Anyone who says that government is boring has never been to a Minnesota Public Utilities Commission hearing. Okay, the hearing itself was boring. But paraphrased and with only a little bit of creative license, it was dramatic and occasionally humorous. In a really dark, Drop Dead Gorgeous kind of way.
Curtain up on a large room, with soft, mother-of-pearl walls and a nondescript carpet. At the front of the room sit five stoic commissioners. The chair leans forward to speak. “I’m most concerned about the ratepayer,” he begins. He then inquires about the costs of windmills and other renewable alternatives to coal.
The representative from the utility company appears absolutely gleeful about the opportunity just handed to him. “The price of renewables is escalating at a much higher rate than any other type of power,” he gasps.
The woman testifying on behalf of the various clean energy advocates bristles slightly. “Well, no. There have been no studies that have shown that conclusively.” She implies that further studies would be needed in order to make that assertion with the confidence that Mr. Utility had.
The chair pounces. He objects to the implication that more studies be done, which would mean more delays that would threaten his Yeoman ratepayers (though missing the point of the witness’s comment). Then he suddenly waxes nostalgic. “I’ve been doing this for a long time,” he muses. “And you can’t always go on the evidence. A certain amount of this is instinct, and comes from experience. Now I don’t want to talk about myself…” though clearly he did, “and about my wisdom and experience, but this job takes wisdom, and experience. And you can only get that wisdom from experience. Have I mentioned that I am wise and experienced?” He paused. “Well, I think this is a good time for a ten minute break.”
After the commission had reconvened, closing remarks were made.
The applicants emphasized that while they were not entirely confident in their cost estimates, the longer it took to break ground, the more it would cost to build the plant. “Delay is a poison pill,” they asserted. They acknowledged that some of the commissioners were not satisfied that they, the applicants, had satisfied their obligations of proof. Nonetheless, the project would die if it were not approved right away. “We urge the commission to grant the Certificate of Need,” they concluded. “If you make us come up with better numbers, it will take too long, and the sketchy numbers we have now will be even wronger!” The chair nodded knowingly.
With this, the commission entered into deliberations about the fate of the coal plant in question, called Big Stone II (appropriated abbreviated BSII). Specifically, the commission was to determine whether to issue a Certificate of Need allowing transmission lines to be built from the proposed plant in South Dakota. After some discussion about the regional nature of the project, and other serious federalism issues that kind of ruin my dramatization, the chair once again addressed the room.
“It would be easy to say no to this plant. That is the popular thing to do. But my job is to provide for the energy needs of the ratepayer. Not the needs of the entire planet, but the need of Minnesota. In fifty years, no one will remember who approved this plant. It’s not like I want eternal glory, per se, though donations to the Chair’s Foundations for Remembering the Life and Career of the Chair can be made after the hearing. Anyways, saying yes is the courageous thing to do.”
At this, many in the room were visibly confused about the suggestion that siding with industry is a difficult and courageous thing to do. Another commissioner said as much. A third commissioner spoke up, saying that he was not especially convinced with the evidence in the record. He noted that applicants and interveners both had presented dramatically different models, different because they had used different assumptions. He asked for an independent consultant to evaluate the information.
At least an hour of discussion and another break later, the applicants were willing to accept further studies, since it had become clear that without further clarification the application would be rejected. And so, in a room filled with palpable tension, the eager citizens waiting to hear the decision were served by the PUC with a cliff-hanger almost as suspenseful as an episode of 24… and not in a good way.
Unconvinced that BSII was needed, they elected to perform further studies at the mighty ratepayer’s expense rather than rule that the plant was not needed.
*******************************************************************
For a more factual (though decidedly less colorful) account of the Big Stone II project, check out the following resources:
http://wcco.com/local/big.stone.energy.2.740764.html
From the Sierra Club: http://northstar.sierraclub.org/campaigns/air/coal/bigStoneFactsheet.html
From the project planners (I’m an equal opportunity blogger): http://www.bigstoneii.com/PlantProject/PlantEnvironmentalImpact.asp
(Necessary caveat: a ‘more efficient’ coal plant still emits boatloads of CO2. So, sure, if you’re into that kind of thing.)
