by Bruce Goodman

After waiting more than two years, Consumers Power has received MDEQ approval of a Michigan air use permit for it proposed new coal fired facility in the Bay City area.  Whether it turns out to be the last project standing is still to be seen.  The LS Power coal project proposed for Midland suspended its efforts to get permitted earlier this year.  The Wolverine Power coal project in Rogers City, once thought to be the leading contender to get the first permit, is waiting.  And the oft-delayed coal project for Holland Board of Public Works still has not surfaced. 

What impact this decision may have on alternative and renewable energy projects in Michigan is unclear.  What is clear is that now Consumers Energy will not have all its political energies focused on the permitting problems it was having with the MDEQ.  However, the “problem” venue will only be shifting, as there is little doubt that ultimately the decision to permit the project will be challenged in the courts.  Meanwhile, it will be interesting to see what steps Consumers Power takes to begin mothballing coal capacity, as it is required to do under the stipulation of  obtaining the new air permit.  Stay tuned.

Tweet This Post

by Bruce Goodman

In its advisory role to the MDEQ on pending air permit applications, the Michigan Public Service Commission staff has found in two separate reports that there is no immediate need for either the 930 MW coal-fired plant proposed by Consumers Power Company nor the 600 MW coal-fired plant proposed by Wolverine Power Cooperative.  Although previously the MPSC had issued a report calling for at least one new power plant, the MPSC staff’s newest electric demand forecasts do not justify the plants. The findings do suggest there would be a need for new capacity if old capacity was retired.  This seems like the card that Consumers Power Company has been unwilling to play, as it has a number of very old coal fired plants.  Accoring to the MPSC staff, if there is no retirement then there is no need for baseload capacity for 13 years. The implications for Detroit Edison’s proposed Fermi 3 nuclear reactor are not clear.  The earliest in-service date for that $10 billion plant would be 2018.

Tweet This Post

by Bruce Goodman

There is a disconnect in the public discourse on electric generation in Michigan.  It revolves around the confusion caused by such terms as “capacity”, “availability”, “energy”, “reliability”,  “intermittent”, “firm”, “spot market”, “backup”, “baseload”, “efficiency” and other energy jargon.  Energy policy cannot afford loose talk or loose thinking. The call for energy efficiency and alternative energy requires a better understanding of all these concepts. At the most basic level the public (and its leaders) needs to know that a comprehensive energy policy requires significant baseload capacity (MW) so that  alternative energy as we currently know it (MWh) can successfully contribute to energy security for citizens and businesses.  With an aging fleet of coal burning power plants, a manufacturing based economy, and a history of environmental protection Michigan needs the collective wisdom of economists, engineers, environmentalists, industry, business and politicians to achieve reliable and affordable power and a balanced energy portfolio (and capacity portfolio) of renewable energy, energy efficiency, and replacement baseload generation.

Tweet This Post