May 23, 2008

 

Events justify taking fresh look at city's role with SME

So far all that the proposed Highwood Generating Station northeast of Great Falls has generated is controversy.

Opposition is threefold:

 

Its use of coal to make electricity, a process that has been a major contributor of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere;

 

 

The city of Great Falls' role in it. Some opponents don't believe the city should be involved in such a project;

 

 

Its proximity to a tract that was designated some years ago as the Lewis and Clark Great Falls Portage National Landmark. The landmark encompasses a camp site used by the explorers, as well as their route up from the river bottoms to bench land on which they portaged past the waterfalls that blocked their way.

 

We applauded the city's intentions when it first got involved in the project, and we still think the underlying reasons have validity.

In the deregulated electricity environment, the city and other government entities say they got the proverbial shaft from NorthWestern Energy a few years ago.

For Great Falls, joining with five electric co-ops in pursuing the Highwood plant was one of several options explored in the search for a predictably priced, reliable source of electricity.

But much has changed since the project was launched, especially America's attitude toward generating electricity from coal, or at least toward generating it without dramatic improvements in capturing emissions, including carbon dioxide.

Two major changes have occurred to the project itself:

 

The Rural Utilities Service, which typically funds electric cooperative projects, said in February that it was pulling back on funding coal projects, including Highwood. That left the coalition of five co-ops and the city — formed as the Southern Montana Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative — to look for private financing.

 

 

The largest co-op member of SME pulled out, though the circumstances of its departure are in some dispute. That left the plant's organizers with one less — and significant — partner.

 

We now applaud new City Manager Greg Doyon's desire to take a fresh look at the city's involvement in Highwood. Considering the shifting political sand beneath the project, it only makes sense.

In fact, Doyon's predecessor, John Lawton, also supports such a look.

In an e-mail to city officials and the Tribune earlier this week, Lawton said, "I completely agree with what Greg is proposing."

"Further," he said, "what else could he and the City Commission do when SME is asking them to be part of a new entity? Signing on with a new entity and a new concept will require a public discussion and Commission actions."

The city may or may not decide to stick with SME; but the occasion of a new manager, a newly constituted SME, and a changed energy market more than justify a fresh look.