A case currently in the hands of the Wisconsin Supreme Court could significantly impact the economy and everyday day lives of state residents, particularly if the plaintiffs have their way.
Judgment in the case of Clean Wisconsin, Inc., et. al v. Public Service Commission, et. al will decide whether a $2.15 billion proposal by We Energies (a utility company serving parts of Wisconsin and upper Michigan) to build two additional coal-fired power plants on the shore of Lake Michigan in Oak Creek will go forward. As reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the plants would generate 1,220 megawatts of power, enough to serve 610,000 homes.
Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan sided with Clean Wisconsin Nov. 29, 2004, ruling that the state Public Service Commission (PSC) approved the proposal without proper consideration of alternative sites and ways of generating power.
In a statement issued the day after the ruling, the PSC announced their intention to appeal stating, “The PSC held over 24 hours of public hearings where nearly 300 citizens testified. There were also over 90 hours of technical hearings with 70 expert witnesses on the Elm Road power plant project that resulted in a record of almost 6,000 pages that were reviewed by the Commissioners before they made their decision.”
For their part, We Energies considered several layouts and has constantly explored conservation efforts and sources of renewable energy. Clearly, they did not make their proposal hastily and without extensive technical research.
Supporters of Clean Wisconsin’s efforts to undermine this project include the odd combination of S.C. Johnson & Son Inc., Calpine Corp., Sierra Club and Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group (WisPIRG). Opponents of the Oak Creek project generally offer similar reasons for their positions — a desire for alternative considerations and a better environment. The motivations for all four of these organizations deserve examination.
S.C. Johnson recently installed a 3.2 megawatt turbine and generator to burn methane gas. Calpine currently sells power to We Energies from their Zion Energy Center in Illinois. But of course the financial incentives to these companies for keeping We Energies (and Wisconsin residents) dependant on costly out-of-state electricity and certain renewable sources have nothing to do with their opposition to the project.
The environmental organizations’ opposition to this project is perhaps less complicated. They support clean air and water, but so does everybody else — including power companies such as We Energies, who intends to remove 70 percent of mercury, 95 percent of sulfur dioxide and 90 percent of nitrogen oxides from their emissions.
In their constant advocacy of clean air and water, the environmental groups have spoken louder on this case than others. The Sierra Club and others had little to say when their attorney Dennis Grzezinski and others managing the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District dumped 4.6 billion gallons of raw sewage into Lake Michigan last May.
In general, those opposing the project support increased use of natural gas and wind energy. Each has its problems.
Natural gas offers the property of cleaner emissions. However, it comes with volatile pricing, a situation only made worse by a utility company increasing its demand. We Energies estimate the cost of replacing coal with natural gas in the Oak Creek project at $1.9 billion.
Environmental organizations also push expansion of wind energy. Wind turbines essentially operate as fans in the generating region of operation. A fan does not consume power equivalent to the amount of power required for an entire apartment. Likewise, even on a windy day, a similarly sized fan operating as a generator will not produce enough power for the apartment.
Even with existing conservation efforts, Wisconsin will require 7,000 additional megawatts of electricity by 2016. To put this in perspective, We Energies currently supplies approximately 6,000 megawatts of electricity.
The steadily increasing demand for power in Wisconsin requires foresight and effective leadership to develop cost-effective solutions that balance environmental concerns while meeting energy specifications. In proposing their Oak Creek expansion project, We Energies has provided both. With their efforts to block the project on legal technicalities, Clean Wisconsin, WisPIRG, the Sierra Club and other organizations have offered neither.
Mark A. Baumgardner ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in electrical engineering.