grant the city of Great Falls the right to supply all willing
customers with electricity, (and) go one step further by granting the right to
supply all rural customers.
As
long as modern technology is used to provide the most efficient and cleanest
power. It must be competitive and affordable. The tax base will help our schools.
A.
The production and
availability of energy is a critical part of our economic base. Gaining my support for the coal-fired
power plant is based on three conditions:
That Southern Montana Electric be held to the most stringent possible
controls on mercury emissions; that
they honor a commitment to hiring union labor and Montana workers; (and) that
the city of Great Falls and its citizens are not exposed to any financial
liability.
B.
I believe in the merits
of public power regulated by the Public Service Commission, which is the best
position to evaluate protections for the consumer.
I
am in favor of the coal plant and the customer base should be expansive. I want consumer costs reduced and
stabilized. Employment
opportunities will be a benefit.
More, better better-paid workers increase our tax base and revenue. Environment and pollution must be
addressed scientifically and accurately, not emotionally.
Did not return a comment
Mercury emissions is a
devastating pollutant that needs to be limited. I
strongly oppose the construction of the Highwood Generating Plant (near) Great
falls, not because it will promote jobs, but because of the pollutant emissions
coming from the Plant.