Arduous process ahead for developers of power plant

By The Associated Press - 6/28/04

GREAT FALLS (AP) — Some high hurdles are ahead for the people who want to build a coal-fired power plant that would be Montana's first major project of that kind in 30 years.

‘‘It's a long, lengthy process,'' said Tim Gregori, general manager of Southern Montana Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative. ‘‘And we've already been at it three years.''

The co-op anticipates completion of the plant near Great Falls no sooner than 2008. Finishing the work that year will happen only if everything pencils out financially for the $470 million, 250-megawatt plant; an array of regulations are met; and likely opposition on environmental grounds is overcome.

‘‘We'll look at the specifics and listen to what the developers have to say, but I'm anticipating that we're going to be opposed to this plant very strongly,'' said Pat Judge, energy program director for the Montana Environmental Information Center in Helena. ‘‘Coal remains the most polluting way to generate a kilowatt of electricity.''

Backers of the project say various factors are in its favor:

n Customers already are promising to buy the power.

n Expensive new power lines won't have to be built to transmit the power.

n The project has access to financing.

n The plant would employ a cleaner-burning technology.

n It would be the first major public-power project in Montana, a plant owned by Montana consumers, dedicated to serving them with affordable, reliable power through nonprofit means.

The plant is proposed by Billings-based Southern Montana Electric G&T Co-op, created last year by a group of five rural electric cooperatives serving 100,000 people in central and south-central Montana. The partnership occurred because several major contracts that supply the rural co-ops with electricity begin expiring in 2008 and will not be renewed, meaning the co-ops need new power sources.

The city of Great Falls, facing its own challenges in securing energy, joined the co-op and tentatively plans to finance 17.5 percent of the plant. Great Falls would reserve a proportionate amount of the plant's power, about 40 megawatts, and hopes to make extra power available to other consumers later.

Over the long run, co-op members believe building the plant would provide power that is less expensive and more reliable than what is bought on the open market.

Stuart Lewin of Great Falls, a member of the conservation group Missouri River Citizens, likes the idea of publicly owned power. But he questions the appropriateness of a coal plant.

‘‘In the long run, we have to live with a plant that poses problems with global warming,'' Lewin said. ‘‘I would rather see our public capital be used to develop cleaner sources of power.''

Gregori said the co-ops considered other power sources, but coal is the best choice both for reasons of economy and because customers need a reliable, 24-hour source of electricity.

The exact cost of the coal plant's power is not known, because designs on the boiler and other factors are still being determined. But Gregori said engineering consultants concluded the cost would beat the open-market price of about $45 per megawatt hour.

Customers of NorthWestern Energy in Montana currently pay about $40 per mwh. That does not include the delivery cost of about $35 per mwh.

Many co-ops get a much better deal. Gregori said the members he serves pay about $30 per mwh for electricity, including transmission.

The plant would have less environmental impact than those of old, he said, partly through ‘‘clean coal'' technology. But Judge said that does not change the fact that burning coal creates carbon dioxide, a primary ‘‘greenhouse gas.'' Coal-fired plants also create mercury, a toxic metal associated with health problems, he said.

Gregori is confident the plant would meet all applicable air- and water-quality standards. But even if it did, it remains open to court challenges.

Last year the Montana Environmental Information Center filed suit to block an air-quality permit granted in early 2003 to a proposed coal-fired plant near Roundup, arguing it violates the state constitutional guarantee to a ‘‘clean and healthful environment.'' That case is scheduled for a December trial before a state judge in Roundup.

Even before a court challenge against the plant proposed for the Great Falls area could be mounted, the developers must secure the land for the project and obtain many permits. State officials say it's likely an environmental impact statement, a comprehensive study taking many months, will be necessary.

Information from: Great Falls Tribune, http://www.greatfallstribune.com