7-2500-15532-2
STATE OF
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
In
the Matter of a Petition by Xcel SUMMARY
OF TESTIMONY
Energy
for Approval of a Three-Plant AT PUBLIC HEARINGS
Emissions
Reduction Proposal and
Rate
Rider to Recover Costs.
The above matter came before
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Richard C. Luis for public hearings in
This Summary of Testimony reports to
the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) on the oral testimony offered by speakers
at the public hearings listed above. The
Commission will issue an Order on the Emissions Reduction Proposal by Xcel
Energy Company (Xcel or the Company) after examination of the Summary, the
hearing transcripts, all filings in writing submitted by the public (deadline
was September 29, 2003), and all filings and arguments submitted by Xcel, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and other interested persons and
entities.
Xcel presented its testimony in a consistent manner at all eight public hearings, through prepared testimony read or paraphrased by Ron Elsner, the Company’s Metro Emission Reduction Project (MERP) Manager. His presentation was supplemented by overhead-projected slides (Xcel Ex’s 1-9). Mr. Elsner’s presentation highlighted the impacts on ratepayers of the proposed projects, commented on the effect (minimal) the proposal would have on the natural gas supply, and laid out the timetable for implementing the proposal.
The Company’s Allen S. King Plant at
The Company’s High Bridge Plant in St. Paul is proposed for conversion from a coal-fired facility to one powered by natural gas, including the installation of two natural gas combustions turbines and a new steam turbine, all by May, 2008. The estimated capital cost is 412 million dollars. Emissions reductions are designed to be 4,400 tons per year (98 percent) from current nitrous oxide emissions, 3,100 tons per year (100 percent reduction) from current sulfur dioxide levels, 100 tons per year (100 percent reduction) from current levels of particulate matter and removal of 66 pounds per year of mercury (a 100 percent reduction from current levels).
A partial conversion of the
Riverside Plant in
The total price for the proposal is just over 1 billion dollars, which Xcel proposes to recover over 30 years beginning in the year 2006. The proposed rate increase will vary over time, increasing from 2006 to 2010 and declining thereafter. The project is expected to increase retail electric rates by approximately 11 or 12 percent (gross).
The Company is advancing the proposal because of the significant environmental benefits offered by the conversions to natural gas. The proposal also allows Xcel to maintain a diversity of fuel supply, and increases the Company’s total capacity by approximately 400 MW.
Deputy Commissioner Ann Seha, Staff Engineer Ann Jackson and Section Manager David Thornton made consistent presentations on behalf of the Agency, which filed comments and studies earlier pursuant to its charge from the legislature to review the proposed pollution controls to ensure that they meet pollution reduction requirements, to verify the emission reductions to be expected from the project, to review the costs of the proposal, to estimate the health and environmental benefits of the proposal and to advise the MPUC as to whether the project is appropriate.
Based on its study, the MPCA recommends that the PUC approve the proposal outlined at the public hearings, to convert two of the plants from coal burning to natural gas burning facilities and to upgrade the pollution controls at the King Plant. The MPCA found that this proposal would achieve large reductions of many key pollutants, install the best control technology at all three plants, and would be cost-effective.
The MPCA presentation stressed some of the legislative history, chiefly the concern on the part of the legislature that 60 percent of the state’s power is still generated in plants that are exempt from the regulations under the Federal Clean Air Act. As a result, the legislature crafted incentives to energy companies to control their emissions from plants that would otherwise be exempt from the Clean Air Act standards. This proposal by Xcel is the first to proceed since passage of the new law. The MPCA has concluded that the project proposed by Xcel appropriately achieves environmental benefits without any unreasonable costs to customers, which is in line with the intent of the legislature. The Agency notes that the controls that Xcel is proposing to install are the best available control technology for the pollutants that they are dealing with.
The MPCA found that the proposed costs for the projects were reasonable, and that the benefits are large, if the projects are approved. The largest benefit is the removal of such a large amount of fine particles from the air, which particles have been found to be causing an increasing number of health problems. The MPCA stresses also that a substantial reduction of sulfur dioxide emissions should result in decreased acid rain. Significant reductions in mercury emissions are also a benefit, as mercury has been shown to be extremely hazardous to fish life and can cause health problems in humans who consume contaminated fish. The projects are also expected to result in a significant reduction in haze in the metropolitan area, which will improve visibility. Also, the proposed refurbishing of a 1000 MW of the power grid for longer life and longer use and the addition of almost 400 MW of available power will have a benefit because the Company will not have to build new electric transmission lines or energy facilities to add an equal amount of power to its grid.
At each hearing, the MPCA distributed a document entitled “MPCA Review of MERP Projects”, which summarizes the studies done by the Agency pursuant to the authorizing legislation.
III. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN
The public hearing at the Chippewa County Courthouse in
The basic concerns for the commentators were the cost of the project and
the rate increases that would result (for both electricity and natural gas),
the potential for jeopardizing the Nation’s natural gas supply and whether
sufficient research had been done to clean up the coal burning processes. Mr. Anderson proposed that the entities that
are providing energy through wind power generation technologies be responsible
for providing turbines to generate power during the times when the wind is
down. He and Mr. Boettcher emphasized
the need to apply best available technologies to the current processes at the
Company’s existing plants before engaging in such costly conversions as those
proposed in the MERP Plan. Mr. Kuehl
suggested that new energy needs in
IV. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN
Approximately 80 people attended the public hearing at the Northeast Minneapolis Armory on September 3. Twenty-six people offered oral (and some written) commentary for the record at this hearing, which was attended by PUC Commissioner Gregory Scott. The comments, most of them brief, were overwhelmingly in favor of adoption of Xcel’s plan. The top reason given for support was that under the plan, significant amounts of pollution would be removed from the air. Among the speakers voicing support for Xcel’s endeavor were State Representative Phyllis Kahn and Minneapolis City Councilmen Paul Ostrow (the Council Chair) and Don Samuels.
Representative Kahn noted that the
Legislature is concerned about emissions from coal plants, particularly carbon
dioxide that causes global warming, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide that
cause ground-level ozone, sulfur oxide that causes acid rain, mercury that contaminates
fish and damages the brains of children who eat the fish, and fine particles of
coal that cause asthma, lung disease and heart attacks. These effects also drive up health costs. Chairman Ostrow noted the City Council passed
a unanimous resolution in support of the MERP Proposal and Councilman Samuels
likened the Riverside Plant to “one shared giant unfiltered cigarette that the
City of
Xcel’s Riverside Plant, located in Northeast Minneapolis a short
distance away from the site of the hearing, deposits one-third of its emissions
in
A significant number of speakers represented distinct neighborhood
associations from various areas in the City of
Randy Kouri of the Mississippi Corridor Neighborhood Coalition endorsed
the conversion to natural gas at the Riverside Plant and added that conversion
to gas is helping clear the air in other segments of our infrastructure, such
as the gas furnaces being installed in new housing. He cited the increase in asthma cases and
school absenteeism in
Suzanne Maeder pointed out that the plants slated for conversion under
the MERP Proposal were exempt initially from the requirements of the Clean Air
Act because it was assumed that they soon would be replaced, which has not
happened in the 30 years since enactment of the federal legislation. She applauds Xcel’s effort to do something
about it. Several witnesses who are
athletically inclined and engage in distance running, bicycling and basketball
within the City of
Jeff Conrod pointed out that a
conversion of the Riverside Plant to natural gas would eliminate the
transportation of coal to fuel the boilers there, and that a pleasant side
effect would be that diesel emissions from the diesel trains that bring the
coal in and the diesel trucks that haul the ash away would also be
eliminated. Amy Luesebrink testified
that her group, Clean Energy Now, advocated in a series of meetings that began
years ago some of the very points that ended up in Xcel’s plan. These goals include a conversion to natural
gas at the
Frances Guminga testified in an effort
to put a “human face” on the statistics and data in the record. She related that her older brother died of
heart disease, from which he suffered for 20 years, after living for 30 years
in the shadow of the Riverside Plant.
She believes that the effects of the plant’s pollution on his heart and
lungs contributed to a premature death.
She also expressed concern for her 89-year old mother, who is unable to
go outside on many days due to the excessive pollution in
Many speakers wondered aloud about why the conversion of
Witness Justin Eibenholzl of the Clean Energy Now Coalition pointed out that the City of Minneapolis has found in a study that there were eight premature deaths, 15 new cases of adult chronic bronchitis, 102 cases of child acute bronchitis, 4 hospital admissions from respiratory causes, 84 emergency room visits, 1,180 asthma attack days, 17,100 restricted days of activity, and 44,300 respiratory symptom days attributable directly to the Riverside Power Plant. His testimony did not reveal the time period over which the numbers were aggregated.
Jonathan Bishop, of the Sierra Club and “Newer Technology for Mercury Removal”, suggested that Xcel consider installing an experimental powder designed to remove mercury by means of an ion exchange at the Allen S. King Plant. One company involved in developing this technology is called Enviroscrub. Mr. Elsner of Xcel replied that Enviroscrub’s process is still a developing technology, whereas the Company has decided, for purposes of its MERP Plan, to rely on technologies that have proven to be reliable over time.
V. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN
The public hearing at the Winona County Courthouse on September 8, 2003, attracted approximately 30 members of the public, of whom 10 offered oral testimony. PUC Commissioner Phyllis A. Reha attended the proceeding. Also present were representatives of the PUC staff, the Department of Commerce and the Office of the Attorney General (OAG).
Commentary on the Company’s MERP Proposal was mixed--most speakers favored it, for various and qualified reasons, but some dissented.
Vic
Ormsby, a Winona County Soil and Water Conservation Supervisor, spoke in favor
of MERP on behalf of Bluffland Environment Watch, the Prairie Island Coalition
and the Downriver Alliance. Speaking in
his individual capacity, Mr. Ormsby urged caution because of our dwindling
supplies of natural gas and society’s tendency to be excessive in the
consumption of energy. He noted that 17%
of the natural gas consumption in the
Cheryl
Gonia, representing the Sierra Club and the National Audubon Society, while
supporting Xcel’s initiative, questioned whether development of additional wind
generation might be a better long-term solution of the clean air issue. Joe Morse of the Downriver Alliance
(representing conservation organizations in both
Les Boelter, CEO of Boelter Industries, Inc., which manufactures paper board in Winona and Wabasha, cautioned that a 6-8% rise in (net) electric rates may be too much for some industries to absorb, which could have an adverse economic effect if such companies had to shut down.
Another
VI. PUBLIC
TESTIMONY IN
Approximately
50 people attended the proceedings on September 9 at the Community Room in the
Kathleen
Schuler of the Institute for Agricultural and Trade Policy spoke in favor of
the MERP Plan, especially with respect to its efforts to reduce mercury
levels. She pointed out that 40% of
Tom Marks,
a legislative candidate for the Green Party, cautions the MPUC that approval of
the MERP Plan would perpetuate our reliance on fossil fuels. He urges consideration of requiring more
utilization of wind and solar power.
Elizabeth
Sedgwick, a student at Minnesota State University-Mankato, spoke against the
proposal because of the cost of conversion and the continuing high price of
natural gas, which is a non-regulated commodity. She cautions that the
Dr.
Barbara Carson, a Sociology Professor at Minnesota State University-Mankato,
supports the proposal primarily because of the reduction in acid rain that
would result. She was educated in
Another
witness supported the notion that the conversion at
VII. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN
Approximately
75 members of the general public attended the proceeding on September 11 at the
Much of the testimony at
State Representative Rebecca Otto favors adoption of Xcel’s
proposal. Her particular concern is the
level of mercury in fish caught in
Don Dame, a retired Mechanical Engineer, urged the MPUC to continue to allow the burning of coal before converting the plants in question to natural gas. He feels natural gas prices are and will be prohibitively high, approximately 400% over that of coal. Mr. Dame cites for authority the recently-expressed concerns by Federal Reserve Chair Allan Greenspan on the rising prices of natural gas.
Scott Bol lives near the King Plant in
Leah Foushee, representing the North American Water Office
and the Indigenous Womens’ Mercury Investigation, took the position that the
destruction of wildlife caused by power plant emissions, especially from
mercury, amounted to genocide of the people whose ancestors were the original
caretakers of the land. She fears also
that many of
Many of the persons testifying in favor of MERP in
Festus Tierney, a retired Xcel employee, opposes the
conversions to natural gas because he believes the plants run efficiently on
coal, as they were designed to. Mayor
David Beaudet of
Paula Maccabee of the Sierra Club offered the comment that
closed-coal storage at the King Plant site would alleviate the problems local
residents have with coal dust. Her
suggestion was supported by Bill Metcalf, who also questions why Xcel has no
signage to warn fishers that their catch is contaminated by mercury. Sandy Metcalf wondered if the renovated plant
would be more noisy than the current operation (the Company replied that it
would not). Russ Adams of the
Approximately 18 members of the public appeared in
The seven persons who spoke in favor of the proposal echoed
many of the statements discussed in
A Professor of Resource and Environmental Economics at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict pointed out that MERP will internalize some of the external costs imposed by the three plants and would bring the price of electricity closer to its true societal cost. He stated that MERP would be better than what he called “son of MERP,” the alternative that would have all three plants continue to burn coal. He believed that the higher levels of mercury and carbon dioxide that would be produced by the alternative would be unaccounted for and consumers would continue to receive a false price signal about the true costs of their consumption.
Another speaker stressed that external costs from pollution
are undeniably real costs that are imposed upon society, although very
difficult to measure. He pointed out
that the cities of
John Hilton, from Gold’n Plump Poultry spoke in opposition
to the MERP Proposal. Gold’n Plump
currently purchases roughly 1.7 million dollars worth of electricity annually
from Xcel, and the proposed rate increase could add as much as $136,000. Gold’n Plump must compete with producers in
Another commentator noted that approximately a week
earlier, there had been an air pollution advisory warning, which affected not
only the metro area, but also
A spokesman for the Minnesota Interfaith Global Climate
Change Campaign, part of a national group including the US Catholic Conference,
the National Council of Churches of Christ, the Coalition on Environment and
Jewish Life, and the Evangelical Network spoke in support of the primary
proposal. The purpose of his group is to
bring a religious and moral perspective to the debates on global warming and
energy policy, and to increase the visibility of the broad support within major
American faith communities for governmental actions to reduce carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gases. He pointed
out that the primary MERP proposal would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by
over a million tons, but that the alternative proposal would actually increase
carbon dioxide emissions by 444,000 tons.
If the primary proposal were adopted, it would be the equivalent of
removing 250,000 cars from the roads, or the equivalent of building 460 new
wind turbines. Adopting the MERP
proposal is the most important thing that
Another speaker noted that the primary MERP proposal would reduce mercury emissions by 191 pounds a year, but the alternative MERP proposal would only reduce these emissions by 14 pounds a year.
Concerns were voiced over the adequacy and reliability of
supplies of natural gas, particularly into the future. Will there be enough of it, and at what
price? An alternative to natural gas
would be coal coking, which would have the side benefit of producing a variety
of additional chemicals that could be used for other purposes. Xcel responded that a coal gasification plant
requires roughly 500 acres, whereas the spaces around the
A number of commentators commended Xcel Energy for the proposal. But some of them went on to say that the Commission must be vigilant to assure that the costs of this project are not unfairly imposed on residential customers.
At least two customers in
A representative of Clean Water Action Alliance focused on mercury, pointing out that the Center for Disease Control has recently stated that roughly 10% of women of childbearing age already have so much mercury in their blood that if they became pregnant, it would pose a threat to a developing fetus. She went on to say that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Health are now advising women of childbearing years who are considering having a child to follow the pregnancy consumption guidelines for fish for two years prior to having a child. She thought that the substantial reduction in mercury that would come with Xcel’s primary proposal is well worth any cost. This prompted another commentator to ask what portion of the cost of this project was going to be borne by investors, rather than ratepayers. She wanted to be sure that the consumers would not be paying so that investors could make a big profit.
Another commentator was opposed to the use of natural gas. He admitted it had many environmental benefits, but thought that we would be better off building a modern, well-scrubbed coal plant rather than converting coal plants to natural gas.
Approximately 50 members of the public appeared in
One of the first speakers had a copy of the July 21, 2003
issue of Time magazine, and paraphrased from the article that said we
were wasting natural gas when we used it to burn electricity, and that we are
running out of it, at least running out of it at reasonable prices. He advocated the use of waste wood, which is
being done on a large scale at the District Energy Heating Plant in
Dave Thune lives just a few blocks from the High Bridge
Plant and he owns and manages commercial property within one mile of the
plant. He urged the Commission to direct
that the conversion to natural gas take place as fast as possible, indicating
that both as a homeowner and as a businessman, he would gladly pay the price
because of the dramatic improvement in the quality of life both in
Another commentator indicated that she had recently signed up for Xcel’s Windsource program, and urged others to do so. She attempted to place $1500 in cash into the hearing record to indicate her commitment to clean air. The cash was returned to her, but her commitment is noted here.
St. Paul Mayor Randy Kelly wrote in favor of the program, so long as there was “diligent fiscal review” to assure that rates remained affordable.
The St. Paul Riverfront Corporation urged that the plan be adopted, because it would cut train traffic in the area, cut coal dust emissions, and significantly cut emissions from the stacks. All of these would be benefits for the city’s riverfront.
Another commentator urged the Commission to remember the
problems of global warming, and the large amount of greenhouse gasses produced
by coal burning power plants. She was
opposed to the alternative all-coal proposal because it would increase carbon
dioxide emissions and perpetuate
An Xcel shareholder commended the Company for proposing this plan, but urged that the Commission look carefully at Xcel’s past budgets because he believed that Xcel had already established reserve accounts for these types of renovations. He thought it was only natural for the Company to try to get the ratepayers to pay additional monies for this, rather than for the Company to spend the money it had budgeted for it, but he opposed that. Finally, he also thought that a 30 year time table was unrealistic. It appears that he was thinking that the construction itself was going to take 30 years.
A resident on the south side of the river (in
A representative of EnviroScrub, (a process that was discussed earlier), appeared at St. Paul as well to suggest that the Company’s technology ought to be considered for the King Plant, as well as for the other two plants. Xcel responded that it has reviewed that technology, along with numerous others, but determined that the technology had not proven itself enough to justify its use at this time. A representative of Clean Water Action noted that the EnviroScrub process did not claim to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, nor did it reduce the impacts of strip-mining coal.
Representative Carlos Mariani, whose district includes not only the High Bridge Plant itself, but also neighborhoods on all sides of it, stated that the primary MERP proposal was exactly the kind of outcome that many legislators had hoped for when they adopted the enabling legislation. He supported the primary proposal, and opposed alternative ideas that relied on continual use of coal. He also commended Xcel for its efforts to be a good neighbor and improve the area around the plant.
A small business owner, who employs 30 people, complained about the definition of “industrial.” His calculations showed that he was going to have to pay 60 times the increase that a residential ratepayer would have to pay, and stated that his company just could not afford it. He argued that not all businesses are big business, and not all industries big industry; small businesses should get better treatment.
Another opponent of the plan, who has been an Xcel stockholder for many years, thought that the proposed plan gave Xcel too much freedom to spend any amount of money, and that the Commission must pin down the amount that Xcel is going to spend in order to protect ratepayers. He favored putting additional scrubbers on the plants, rather than converting to natural gas, but regardless of what plan is adopted, he thought the Commission had to control how much money was spent.
A number of speakers talked about the qualitative benefits
of the primary proposal being hard to measure.
One speaker cited a study done by the Minnesota Project, which indicated
that 1.2 billion dollars worth of health costs would be saved if the primary
MERP proposal were adopted. She also
pointed out that
The executive director of the Environment and
A retired professor from
Another commentator focused on mercury, pointing out that
it is a global problem and that anything that Minnesota plants can do to reduce
their emissions is “almost irrelevant” because the emissions from Minnesota are
tiny compared with the global burden of mercury. Furthermore, if we really want to improve the
health of Minnesotans, we should put our money into cleaner power generation in
the states to the west of us, such as
An author who focuses on issues relating to spirituality and the environment stated that we have benefited from low-cost energy in part because we have not gotten away from coal to the same degree that other states have. But those costs do not reflect all the externalities, particularly the health impacts. He thought that we had a moral duty to improve the environment over time, even if only gradually, but that we did not have to do it perfectly. He favored the primary MERP proposal.
This position was echoed by a long-time Minnesota resident and historical writer, who agreed that natural gas was not a perfect solution, but that it was a step, and one we should make even though we realize that natural gas is not the final solution.
PUBLIC
TESTIMONY IN
Approximately 85 members of the public attended the hearing
in
Minneapolis Mayor R. T. Rybak favored the primary proposal,
indicating that the Riverside Plant was the “number one source of air
pollution” in the City. Although the
proposal would increase the City’s own energy costs by six percent, that
increase is more than offset by a ten percent reduction in energy achieved by
the City’s energy use reduction program.
He urged other businesses, concerned about their increased costs, to
institute a similar program that might actually save them more than the MERP
proposal would cost. The Minneapolis
Health Department analyzed the health implications of the Riverside Plant to
city residents, and determined that the plant was the cause of 15 new cases of
adult chronic bronchitis, one or two new cases of child acute bronchitis, four
hospital admissions from respiratory problems, 84 emergency room visits, 1,180
asthma attack days, 17,000 restricted activity days, and 44,000 respiratory
symptom days. Recognizing the
impossibility of putting a dollar figure on these impacts, the Minneapolis
Health Department nonetheless estimated a total 57.4 million dollars in annual
impacts. Mayor Rybak also noted that
businesses should be very concerned about the possibility of falling out of
compliance with federal air pollution standards, and he noted that the
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce has estimated a cost of 260 million dollars a
year if that were to happen. He noted
that the plant occupied an important piece of land that is part of the long-term
development opportunities in the City, and its coal fields could be converted
to housing and other development. Right
across the river is the Upper River Terminal that the City would also like to
redevelop. He noted the presence of lawn
signs, particularly in the neighborhoods of North and
Representative Keith Ellison also supported the primary proposal, stating that his only complaint with it was that it should be happening at a faster pace. As an attorney, he noted that Executive Order 12898, signed by President Clinton, directed federal agencies to make environmental justice part of their missions, by identifying and addressing disproportionately high adverse human health and environmental effects of programs on minority populations and low-income populations. He pointed out that an Atlanta, Georgia-based coalition, People’s Agenda, and the Washington-based Black Leadership Forum released a study showing that 68 percent of blacks live within 30 miles of a coal-fired plant, which is the area within which people experience the maximum effects of smoke stack emissions. But much of Rep. Ellison’s district is within three miles of the plant. On a county-to-county basis, he noted that 71 percent of blacks live within counties that don’t meet federal air pollution standards, compared with 58 percent of whites. He noted that asthma hospitalization rates for blacks are three times the rate for whites, and the death rate from asthma on blacks is 30.87 deaths per one million, which is twice that for whites. He thought the conversion should happen sooner, rather than later.
Hennepin County Commissioners Gail Dorfman and Peter
McLaughlin noted that all seven Hennepin County Commissioners agreed that the
primary proposal ought to go forward.
Commissioner Dorfman repeated that the state Chamber of Commerce study
estimated that if the area became an ozone nonattainment area, it would cost Minnesota
citizens and businesses in the range of 189 to 266 million dollars
annually. Commissioner McLaughlin noted
that the Hennepin County Board had passed a resolution on March 11, 2003,
supporting Xcel’s proposal to repower the two riverside units with natural
gas. He cited a study by the Minneapolis
Healthy Learners Asthma Initiative, in 2001, which reported that 57 percent of
students in
Senator Linda Higgins, who was the chief author of the
original MERP bill in the Senate, urged the Commission to quickly approve
Xcel’s primary proposal. She stated that
the Riverside Plant emits more toxic air pollution than any other facility in
all of
Representative Joe Mullery, also an attorney, began by
strongly endorsing the primary proposal, and labeled the alternative plan as
“simply unacceptable.” He pointed out
that the primary plan would result in at least a 200 percent reduction in
particulates and a 35 percent reduction in nitrogen oxides as compared to the
alternative. He also discussed the issue
of environmental justice, pointing out that the EPA had issued regulations not
only preventing intentional environmental racial discrimination, but also
preventing any state agencies from in any way being involved in allowing
polluting industries to have a disparate impact on communities of color. He drew the comparison with the Black Dog
plant in
Minneapolis Councilman Dean Zimmerman also wanted the
conversion to happen twice as fast as it was being planned, and stated that the
57 million dollars worth of hidden health care costs were greater than the
increased cost resulting from adoption of the plan. In other words, it would actually be a net
savings for
Representative Jean Wagenius, from
Commissioner Annie Young, of the
Senator Scott Dibble presented a petition signed by himself
and 19 other senators and representatives from around the Metro area that urged
the Commission to adopt the primary proposal because it fulfills both the
spirit and the intent of the emissions rider adopted by the Legislature in 2001
and the 2002 Legislation that gave rise to the MERP plan. The Legislators also urged the Commission to
allocate costs equitably to all customers so that the costs are not unfairly
imposed on small, residential customers.
Finally, the Legislators urged that Xcel shorten the timeline for
converting the
Representative Sheldon Johnson, from the East side of St. Paul, pointed out that his district has been a nonattainment area for particulate matter for more than a couple of years, and he wants clean air and clean energy now. He was one of the signatories to the petition presented by Senator Dibble.
The statistical information presented by the elected
officials provided the audience with ammunition to state their own views. One man, for example, talked about the
increase in pollution from the Riverside Plant over the past few years and
asked the Commission “how much will it grow in the next seven years and what
part of this no-brainer [the primary proposal] is misunderstood?” The American Lung Association of Minnesota
and the Minnesota Asthma Coalition both support the primary proposal, arguing
that its adoption would be a significant factor in staving off the region’s
falling into non-attainment status for ozone and fine particulates. They noted that currently there are
approximately 88,000
A volunteer from the Science Museum of Minnesota’s River
Eye Project stated that he encounters many people fishing on the banks of the
river. They are fishing for food, not
just for recreation. He estimated that
90 percent of them were people of color. He feels bad when he tells them the
danger of eating fish from the river because of mercury. He noted that almost the entire length of the
An opponent of the conversion proposal indicated that he wants a reliable source of electric power. He views natural gas as expensive and scarce, compared to coal, which he characterized as cheap and plentiful. He believed that it is technically and economically feasible to reduce coal emissions to the point where they are comparable to natural gas emissions.
A science teacher in the Minneapolis Public Schools for 27
years stated that when she first started teaching at
Another speaker supported the conversion from coal to natural gas but he strongly resented the idea that citizens should have to pay for clean air and clean water when profits from Xcel had gone to its shareholders. He chided the legislators for allowing Xcel to “pick our pockets” for the conversion, arguing that Xcel had known the benefits of the conversion for years, but chose to profit from the dirty emissions until the Legislature allowed them to charge the public for cleaning it up.
A pediatrician who grew up in North Minneapolis and now practices in South Minneapolis stated that everyday he treats at least one child, sometimes two or more, who have asthma, and that “it is the chronic illness of childhood,” accounting for more hospital admissions of children than any other disease. He prescribes five or six different kinds of inhalers, but their average cost is about $60 to $100 per month. He has children who are on more than one medication, some who are taking two and three medications a day to control their asthma, and many of whom have to take steroids to control it. He urged the Commission to approve the conversion.
Another commentator spoke of a recent article in a magazine
(entitled Organic Style, Minneapolis Ex. 4) that ranked 125 cities in
the country by how healthy it was to live there.
Another commentator, who works in a North Minneapolis
school, pointed out that when children are absent from school or has not gotten
an adequate night’s sleep, they are not able to receive the benefits of the
education that is offered. Many of the
schools in
Another public school administrator testified that over the 29 years that she has served in the schools, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of children with asthma. She characterized the problem as “urgent” and her operative word was “now.”
A representative of the
Former Commerce Commissioner Jim Bernstein strongly supported the primary MERP Plan, and complemented Xcel for proposing it. He responded to those who were concerned about rate increases by noting that if these three plants are not upgraded and ultimately have to be replaced, ratepayers will face much bigger increases. He characterized the rate increases from MERP as “house cats” compared to the “wild tiger” increases that will occur if the plants have to be replaced. But he did caution the Commission to be certain that the cost is minimized by requiring Xcel to competitively bid the project. He stated that rate payers have a legitimate stake in keeping the cost as low as possible, and that competitive bidding (which could include Xcel, if it choses to participate) usually results in lower costs. Finally, he stated that there was no such thing as “clean coal.” Instead, there is only dirty coal and perhaps less-dirty coal.
Another commentator, who is a scientist by education but a lawyer by profession, commended Xcel “for doing the science right.” He did his own calculations of personal costs and benefits, and determined that for him, he would save money if the plan were adopted because he would not have to lose productivity from headaches or breathing problems, and that savings in his productivity would outweigh his cost for the plan.
A representative from EnviroScrub stated that it would cost about 20 to 25 million dollars for Xcel to build one of EnviroScrub’s pollution control systems large enough to prove its viability, and that such a commercial-scale project could be operational in 2004. If it did not meet Xcel standards, this additional cost would only increase Xcel’s budget for the project by about 2.5 percent. On the other hand, if it did meet Xcel’s standards, several hundred million dollars could be saved. He noted that in a number of areas, the EnviroScrub process would improve air quality over Xcel’s current plan, particularly in the area of particulate matter, where Xcel plans to meet the EPA’s PM10 particulate standard, while EnviroScrub can meet not only that but also the PM2.5 standard. But another commentator responded that there is not yet any large-scale use of the EnviroScrub technology and now is the time for the Commission to go ahead and approve the primary MERP proposal.
A public health professional who is with the Institute for
Agriculture and Trade Policy focused on mercury, indicating that the primary
proposal would eliminate 100 percent of mercury emissions at two of the plants,
but only 20 percent at the King Plant.
She urged that 20 percent was not good enough, and the Commission should
modify Xcel’s plan to require the addition of mercury control technology at the
King Plant to reach at least 90 percent removal. She stated that a plant in
Gregory Gray, a former legislator and now consultant with
the Minneapolis Urban League, concluded the evening by pointing out that North
Minneapolis was subject to a variety of different sources of air pollution,
including the
Dated this 15th day of October, 2003
/s/
Richard C. Luis
________________________________
RICHARD
C. LUIS
Administrative
Law Judge
|
/s/ Allan W. Klein |
|
ALLAN W. KLEIN |
|
Administrative
Law Judge |
Reported: Shaddix and Associates
Transcripts Prepared.