> News > Today's News

«--back to story

Email: "Opponents of coal plant testify before utilities board"
*To:		<--TO Email REQUIRED!
*From:		<--FROM Email REQUIRED!

Leaving six Alliant Energy witnesses for later cross-examination, the Iowa Utilities Board Wednesday moved on to the lineup of Consumer Advocate witnesses, all opposed to the proposed building a new coal-fired power plant in Marshalltown.

Michael Drunsic, a research associate for the firm Synapse Energy Economics, had argued in documents presented before this week’s hearing in the Iowa Veterans Home’s Whitehall Auditorium that the way Alliant modeled how much wind energy could be generated in the future was too restrictive and thus limited the real possibilities wind could have.

In cross-examination, the questioning from Alliant’s lawyer scrutinized Drunsic’s experience using such modeling methods.

Witness Robert Fagan, a Synapse senior associate, was later questioned similarly about whether his involvement in power plant-related cases across the United States and Canada had much in common with wind power generation, which he had argued in pre-filed testimony held the potential, along with energy efficiency, to satisfy the energy needs upon which the case for a new coal plant has been built.

He added that a new goal announced by Gov. Chet Culver this week of attaining 25 percent of power needs in the state through renewable sources further pointed toward investment in wind rather than coal.

Fagan also said he considered wind to be capable of a baseload-type energy contribution to an overall portfolio, and that natural gas was the next-most cost-effective fuel.

Discussions changed to the topic of carbon dioxide emissions and global climate change with the cross-examination of witness Dr. Ezra Hausman, another senior associate with Synapse.

Hausman argued that even if the proposed plant generates fewer emissions than older plants, Alliant is still heading in the wrong direction of curbing greenhouse gases. He also did not consider the notion of retrofitting carbon capture technology in the future to be a realistic possibility for the new plant.

It would be a different scenario if carbon capture and storage technology was written into the current plans for the plant, he said.

“I look forward to the day permanent capture and storage is a reality,” he said.

Board members questioned Hausman on the new plant’s impact if older plants were displaced as a result of it and whether he would still oppose the plant if it met carbon regulation and remained cost-effective.

He said displacement would represent a step in the right direction but he would not regard any regulation that continued to allow vast amounts of carbon dioxide emissions as sufficient regulation.

“The day this board and others draw the line [on emissions limits] is the day that technology will start developing,” he said.

Hausman anticipates passage of carbon regulation by the federal government to be very likely in the next couple years.

Bill Powers, a consultant with Powers Engineering, added to previously filed testimony about the advantages of newer coal technologies with the assertion that ultra-supercritical pulverized coal boiler technology, as opposed to the plant’s proposed supercritical pulverized coal equipment, would provide a significant 6 percent boost in efficiency, though he admitted no such plant currently exists in the Midwest.

He also argued that the form of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle coal technology best suited for the proposed situation was ignored by Alliant’s staff in analyzing their options.

Synapse Senior Consultant David Schlissel was put on the stand late Wednesday afternoon. As the chief witness for the Office of Consumer Advocate, his pre-filed testimony centered on Alliant’s consideration of risks associated with the proposed plant and the modeling used to create their resource plan.

The only other Consumer Advocate witness, besides Dr. Xiaochuan “Larry” Shi, who briefly attested during the day to computer model results, is Scudder Parker. His focus has been on energy efficiency measures that could delay or avoid construction of the coal plant.

More witnesses opposed to the proposed plant are anticipated to testify before the IUB Thursday, including Dr. James Hansen, a NASA climate scientist who has been billed as a staunch proponent of the threat of global warming.

———

Contact Ryan Brinks at 641-753-6611 or rbrinks@timesrepublican.com

 

Subscribe to Times Republican

Share: