India's Blackout Lesson: Coal Failed, Small Solar = Big Results

From a story by Justin Guay, Sierra Club International Program:

Of course they still have to face the problems they have inherited from trying to copy/paste a centralized grid from the West. So what can they do to solve peak problems with the grid they already have in place? Deploy lots and lots of distributed solar and efficiency.

That's because, unlike coal, solar for the most part is available when you need it - during peak hours. Which is why it's great to see States like Gujarat taking the lead in roof top solar programs with the support of the IFC. And efficiency makes the peaks smaller so you need less power in the first place.

The irony here of course is that distributed generation has always been ignored as trivial compared to the real need for a large scale 'modern grid.' That’s because policymakers and commentators lack the imagination to understand the fact that when aggregated, small can be very, very big.

Take the hidden truth behind India's modern grid (as my colleague Jigar Shah points out): it is actually already a distributed system that is largely powered by filthy, costly diesel gen sets. That’s because power outages are so frequent that businesses and wealthy individuals have been forced to pay for this backup generation to ensure power. This is a tremendous opportunity for companies seeking targeted diesel replacement strategies to save people and companies tremendous amounts of money, while providing reliable power.

Read more »

Sierra Club issues notice of intent to sue We Energies for coal ash spill

A news release from the Sierra Club:

Madison, Wisconsin - Today, the Sierra Club issued a Notice of Intent to sue We Energies for the October 31 flood of coal ash into Lake Michigan when an old landfill located on the bluff collapsed at a construction site at the company’s Oak Creek coal plant.

“We Energies must be held responsible for the toxic mess at the bottom of Lake Michigan,” explained Jennifer Feyerherm of Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign. “We Energies has essentially turned Lake Michigan, a national treasure that supplies drinking water to over 10 million people, into a coal ash dump. We Energies filled a ravine next to Lake Michigan with coal ash, and it is that ash that now lies at the bottom of the lake. This was a predicted and preventable disaster.”

A biologist from the Southeastern Wisconsin Planning Commission raised concerns about the structural stability of the bluff when We Energies was planning to develop the site. As construction proceeded, the bluff collapsed, covering the shoreline with an estimated 25,000 cubic yards of coal ash and soil and dumping 2,500 cubic yards of coal ash and soil into the lake.

The Notice of Intent to sue alleges that the pollutants in the coal ash at the bottom of Lake Michigan “pose an imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the environment.”

Coal ash is the toxic byproduct of burning coal. Heavy metals such as arsenic, mercury, chromium, and molybdenum remain in the ash after coal is burned. These toxic metals are linked to many health effects including cancer, birth defects, kidney damage, and nerve damage. In fact, studies have likened the risk of living near a coal ash site to smoking a pack of cigarettes each day. These toxic metals also put our fragile Great Lakes ecosystem at risk, threatening aquatic habitat and building up in the food chain.

“There are more than 2,000 toxic coal ash sites in the U.S. polluting our air and water, and now there is a new one on the bottom of Lake Michigan,” noted Melissa Warner, a volunteer leader with the Sierra Club that lives south of the coal ash dump. “My family’s drinking water comes from the lake. We Energies must clean up its mess and prevent any disaster like this from happening again.”

To date, there has been little information available to the local community about where the coal ash in the lake is going, what it will take to clean it up, and when the cleanup might be completed. Today’s Notice of Intent to sue is the first step in legal action against We Energies to force the company to clean up the toxic coal ash.

Ever since the TVA coal ash disaster in 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency has been trying to enact national protections to stop this kind of disastrous spill from happening.

“Communities here in Wisconsin and across the nation remain at risk and unprotected,” concluded Feyerherm. “The burning of coal is a public health menace. This spill is yet another illustration that as long as we are still mining and burning coal, our families and communities are paying the price.”

More posts on the spill and utilities.

Read more »

We Energies' coal ash spill dumps toxins into Lake Michigan

A news release issued by Clean Wisconsin:

November 1, 2011

Contact:
Katie Nekola
Clean Wisconsin
608.212.8751(cell)

MILWAUKEE — Monday’s bluff collapse at We Energies’ Oak Creek coal plant sent a substantial amount of coal ash into Lake Michigan. Coal ash is a dangerous byproduct of burning coal to make electricity, yet has potentially toxic health effects if it enters our groundwater.

“We Energies said in an update on its website today that coal ash is ‘not a hazardous material,’” says Katie Nekola, attorney for Clean Wisconsin, “but that is far from true. The fact is, coal ash contains chemicals and compounds that are dangerous to human health. This disaster proves that we need better regulation of coal ash and that the public deserves the right to know what’s in their drinking water.”

Coal ash contains 24 known pollutants, some of which, according to the National Resource Council, are toxic even in minuscule quantities. Those toxins include: arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, lead, mercury, and dioxins, along with other chemicals and compounds.

These toxins can cause serious health problems including cancers, central nervous system damage, and blood and kidney disorders. Coal ash dump ponds and landfills are often unlined, and arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmium can leach into local drinking water. One Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study found that residents living near unlined ash ponds run a risk of cancer from arsenic contamination that is 2,000 times greater than the EPA's threshold for acceptable risk. At Oak Creek, the coal ash came from a decades-old, closed coal ash landfill. This spill comes at a time when Congress is considering limiting EPA's authority to regulate coal ash as a hazardous waste.

“This landslide poured toxic materials directly into Lake Michigan, which 10 million people rely on for drinking water,” said Nekola. “Area residents should insist that We Energies and state regulators ensure the safety of their water supplies as soon as possible.”

###

Read more »

Bluff collapse at power plant sends dirt, coal ash into Lake Michigan

From an article by Meg Jones and Don Behm in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Oak Creek - A large section of bluff collapsed Monday next to the We Energies Oak Creek Power Plant, sending dirt, coal ash and mud cascading into the shoreline next to Lake Michigan and dumping a pickup truck, dredging equipment, soil and other debris into the lake.

There were no injuries, and the incident did not affect power output from the plant.

When the section of bluff collapsed and slid from a terraced area at the top of a hill down to the lake, Oak Creek Acting Fire Chief Tom Rosandich said, it left behind a debris field that stretched 120 yards long and 50 to 80 yards wide at the bottom.

Aerial images show a trailer and storage units holding construction equipment tumbled like Tonka toy trucks and were swept along with the falling bluff in a river of dirt that ended in the water.

"This is definitely a freak accident," U.S. Coast Guard Lt. j.g. Brian Dykenssaid.

As a company hired by We Energies began cleanup in Lake Michigan, the utility confirmed that coal ash was part of the debris.

"Based on our land use records it is probable that some of the material that washed into the lake is coal ash," We Energies spokesman Barry McNulty said. "We believe that was something that was used to fill the ravine area in that site during the 1950s. That's a practice that was discontinued several decades ago."

The Environmental Protection Agency is in the process of developing stricter regulations of coal ash following a 2008 Tennessee coal ash pond washout that created a devastating environmental disaster.

Read more »

Wind project holds down utility's costs by$12 million, coal pushes them higher

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

We Energies customers could see a small increase in electric bills in 2012 linked to the higher price of coal and other power plant fuels expected next year, the company said Wednesday.

The state's largest utility filed a plan with the state Public Service Commission that said costs linked to power plant fuels are projected to rise by about $50 million in 2012.

The utility wants to delay an increase in non-fuel rates until 2013. Whenever that increase hits customers' bills, it would result in a hike of about 6%, the utility projects.

Under the utility's plan, rates would rise in 2012 only because of power plant fuel prices, and the bottom line for customers would be an overall 2012 increase of less than 1%.

Residential customers would see a 0.7% increase, adding 77 cents a month for a typical residential customer now paying $104.90 a month for electricity, utility spokesman Brian Manthey said. Business customers would see increases of about 1% to 1.1%. . . .

The higher price of coal is projected to lead to $28 million in higher costs next year, including the price of the fuel itself and cost to deliver it by train to Wisconsin. Other increases include $10 million for power it buys from the Point Beach nuclear plant and about $8 million for natural gas.

Offsetting these increases somewhat is the state's newest and largest wind farm, set to open late this year. Generation from the Glacier Hills Wind Park would decrease 2012 fuel costs by more than $12 million, We Energies said.

Read more »

Valley plant could switch to gas

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

We Energies plans to take initial steps toward converting its Milwaukee coal-fired power plant to burn natural gas, the utility's chairman told shareholders Thursday.

The Milwaukee utility has been under pressure to address air pollution from the power plant located south of downtown in the Menomonee River Valley.

To comply with new federal pollution rules, the utility has been studying whether to convert the plant to natural gas or to add environmental controls that could allow it to continue burning coal.

"We believe we will need to convert the plant from coal to natural gas," Chairman and Chief Executive Gale Klappa told shareholders at Wisconsin Energy Corp.'s annual meeting at Concordia University Wisconsin in Mequon.

We Energies will file an application with the state Public Service Commission in the second half of this year for an initial project that would be needed for that conversion to take place.

"That first step would be to put in a larger natural gas pipeline that could . . . supply natural gas to that facility," Klappa said. "That will be a significant project. It will require PSC approval, it will require City of Milwaukee approval, and it will require us to update a 1949 natural gas line that runs through the area."

Klappa did not announce a timeline for converting the plant from coal to gas. Utility spokesman Brian Manthey said the utility needs to ensure it has the approval and the ability to supply gas to the power plant before it makes a final decision.

"The (Cleaner Valley) coalition encourages We Energies to move as quickly as possible," said the Rev. Willie Brisco, president of Milwaukee Inner City Congregations Allied for Hope. "People's lives are impacted by Milwaukee's dirty air each and every day."

Built in the late 1960s, the Valley plant is the utility's only major coal-fired plant in Wisconsin that lacks modern pollution controls. A much smaller coal plant in Wauwatosa provides steam to businesses at the Milwaukee County Grounds.

Environmental groups and a consortium of other groups in the Milwaukee area formed the Cleaner Valley Coalition to urge the utility to clean up the plant. In addition, the Sierra Club and Clean Wisconsin challenged an air pollution permit for Valley, saying it doesn't go far enough to protect public health.

"We're very happy to hear that they're taking a step in the right direction," said Emily Miota of the Sierra Club. "The biggest concern now is that they move quickly to make this happen."

Read more »

Environmental groups challenge Valley plant's air pollution permit

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A new air pollution permit issued by state regulators for the coal-fired power plant near downtown Milwaukee doesn't go far enough to protect public health, environmental groups said Thursday as they filed challenges to the permit.

We Energies' Valley plant doesn't have modern controls to reduce emissions linked to soot, smog and respiratory health problems.

The state Department of Natural Resources recently issued a permit for the plant to keep operating without installing more controls.

Sierra Club and Clean Wisconsin, backed by the Cleaner Valley Coalition, filed petitions with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the DNR seeking changes to the permit. The DNR filing seeks a contested case hearing before an administrative law judge.

In light of new EPA standards, the Milwaukee utility is continuing to evaluate whether to add controls to the plant or switch the plant from burning coal to burning natural gas.

A decision on changes for the Valley plant, which provides steam to heat and cool downtown Milwaukee buildings, is expected this year.

"It's great that they're deciding. We need a decision now because Milwaukee air quality is bad now. And we're hoping they'll make the right decision and move away from coal because it's just going to get more expensive to continue to burn coal," said Jennifer Feyerherm of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign. "There are so many people living by that plant, and coal is too dirty to burn amid that many people."

Read more »

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Utility customers could be on hook for extra cost

We Energies customers may be on the hook for more money to pay for the Oak Creek power plant, based on latest estimates that indicate the project came in 8.7% over budget - adding $191 million to the price tag for the largest construction project in state history.

The project initially was approved with a budget of $2.19 billion. Project delays blamed on litigation and permitting delays, as well as weather-related construction problems, have contributed to rising costs. The total price tag is now pegged at $2.38 billion.

A report by R.W. Beck & Co., a consultant hired by We Energies to review the progress of the construction, indicated that the cost for the second phase of the plant would come in about 9% over budget. An earlier report said the cost of building the first unit and facilities - including coal-handling machinery and a giant pipe beneath Lake Michigan that draws water to cool the plant - was projected to go 7% over budget.

In a filing with securities regulators on Friday, Wisconsin Energy Corp. announced the $191 million in overruns. The amount to be collected from We Energies customers is expected to be provided to the PSC in coming months as part of a proceeding to set rates in 2012 and 2013, utility spokesman Brian Manthey said.

The utility maintains the plant is a bargain based on rising steel and construction expenses that boosted the costs for similar projects around the country in recent years. The utility was able to lock in prices before steel and other commodity prices soared in the middle of the decade.

Read more »

We Energies ponders Valley plant's future

From an article by Thomas Content in the Milwaukeee Journal Sentinel:

Stricter EPA pollution rules leading to changes

We Energies managers expect to decide this year how the utility will clean up the Menomonee Valley power plant to comply with new environmental rules.

The Milwaukee power company is studying whether to add pollution controls at the downtown plant or to convert the plant to burn natural gas.

A coalition of health and environmental groups plans a petition drive calling on the company to make changes more rapidly.

The Valley plant has come under fire because it is the only large utility plant the company operates in Wisconsin that hasn't been outfitted with state-of-the-art pollution scrubbers or shut down.

As part of a federal court settlement resolving alleged violations of the Clean Air Act, the state's largest utility has added pollution controls to power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie, and converted its oldest coal plant in Port Washington to burn natural gas.

The Cleaner Valley Coalition has expanded its coalition with the addition of the Milwaukee Inner-City Congregations Allied for Hope and the Wisconsin Interfaith Power & Light coalition, among others. Other members include the Black Health Coalition of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Latino Health Coalition, Midwest Environmental Advocates, Sierra Club and Clean Wisconsin.

"We are demanding We Energies to clean up its mess and the Environmental Protection Agency to hold We Energies accountable to meet modern and protective health standards," said Virginia Zerpa, leader of the Cleaner Valley Coalition.

Read more »

Colorado regulators vote for Xcel to shut 6 coal-fired plants

From an article by Mark Jaffe in the Denver Post:

The Colorado Public Utilities Commission voted Monday to shut six aging Front Range coal-fired power units and allow Xcel Energy to replace them with a new $530 million gas-fired plant.

Pollution controls, with a $340 million price tag, also were approved for the coal-burning Pawnee plant near Brush and the Hayden plant.

The commission still must decide what to do with the largest coal-burning plant in the Denver area — the Cherokee 4 unit.

"Cherokee 4 is the largest source of air pollution in the Denver area, and it needs to be shut," said John Nielson, energy-program director for the environmental-policy group Western Resource Advocates.

The closures, which will occur between 2011 and 2017, are part of Xcel's proposal to meet the state Clean Air- Clean Jobs Act, which seeks to cut nitrogen-oxide pollution by 70 to 80 percent.

Xcel would receive accelerated cost recovery for the investments in a comprehensive plan to cut pollution under the law.

The state is out of compliance with federal clean-air health standards and has to submit a plan next year to the Environmental Protection Agency showing steps to cut pollution.

Read more »

Wisconsin Cannot Afford to Ignore Rising Coal Prices

For immediate release
December 1, 2010

More information
RENEW Wisconsin
Michael Vickerman
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Wisconsin Cannot Afford to Ignore Rising Coal Prices

Long-considered an inexpensive and reliable fuel source, coal has become subject to market and regulatory pressures that threaten to make it an expensive and risky way to generate electricity, according to national news reports and pertinent utility filings with the Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC).

“The expectation of continued increases in coal prices reinforces the value of relying on Wisconsin’s own energy resources. If there’s an effort to find savings for utility customers, the logical move would be to shutter antiquated coal plants before they become more of a liability,” said Michael Vickerman, Executive Director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide, nonprofit renewable energy advocacy organization.

A key driver behind coal’s rising cost is China, which has moved from an exporter to an importer of coal. The New York Times (NYT) reported last week that Chinese coal imports will hit all-time highs for November and December of this year. Some of this coal is coming from Wyoming’s Powder River Basin, the coal field that also supplies many Wisconsin power plants.¹

In the New York Times story, an executive from Peabody Energy, the world’s largest private coal company, predicted that his company will send larger and larger quantities of coal to China in the coming years.

Further adding to the upward price pressure on coal is the rising cost of diesel fuel. The PSC has estimated that half of the delivered cost of coal in Wisconsin is attributable to rail shipment, that is highly sensitive to the price of diesel fuel, which sells for 38 cents more per gallon than it did a year ago, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.² Tom Whipple, editor of the Peak Oil Review, expects diesel fuel supplies to tighten in 2011 as a consequence of flat production volumes and increasing demand from Asia.³ This phenomenon could affect Wisconsin electric utility rates as early as January 2011, according to Vickerman.

We Energies’ coal costs have escalated by $57 million, of which transportation costs account for almost $33 million, according to the utility’s most recent rate filing with the PSC. On top of that, We Energies expects to pay an additional $8 million in oil surcharge costs.4

Click to continue

Read more »

Wind generation reduces climate-changing emissions

From a report titled "The Facts about Wind Energy’s Emissions Savings" prepared by the American Wind Energy Association:

. . . four of the seven major independent grid operators in the
U.S. have studied the emissions impact of adding wind energy to their power grids, and all four have found that adding wind energy drastically reduces emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmful pollutants. While the emissions savings depend somewhat on the existing share of coal-fired versus gas-fired generation in the region, as one would expect, it is impossible to dispute the findings of these four independent grid operators that adding wind energy to their grids has significantly reduced emissions. . . .

DOE data show that wind and other renewables’ share of Texas’s electric mix increased from 1.3% in 2005 to 4.4% in 2008, an increase in share of 3.1 percentage points. During that period, electric sector carbon dioxide emissions declined by 3.3%, even though electricity use actually increased by 2% during that time. Because of wind energy, the state of Texas was able to turn what would have been a carbon emissions increase into a decrease of 8,690,000 metric tons per year, equal to the emissions savings of taking around 1.5 million cars off the road.

Read more »

Doing it cleaner

From an editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

We Energies' Valley power plant is a vital link serving the region's energy needs. That doesn't mean it can't run cleaner.

We Energies' coal-fired Valley power plant isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Nor should it. The plant - about a mile south of downtown Milwaukee in the Menomonee River Valley - meets a vital need in the utility's energy network and plays a unique role among power plants by producing steam to heat many downtown buildings, helping to keep heating costs stable.

But it is time to clean up the plant and bring it into the 21st century. We Energies is working on that, but anything the utility can do to expedite the process would be helpful. What that will mean is either switching to a new kind of fuel - natural gas - or adding equipment to the plant to clean up its emissions. Both would cost money, and ratepayers will have to pick up the cost.

The utility needs to figure out which is the better option and look for ways to mitigate the cost, but improving air quality is essential to public health and economic development. It's worth some cost.

As a recent article by Thomas Content and Lee Bergquist made clear, Valley is a plant with a problem. It is We Energies' oldest power plant that lacks modern emission controls. It thus adds to air pollution in the Milwaukee area, a region with air quality challenges.

Read more »

We Energies' Valley plant operates under more lenient standards

From an article by Tom Content and Lee Bergquist in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Many old coal-fired power plants are shutting down or being upgraded, but Valley escapes change

Many of Wisconsin's oldest coal-fired power plants are shutting down or are being upgraded as regulators tighten standards to improve air quality.

But We Energies' Valley plant - with its twin 400-foot smokestacks that tower over the High Rise Bridge a mile south of downtown Milwaukee - is a glaring exception.

The utility has avoided installing costly pollution controls by capitalizing on the plant's age, its unique role in producing steam to heat many downtown buildings and a court settlement with environmental regulators.

Valley is We Energies' oldest power plant that lacks modern emission controls. As a result, it exposes metro Milwaukee - an area with longstanding air quality problems - to more air pollution.

"Valley is the poster child for the oldest and dirtiest coal plants in the state," said Jennifer Feyerherm of the Sierra Club, an organization that has been active in forcing utilities to clean up operations of old power plants.

We Energies' No. 2 executive said the company has installed equipment to bring down pollution.

"We have not ignored Valley," said Rick Kuester, the utility's executive vice president.

He signaled for the first time that the company is studying the future of Valley and considering adding more pollution controls or switching to a cleaner burning fuel.

Kuester also emphasized the critical role the plant plays in the financial health of downtown Milwaukee by relying on steam to keep heating costs stable. The plant also provides supplemental electricity for the broader power grid on hot summer days when usage is high.

Read more »

RENEW Wisconsin Calls for Veto of Waste-to-Energy Bill

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 23, 2010

MORE INFORMATION
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

RENEW Wisconsin Calls for Veto of Waste-to-Energy Bill

RENEW Wisconsin called on Governor Jim Doyle to veto a bill that allows garbage to qualify as a renewable energy resource.

“The bill (Senate Bill 273), passed in the last hours of the final legislative session, would lead to a cutback in new clean-energy installations using solar, wind, biogas, and biomass,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide renewable energy advocacy organization.

The bill would credit electricity from gasification of garbage toward the amount of renewable energy each Wisconsin utility must supply under current law.

“By failing to pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act, the Legislature essentially froze the overall percentage of renewable energy that Wisconsin utilities must supply to customers,” said Vickerman.

“Adding solid waste to the list of eligible resources without raising the percentage above the current requirement will result in a reduction of electricity derived from truly sustainable renewable resources.”

“No way can anyone legitimately say that this bill expands renewable energy in Wisconsin.”

“All in all, this session will be remembered as a wasted opportunity for clean energy and job creation,” Vickerman said.

“When we entered the month of April, we had high hopes for the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a bill that would have forcefully sent Wisconsin down a path to energy independence while creating thousands of new jobs. Instead, the Legislature crammed garbage down the throats of utility customers.”

“No other legislative body in history has managed to trash Earth Day and the legacy of Wisconsin’s own Gaylord Nelson as completely as the Wisconsin Senate whose leaders wouldn’t allow a vote on the Clean Energy Jobs Act,” according to Vickerman.

“Governor Doyle can honor Gaylord Nelson by vetoing SB 273.”

END

Read more »

The staggering cost of new nuclear power

From an article by Joseph Room on Center for American Progress:

A new study puts the generation costs for power from new nuclear plants at 25 to 30 cents per kilowatt-hour—triple current U.S. electricity rates!

This staggering price is far higher than the cost of a variety of carbon-free renewable power sources available today—and 10 times the cost of energy efficiency (see “Is 450 ppm possible? Part 5: Old coal’s out, can’t wait for new nukes, so what do we do NOW?”

The new study, “Business Risks and Costs of New Nuclear Power,” is one of the most detailed cost analyses publically available on the current generation of nuclear power plants being considered in this country. It is by a leading expert in power plant costs, Craig A. Severance. A practicing CPA, Severance is co-author of The Economics of Nuclear and Coal Power (Praeger 1976), and former assistant to the chairman and to commerce counsel, Iowa State Commerce Commission.

This important new analysis is being published by Climate Progress because it fills a critical gap in the current debate over nuclear power—transparency. Severance explains:

All assumptions, and methods of calculation are clearly stated. The piece is a deliberate effort to demystify the entire process, so that anyone reading it (including non-technical readers) can develop a clear understanding of how total generation costs per kWh come together.

As stunning as this new, detailed cost estimate is, it should not come as a total surprise. I detailed the escalating capital costs of nuclear power in my May 2008 report, “The Self-Limiting Future of Nuclear Power.” And in a story last week on nuclear power’s supposed comeback, Time magazine notes that nuclear plants’ capital costs are “out of control,” concluding:

Most efficiency improvements have been priced at 1¢ to 3¢ per kilowatt-hour, while new nuclear energy is on track to cost 15¢ to 20¢ per kilowatt-hour. And no nuclear plant has ever been completed on budget.

Time buried that in the penultimate paragraph of the story!

Read more »

We Energies coal plant hits milestone, generates power

From a Tom Content post on JSOnline:

We Energies’ newest coal-fired plant is generating power, after “significant progress” in construction over the past three months, the company’s chairman said Thursday.

The coal plant consists of two coal-fired boilers next to an older coal plant on Lake Michigan in Oak Creek. The first new boiler began burning coal earlier this month and has been running at 25% of maximum power in recent days, said Gale Klappa, We Energies chairman and chief executive.

Bechtel Power Corp., the contractor on the project, also has made progress on building the second boiler, which is now 74% complete, Klappa said.

The $2.3 billion project is the most expensive construction project in state history, as it’s roughly double the combined cost of building Miller Park and rebuilding the Marquette Interchange.

Read more »

We Energies coal plant hits milestone, generates power

From a Tom Content blog post on JSOnline:

We Energies’ newest coal-fired plant is generating power, after “significant progress” in construction over the past three months, the company’s chairman said Thursday.

The coal plant consists of two coal-fired boilers next to an older coal plant on Lake Michigan in Oak Creek. The first new boiler began burning coal earlier this month and has been running at 25% of maximum power in recent days, said Gale Klappa, We Energies chairman and chief executive.

Bechtel Power Corp., the contractor on the project, also has made progress on building the second boiler, which is now 74% complete, Klappa said.

The $2.3 billion project is the most expensive construction project in state history, as it’s roughly double the combined cost of building Miller Park and rebuilding the Marquette Interchange.

Read more »

Pleasant Prairie experiment: Subtracting carbon from coal

From a post by Tom Content on JS Online:

The carbon dioxide catch-and-release experiment in Pleasant Prairie, which started last year, is getting some more attention today.

The We Energies power plant is the site of a project funded in part by the Electric Power Research Institute and the French company Alstom. Alstom has built a system at the state's largest coal-fired power plant that uses chilled ammonia to separate the carbon dioxide that's heads out into the atmosphere.

If all goes well with this test, the utility industry is planning a bigger demonstration of this technology at a coal plant in West Virginia.

Whatever technological change is forced on utilities, it won't come cheap, Wall Street Journal Environment Editor Jeffrey Ball writes in his column today.

"Whatever the truth about 'clean coal,' consumers will be paying for it one way or another," Ball writes.

The test is one way that the utility sector is preparing for regulation of greenhouse gases at some point by Congress. That's significant for Wisconsin given how much we rely on coal for power.

Read more »

We Energies coal dust silo explosion injures 6 workers

From an article by Tom Kertscher in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Oak Creek - An explosion Tuesday morning inside a We Energies coal dust silo rained flames down on a group of contract employees who were making preparations for repair work to begin.

Four employees were inside the 65-foot-tall structure and two outside when the explosion occurred, said a We Energies spokesman. A doctor said a 43-year-old man pulled his son, 22, and at least one other co-worker to safety.

The 22-year-old was the most severely injured, suffering burns to more than half his body, according to Tom Schneider, medical director of the Columbia St. Mary's Regional Burn Center in Milwaukee.

The cause of the blast, reported at 10:53 a.m., has not been determined. Federal and local authorities will be investigating, officials said.

The six workers are employees of the Milwaukee branch of ThyssenKrupp Safway, a Waukesha-based company that provides scaffolding services, said Michelle Dalton, a company spokeswoman. She would not identify the workers.

ThyssenKrupp was hired as a subcontractor by United States Fire Protection, a New Berlin firm that provides fire protection services, according to We Energies spokesman Brian Manthey.

Read more »