Wisconsin's Public Service Commission sent a clear, gutsy and necessary challenge to the state's utilities last week with its rejection of Wisconsin Power & Light's request to build a coal-fired power plant in Cassville: It's time to clean up your act.
WPL and its parent, Alliant Energy, wanted to build a 300-megawatt plant that would have been fueled mostly by coal. However, the proposal also called for up to 20 percent of the plant's energy to be created from burning biomass such as switch grass, cornstalks and waste wood.
The message in the proposal's unanimous rejection was clear in that it was called the "wrong project at the wrong time," meaning that new coal-powered plants may be a thing of the past in Wisconsin.
While Alliant admirably included the biomass component in the project, the plant still would have been "dirty" in terms of its environmental impact. The term "clean coal" is an oxymoron. Coal cannot be clean, it can only be made less dirty through often costly technological measures.
The use of biomass to create energy at the plant would have made it "cleaner" than more traditional coal-powered facilities, but "cleaner" clearly isn't good enough in Wisconsin. As the PSC pointed out, the goal of the state's global warming task force is to reduce carbon emissions, not simply to offset them.
The PSC's rejection was gutsy because the communities of Cassville and Grant County strongly supported the proposal. It would have provided the region with an economic boost and jobs. The message sent is that the need for jobs no longer trumps environmental concerns. On a local level, that's a difficult message to deliver.
Finally, the PSC sent a necessary challenge to utilities, lawmakers and communities with its decision. More aggressive and difficult measures must be taken to promote cleaner energy production in Wisconsin - for environmental and financial reasons.
The PSC correctly anticipates tougher state or federal regulations on the emission of greenhouse gases. The election of Barack Obama to the presidency and the Democratic Party's control of Congress almost guarantees such a move at the federal level. Democrats enjoy the same measure of power in Madison. Regulations almost assuredly will impose financial penalties on carbon emissions, making coal-powered plants like one proposed in Cassville much more costly to the companies that own them.
The challenge to lawmakers is to create incentives that make the market conducive to the development of cleaner forms of energy production, such as wind, biomass and nuclear. Lifting the state's moratorium on nuclear power plants will be a difficult but necessary component of that effort.
The challenge to communities is that wind turbines and nuclear power plants must go somewhere, and the inclination of most people is to oppose those kinds of projects if they're going to be in their backyard. The support in Cassville and Grant County for the coal-biomass plant was a bit unusual but understandable, because of the jobs it would have created. It will be important for utilities to communicate that wind farms and nuclear power plants bring jobs, too. And ultimately the energy they produce is far better for the health of our communities and our planet than what is produced from burning coal.
The PSC is to be commended for its difficult but visionary decision. What happens next is up to all of us.
WPL and its parent, Alliant Energy, wanted to build a 300-megawatt plant that would have been fueled mostly by coal. However, the proposal also called for up to 20 percent of the plant's energy to be created from burning biomass such as switch grass, cornstalks and waste wood.
The message in the proposal's unanimous rejection was clear in that it was called the "wrong project at the wrong time," meaning that new coal-powered plants may be a thing of the past in Wisconsin.
While Alliant admirably included the biomass component in the project, the plant still would have been "dirty" in terms of its environmental impact. The term "clean coal" is an oxymoron. Coal cannot be clean, it can only be made less dirty through often costly technological measures.
The use of biomass to create energy at the plant would have made it "cleaner" than more traditional coal-powered facilities, but "cleaner" clearly isn't good enough in Wisconsin. As the PSC pointed out, the goal of the state's global warming task force is to reduce carbon emissions, not simply to offset them.
The PSC's rejection was gutsy because the communities of Cassville and Grant County strongly supported the proposal. It would have provided the region with an economic boost and jobs. The message sent is that the need for jobs no longer trumps environmental concerns. On a local level, that's a difficult message to deliver.
Finally, the PSC sent a necessary challenge to utilities, lawmakers and communities with its decision. More aggressive and difficult measures must be taken to promote cleaner energy production in Wisconsin - for environmental and financial reasons.
The PSC correctly anticipates tougher state or federal regulations on the emission of greenhouse gases. The election of Barack Obama to the presidency and the Democratic Party's control of Congress almost guarantees such a move at the federal level. Democrats enjoy the same measure of power in Madison. Regulations almost assuredly will impose financial penalties on carbon emissions, making coal-powered plants like one proposed in Cassville much more costly to the companies that own them.
The challenge to lawmakers is to create incentives that make the market conducive to the development of cleaner forms of energy production, such as wind, biomass and nuclear. Lifting the state's moratorium on nuclear power plants will be a difficult but necessary component of that effort.
The challenge to communities is that wind turbines and nuclear power plants must go somewhere, and the inclination of most people is to oppose those kinds of projects if they're going to be in their backyard. The support in Cassville and Grant County for the coal-biomass plant was a bit unusual but understandable, because of the jobs it would have created. It will be important for utilities to communicate that wind farms and nuclear power plants bring jobs, too. And ultimately the energy they produce is far better for the health of our communities and our planet than what is produced from burning coal.
The PSC is to be commended for its difficult but visionary decision. What happens next is up to all of us.
