Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Michigan DNRE denies the Wolverine Clean Energy Permit to Install.
The Alpena News ^ | 5/21/10 | Steve Schulwitz and Steve Murch

Posted on 05/22/2010 8:14:44 PM PDT by jenk

The long wait is over for Wolverine Power and its air quality permit to install application for a new 600 megawatt coal-fired plant. The result is not what the company had hoped for as the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment denied Wolverine's application on Friday.

The process that began four years ago isn't finished for Wolverine, as the company will assess the decision and what it means for the future.

"Wolverine people will be meeting over the next few days to determine the course of action, and there will be action," Wolverine spokesman Ken Bradstreet said.

According to a press release from Gov. Jennifer Granholm's office, the state's decision is based on findings of the Michigan Public Service Commission, which said the company failed to demonstrate the plant was needed to meet future supply needs.

The press release stated the MPSC staff also determined that building the proposed plant would increase electricity rates paid by average residential customers to 20.7 cents per kilowatt-hour. The 59.2 percent rate increase would cost the average residential customer $76.95 more each month.

"In regards to the number, it's totally fictitious," Bradstreet said. "If it were to cost that much - anywhere near that much - we'd never build the plant."

Rogers City Mayor Beach Hall expressed dismay and was saddened by the decision.

"To say that I'm disappointed would be a huge understatement. To say that our governor has done a disservice to Northeast Michigan, Presque Isle County and everyone in the state would be a huge understatement," Hall said. "I put this right on her doorstep. I think the information she got from the MPSC is either misinterpreted or just flat out wrong."

He said his hope is that Wolverine will still build in Rogers City, saying the location in Rogers City is "beautiful" and has a lot of "synergy." He is hopeful that a plant still will be built and perhaps a new governor and administration will have a different point of view.

Hall admitted he began to have some doubts when a decision wasn't made by the end of last year. He believed it was more doubtful when it appeared the fate of the plant was in the hands of the governor.

"It just went on and on and on. I think a lot of people thought this was inevitable, but we kept fighting and putting as much pressure on her as we could," he said. "To say I'm surprised right now, no I'm not. To say that I'm disappointed right now, yes I am."

Retired Judge Josesph Swallow, legal counsel for Citizens for Environmental Inquiry, expressed his pleasure with the decision. CEI was organized by residents who have opposed the plant since its early stages.

"It is our position that the government has a constitutional duty to protect and regulate the environment. They have a statutory duty to do so." Swallow said. "Is that what they are doing by rejecting this, or are they just trying to dodge bullets? I think that if the plant would have been built, and the regulations had changed afterward, people would have definitely been looking at paying higher rates. The future is not with carbon-produced energy anymore. It is in wind, solar and nuclear."

Swallow said this is an opportunity for the area to pursue alternative energy options. While he doesn't like the economic conditions of the region, he doesn't believe a coal-fired plant was the right solution.

"We are protecting hundreds of thousands of Michigan homeowners, businesses, and farmers from paying a whopping increase in their electric bills, which would have been among the highest in the nation," Granholm said. "The cost of doing business in Michigan would have skyrocketed, and despite the short-term gain from its construction, this project would have been a job-killer and a roadblock in our efforts to bring new economic development investments to Michigan."

Elected officials at both the state and national level who serve Northeast Michigan expressed disappointment with the decision. Congressman Bart Stupak, State Sen. Jason Allen and State Rep. Andy Neumann all disagreed with the DNRE's decision.

"I don't undertand the thought process at all," Neumann said. "We have a need in this area. It met (Granholm's) goals for clean energy.

"How can she do that? It met the science, it met the law."

Allen called the decision "another sad chapter in a pattern of neglect by the administration." He said it was a double blow to the region with area tourism taking a hit because of state campgrounds being closed and a failure to establish a snowmobile route between Gaylord and Cheboygan.

"Now after more than a thousand days they have pulled the plug on the Wolverine Power Company plant," Allen said. "The administration is leaving a painful legacy for our region of the state to grapple with for many years to come."

Stupak echoed Allen and Neumann in pointing out the loss of nearly 3,000 potential jobs. He also said the state will continue its reliance on power plants that are both inefficient and heavy polluters.

"Gov. Granholm's decision to deny Wolverine Power's air permit for a new power plant in Rogers City is a blow to Michigan's economy and prevents northern Michigan from helping to establish the state as a leader in new energy technologies," Stupak said. "This project was an opportunity to create much-needed jobs in northeastern Michigan and meet Michigan's energy needs, while remaining consistent with the goal of producing cleaner energy."

Granholm said that in addition to protecting rate payers from being gouged with higher electric bills, the decision protects Michigan's environment from the pollution an unnecessary plant fueled primarily by petroleum coke and coal would produce.

Ultimately, the DNRE said Wolverine had not adequately demonstrated through the alternative analysis the inability to secure long-term power supply purchase arrangements, such as buying power from an existing power plant, to meet their member needs.

Staff writer Mike Modrzynski contributed to this story.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: coal; energy; michigan; regulation
The State of Michigan is headed for an Energy Crisis, and the Democrat Party is mostly to blame.

According to a press release from Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s office, the state’s decision is based on findings of the Michigan Public Service Commission, which said the company failed to demonstrate the plant was needed to meet future supply needs.

In October of 2008, the MDEQ affirmed that the area was safe of air pollution from the proposed plant. So, the Granholm administration went to work to stop the plant by changing the rules.

Jennifer Granholm’s State of the State Address in 2009 laid out the unconstitutional plan to use the MPSC as the decision maker instead of the MDEQ. Instead of arguing about the environmental impact, because her administration had just proved there would be little if any, she wanted to move the target.

So, in June of 2009, the MPSC started the process of being the office that would decide if the plant was needed by using future economic modeling. Since the only way Northern Michigan could prosper was if the plant was approved, the future without the plant is pretty glum, therefore ensuring there would be no uptick in need for electricity. Convoluted? Welcome to bureaucracy.

Meanwhile, our genius Republican legislators thought it would be a grand idea to, at this point, merge the MDEQ and the DNR.

In September of 2009, the MDEQ was combined with the DNR using a legislation package, a portion of which was proudly brought to the floor of the Senate by Jason Allen, as a measure to streamline government. Allen is now seeking a job as representative of the First District of Michigan in Washington D.C.

I’m all for smaller government, but, when you combine two departments like the MDEQ, who had already did their work in approving the plant, and the DNR, who had no interest in the plant whatsoever, dump tons of paperwork on this new “streamlined” government office, it makes it easier for the special interests and the Governor’s office to pressure and push for a decision.

Like it or not, Michigan career politicians, this is also partially your fault.

From the Alpena News:

Ultimately, the DNRE said Wolverine had not adequately demonstrated through the alternative analysis the inability to secure long-term power supply purchase arrangements, such as buying power from an existing power plant, to meet their member needs.

“Through the alternative analysis” means that after the State changed the rules, Wolverine didn’t follow the new rules and come up with the right numbers to make the control-freak governor happy.

How is it that the MDNRE has the power to tell a manufacturing company that they don’t need to manufacture, because they can buy it from somebody else?

If it was the Wolverine Jeans Company, and they wanted to hire people to build a jeans manufacturing plant, then hire more to manufacture the jeans, would our nanny government be able to tell them that they have no need to make jeans, because they are being made elsewhere?

The fact is, the Granholm Administration continually changed the rules and moved the target because she wants to please The Sierra Club and Green Peace, and all the green energy companies that she approved.

Consider these facts:

56 wind turbines only produce 180 MW of energy when the wind is blowing very hard, and none when it is calm.

Our side of the state does not produce enough wind to provide any energy.

It takes one month to construct 30 wind turbines on land.

Most wind turbines are made in Canada.

Off shore wind turbines would only be useful off the coast of the North Western Lower Peninsula, which also happens to be the most scenic, with the most beautiful sunsets, and extremely high property values.

It only takes one person to keep a windfarm running.

So, when Granholm’s office says that the jobs would be short term, the fact is, there is not much more short term than one month. Wind energy and solar energy will not and cannot provide more energy. The energy companies of Northern Michigan will continue to buy coal power from other states, and someday, these Democrat politicians interested in authoritarian control will be held to account.

1 posted on 05/22/2010 8:14:45 PM PDT by jenk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jenk

Enjoy your brownouts, Michigan. Idiots.


2 posted on 05/22/2010 8:19:09 PM PDT by piytar (Ammo is hard to find! Bought some lately? Please share where at www.ammo-finder.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

This is simply insane. The whole nation will suffer because of it.


3 posted on 05/22/2010 8:23:51 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I agree, Michigan is screwed, but why do you think it will make the rest of the nation suffer? Just wondering about your perspective.


4 posted on 05/22/2010 8:34:21 PM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jenk

What I don’t get is how Jennie and the Funky Bunch claim that increasing the supply of electricity will lead to the price of power going up. Maybe in their socialist utopia but not in northeastern MI. I doubt Queen Jennie has even been to Rogers City or Alpena.


5 posted on 05/22/2010 8:48:25 PM PDT by Feasor13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jenk
"How can she do that? It met the science, it met the law."

Science? Law? Liberals don't know either of those. They should have sold the plant on the idea of diversity.

6 posted on 05/22/2010 8:54:27 PM PDT by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Feasor13

It doesn’t matter to Granholm, she has invited solar and wind power to the state to prove she is just as cool as California. Never mind that California and Michigan have extremely different climates. She is managing the decline of Michigan and all of us..all of us...the northerners who grasp at straws to live...have to comply.


7 posted on 05/22/2010 8:55:14 PM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Clock King

Yeah, yeah, we are talking about northern small town, no-growth-Michigan here. This is always the case, the Lansing-Detroit decisions always hurt the little guy. We have little voice in government, all the local politicians haven’t a clue what they are dealing with. It just goes to prove that the Democrat Party in MI is not interested in helping the little guy.


8 posted on 05/22/2010 9:00:27 PM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jenk

Her tax policies ran me out of the state. All of my family still lives there. It’s ridiculous. She’s the governor of one of the most heavily industrialized states in the nation, and she’s killed it with her policies.


9 posted on 05/22/2010 9:16:53 PM PDT by Feasor13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Feasor13

yes, true, you are correct, but those of us who will not move, due to family, and life experience, are left to fight for different policies, and new blood. I wish those who left decided to fight for my sweet Michigan like I, and some of my compatriots have. I love my home.


10 posted on 05/22/2010 9:20:39 PM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jenk
Michigan will still have demand for power, which will drive up energy prices elsewhere. Michigan will also take more national tax dollars from the rest of us.
11 posted on 05/22/2010 9:25:28 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Feasor13
Her tax policies ran me out of the state.

That's unfortunate, but on an impersonal level I find it hilarious that Michigan is now advertising in the South, trying to lure people and jobs.

12 posted on 05/22/2010 9:26:32 PM PDT by DeFault User
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

don’t you see I am trying to change this, thanks for the effing help.


13 posted on 05/22/2010 9:27:52 PM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jenk

Jenk, I about threw up when you mentioned “cool” in your post. Remember the “Cool cities” program? The cool cities got money, and the uncool cities get the pooch.


14 posted on 05/22/2010 9:58:37 PM PDT by healy61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jenk

Strange that they can’t justify building a coal fired plant but they find plenty of justification for wind farm fantasies.


15 posted on 05/23/2010 5:49:46 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jenk

Standin firm here boss.

The only way I’m leaving my home state of Michigan is with my toes in the air.


16 posted on 05/23/2010 5:52:30 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
And this is how you manufacture a need for windfarms.

House Bill 6069 (Increase mandated state power production declines ) Introduced by Rep. Gary McDowell (D) on April 22, 2010, to revise the mandating that natural gas utilities reduce the amount of energy they provide by .75 percent each year beginning in 2013. The bill would require that beginning in 2015 utilities reduce the amount of gas they provide by 1.5 percent, and 2.0 percent beginning in 2016.

House Bill 6068 (Increase mandated state power production declines ) Introduced by Rep. Joan Bauer (D) on April 22, 2010, to revise the mandating that natural gas utilities reduce the amount of gas they provide by .75 percent each year beginning in 2013. The bill would require that beginning in 2014 utilities reduce the amount of gas they provide by 1.25 percent, and 2.0 percent beginning in 2016

House Bill 6067 (Increase mandated state power production declines ) Introduced by Rep. Lisa Brown (D) on April 22, 2010, to revise the mandating that natural gas utilities reduce the amount of gas they provide by .75 percent each year beginning in 2013. The bill would require that beginning in 2013 utilities reduce the amount of gas they provide by 1.0 percent over the previous year.

House Bill 6063 (Increase mandated state power production declines ) Introduced by Rep. Fred Miller (D) on April 22, 2010, to revise the mandating that electric utilities reduce the amount of energy they provide by 1 percent each year beginning in 2012. The bill would require that beginning in 2013 utilities reduce the amount of power they provide by 1.25 percent over the previous year.

17 posted on 05/23/2010 6:00:34 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: healy61

yeah, we got the okay for cool cities, meanwhile, our stores are empty and people are moving away, but hey, we’re cool.


18 posted on 05/23/2010 10:49:53 AM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

:)


19 posted on 05/23/2010 10:50:32 AM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

thanks for that


20 posted on 05/23/2010 10:52:12 AM PDT by jenk (Ain't no party like my Nanna's tea party....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson